TERM PAPER WRITING PROCESS
The position paper assignment develops your skills in critical analysis, moral responsibility, and persuasive writing on an issue in biomedical ethics. Your audience for this assignment is a “professional” audience who are generally familiar with the biomedical ethics field.
Format
- Cover Page, including name, course title and section, and title of paper
- Paper length: 6-8 pages, double-spaced, and paginated
- 11 point Times New Roman font
- Documentation
- Peer Review Summary
Developing A Polished Paper
STEP ONE
Determine the kind of paper you will write – argumentative, exploratory, historical, comparative, , case analysis, textual – see the Term Paper Overview document in this module
STEP TWO
Select a topic area of interest
- Review the handout on possible topics (this is not exhaustive)
- Some excellent resources for papers (both topics and brief reference articles) are The Encyclopedia of Bioethics, Encyclopedia of Legal, Ethical, and Policy Issues in Biotechnology (available in my office), bioethics.net, or http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/
STEP THREE: PROCESS PAPER ONE
Having selected your paper category and topic, decide what your question will be, and what your thesis statement will be.
STEP FOUR: PROCESS PAPER TWO, THREE
Do research that will help you formulate your arguments, interpretations of concepts, historical analysis, comparisons, or textual studies.
- Start your research with the summary articles in the Encyclopedia of Bioethics
- Discuss with your TA additional references
- Be very selective about your use of internet resources; avoid advocacy sites that might give you “fake news”
STEP FIVE
Review references for writing a position paper:
- The best guide to writing a paper is accessed at writingcenter.unc.edu. Review the “handouts” on each section of your paper: “Introductions,” “Thesis Statements,” “Arguments,” “Paragraph Development,” ”Conclusions” and “Philosophy” (these are posted on Canvas)
- Review “Model Papers” from previous students posted on CANVAS
STEP SIX: PROCESS PAPER FOUR
Prepare an outline of the paper for discussion in your recitation sections.
STEP SEVEN: PROCESS PAPER FIVE, SIX
Prepare a rough draft for the required review by a peer reviewer.
- The peer review summary form you submit with your paper is found in the CANVAS module.
- Note the peer review questions are also the criteria for evaluation of the final draft.
STEP EIGHT
Follow the documentation guidelines in the CANVAS document.
STEP NINE
Prepare and submit a final draft, making sure you have corrected all spelling and grammatical mistakes.
- Make sure your final paper adheres to the format guidelines above.
- Make sure you upload the peer review summary along with final paper.
EVALUATION RUBRIC
| Criterion | A-B papers: 120-150 points | C Papers: 105-120 points | D & F papers: < 105 points |
| Form (15 points) | Paper is well-organized, free of spelling and grammatical errors and uses proper sentence construction | Paper has general structure, some spelling and grammatical errors, occasional poor wording | Paper shows little evidence of organization, numerous errors and run-on sentences |
| Documentation (15 points) | Paper provides endnote citations for all factual information and citation of other authors/websites (See Writing Guide, pp. 93-99) | Paper provides endnote citations, but does not reference all relevant information or cited authors | Paper has few, if any citations, shows no evidence of research, does not use proper citation format |
| Introduction/Thesis (20 points) | Reader knows what the issue or question is within the first few sentences, and knows author’s position/thesis by the end of the first paragraph | Paper lacks clear initial statement of issue and thesis, though they are developed as paper unfolds | Paper does not develop any clear question, lacks a thesis. |
| Organization (20 points) | Paper provides arguments against and for the thesis, and provides a fair statement and critique of opposing arguments | Paper inadequately develops arguments against thesis, and critique misrepresents opposing claims | No developed arguments in opposition, there is really no moral issue to be argued |
| Reflection (20 points) | Author integrates research materials, balances research with personal assessment, and offers own insights on the issue | Author integrates some research, but author’s position relies almost entirely on statements of other writers | Negligible integration of research, paper may be entirely personal opinion, not an argued position |
| Ethics Framework (20 points) | Author’s argument integrates basic ethical principles, rules or theories for both critique and support | Author’s argument overlooks some important ethical values on question | Ethical values have minimal role in paper |
| Argument (20 points) | Author’s final position is consistent with initial thesis statement, follows from supporting claims, is coherent with cited ethical principles | Author’s position is somewhat different from thesis, is not fully supported by cited reasons and ethical principles | The final position is asserted, not argued. |
| Process (20 points) | Author uses process papers, participates in class workshops, and peer review accompanies final draft | Author seldom uses process paper, and participates minimally, peer review accompanies final draft | Author does not prepare or participate in recitation, no peer review |