Description
Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria for earning your grade.
Watch the video What is Research?(new tab) for an introduction to the topic of research and how the University library can help!
Read:
Chapter 2 of Kuhn (1970): The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
Chapters 2 and 3 of Arbnor and Bjerke (2009): Methodology for Creating Business Knowledge
Review the article Sometimes Science is Wrong(new tab) by Scientific American.
Conduct a little research, perhaps utilizing some of the library resources mentioned in the video above, to find:
A definition of science that appeals to you.
An example of something that has been labeled science, but according to your definition, does not qualify as science.
By Day 5 of the workshop, prepare and submit an initial discussion posting summarizing your findings:
Quote and cite the definition of science you identified.
Describe the example you found of something that has been labeled as science, but according to your definition, does not qualify as science.
Explain why you believe your selected example does not meet the standards of being considered science.
Your initial post should be at least 250 words in length. Appropriately cite your quote and any other sources you use and include a reference list.
By the end of the workshop, review your classmates’ postings. Respond to at least two of your classmates by evaluating their definition of science and example, and then:
Compare and contrast the definition of science your classmate found to the one you identified with your own initial post. What is different about it? What is the same?
Suggest how the differences between your definition and your classmate’s definition could be meaningful. How might this change someone’s approach to science?
Comment on the example they found. Can you understand why someone might consider this example “scientific”?
Each of your responses should be at least 150 words in length. Appropriately support your points by citing any sources you use.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Discussion (30 points)
Course: 3WI2024 Found of Doctoral Research (BADM-702-01B)
Criteria
Initial Post
Excellent
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Inadequate/Faili
ng
Criterion Score
15 points
14 points
12 points
8 points
/ 15
Demonstrates (13-14 points)
clear, insightful
critical thinking Demonstrates
in initial post.
competent
critical thinking
Thoroughly
and provides a
addresses the
basic
prompt(s),
explanation in
clearly
initial post.
demonstrating
understanding Adequately
of relevant
addresseses
course
the prompt(s),
concepts using demonstrating
course
basic
materials and
understanding
(9-12 points)
(0-8 points)
Demonstrates
limited critical
thinking and
explanation in
initial post.
Demonstrates
little to no
critical thinking
or explanation
in initial post.
Partially
addresses the
prompt(s) or
addresses only
some of the
prompts,
demonstrating
a limited
Minimally
addresses or
did not address
the prompt(s),
failing to
adequately
demonstrate
an
additional
resources (with
citations and
references).
understanding
of relevant
course
concepts using
course
materials and
additional
resources (with
citations and
references).
understanding
of relevant
course
concepts or
provide
evidence of
critical
thinking.
of relevant
course
concepts using
course
materials and
additional
resources (with
citations and
references).
Criteria
Engagement
with
Instructor
and
Classmates
Excellent
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Inadequate/Faili
ng
Criterion Score
10 points
9 points
8 points
7 points
/ 10
Demonstrates
clear, insightful
critical analysis
of your
classmates’
postings.
Demonstrates
competent
critical analysis
of your
classmates’
postings.
Demonstrates
limited critical
analysis of your
classmates’
postings.
(0-7 points)
Interaction is
Responses
Responses
incomplete
represent high represent
(only one
quality
quality
quality
interaction
interaction
response) or
with at least
with at least
both responses
two classmates two classmates are lacking in
by directly
by directly
quality.
commenting
on their ideas
commenting
on their ideas,
and making
connections to
relevant
content.
expanding the
discussion
productively,
and making
connections to
relevant
Responses
advance the
discussion by
introducing
new ideas,
asking
clarifying
questions, and
synthesizing
concepts.
content.
Demonstrates
little to no
critical analysis
of your
classmates’
postings.
Interaction is
incomplete and
is lacking in
quality.
Criteria
Grammar,
Spelling,
Length, and
Citation
Excellent
Competent
Needs
Improvement
Inadequate/Faili
ng
Criterion Score
5 points
4 points
3 points
2 points
/5
Sentence
structure is
complete with
correct
spelling,
punctuation,
Sentence
structure has
minor errors
(fragments,
run-ons) with
correct
Sentence
structure has
several errors
in sentence
fluency with
multiple
(0-2 points)
capitalization,
varied diction,
spelling,
punctuation,
fragments/run- errors in
ons; poor
sentence
and word
choices.
capitalization,
and limited
diction and
word choices.
spelling,
punctuation,
and/or word
choice.
Assignment
Assignment
sources
correctly
length is
correct with
length is
inappropriate
cited.
correct sources with several
correctly
format and
cited.
citation errors.
Assignment
length is
correct with
Sentence
structure has
serious and
persistent
fluency,
sentence
structure,
spelling,
punctuation,
and/or word
choice.
Assignment
length is
inappropriate
with several
format and
citation errors
or sources not
cited.
Total
/ 30
Overall Score
Excellent
Competent
Needs Improvement
Inadequate/Failing
28 points minimum
25 points minimum
22 points minimum
0 points minimum
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
