Topic research, asthma and air pollution in California
my part is only about methodology( like causes and more) of asthma and air pollution, and I need 3 slides of PowerPoints
I need at least 3 good sources and why is chosen; these are some examples that my group did for sources:
1.Acute respiratory health effects of air pollution on children with asthma in US inner cities O’Connor, George T; Neas, Lucas; Vaughn, Benjamin; Kattan, Meyer; Mitchell, Herman; et al. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology; St. Louis Vol. 121, Iss. 5, (May 2008): 1133-1139.DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.02.020 2. Air pollution effects on childhood asthma Zweiman, Burton; Rothenberg, Marc E. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology; St. Louis Vol. 113, Iss. 1, (Jan 2004): 185-186. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2003.10.023 3. P208 Effects of personal air pollution exposure on asthma symptoms, lung function and airway inflammation Chambers, L; Finch, J; Edwards, K; Jeanjean, A; Leigh, R; et al. Thorax, suppl. Supplement 3; London Vol. 72, (Dec 2017): A195. DOI:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2017-210983.350
PAGE ONE: Title page will have title, name, and NU affiliation. (2 points)
· PAGE TWO: Abstract and Key Words will provide an overview of what you determined within your paper within 200-250 words, and have 5-7 keywords at the end of the abstract (10 points)
· PAGE THREE TO SIX:
· Introduction to the topic of choice (one to two paragraphs). (12 points)
· Methods and Discussion section including the methods you used for your literature view and all applicable research information. (30 points)
· Conclusion- summary of ove
· rall research, quality, and potential recommendations you would (or would not) make regarding your environmental health topic. (10 points)
· PAGE SEVEN: Reference page (include at least 10 references primarily from peer-reviewed journals). (15 points)
· Quality of work: APA formatting, grammar, structure, effort, overall professionalism of paper. (15 points)
· Submission of Journal References in PDFs: All pdf journal references must be uploaded in electronic version and contain the following name format to receive full points:
Group_#_Topic_LastNameAuthor_Year
Grading Rubric:
| OUTSTANDING ACHIEVEMENT | COMMENDABLE ACHIEVEMENT | MARGINAL ACHIEVEMENT | UNSATISFACTORY | FAILING | |
| Title Page (Page 1) |
2 pt. Has title, name, and NU affiliation |
1.5 pts. Is missing a single part |
1 pts. Missing 2 parts |
0.5 pts. Missing 2 parts and has unnecessary parts |
0 pts. Missing |
| Abstract (No less than 150 words, but no more than 250 words) & Keywords (between 5-7 keywords) (Page 2) |
10 pts. Clearly and concisely summarizes the problem,methodology, results/discussion, and conclusion and is within the stated word limit. Has an appropriate keywords section |
8 pts. Clearly and concisely summarizes the work with some sections excluded. |
6 pts. Summarizes the literature review with many sections excluded. |
4 pts. Includes an introductory paragraph without describing the research project. |
0 pts. Missing |
| Introduction (Page 3) |
12 pts. Explains the significance and relevance of the environmental health issue in a logical and organized manner. Review of the literature is thorough, relevant, and organized. Sources are numerous and from professional sources. |
10 pts. Expresses the significance and relevance of the environmental health issue with limited information in a mostly logical and organized manner. Review of the literature is mostly thorough, relevant, and organized. Sources are numerous and from professional sources. |
8 pts. Significance and relevance of the environmental health issue is somewhat clear, there is limited discussion of the information and is not organized in a logical manner. Review of the literature is limited, not relevant, or disorganized. |
6 pts. Background is confusing. The significance and relevance of the environmental health issue and information are unclear. Review of the literature is limited, not relevant, or disorganized. |
0 pts. Missing |
| Discussion and Methods (Page 3-5) |
30 pts. Discusses topic through scholarly literature to address the environmental health topic of your choice. Evaluates the progress or outcomes of this issue over time. Discusses problems as well as current solutions. Meets requirement of 4 pages of double-spaced writing. Provides a detailed methods section on keywords and search engines used in literature review. |
24 pts. Discusses topic through scholarly literature to address the environmental health topic of your choice. Evaluates some progress or outcomes of this issue over time. Discusses problems as well as current solutions. Writes only 3 pages of double-spaced writing. Methods section is unclear to reader or only has partial explanation of keywords or search engines used in literature review. |
18 pts. Somewhat discusses topic through scholarly literature to address the environmental health topic of your choice. Either evaluates minimal progress or outcomes of this issue over time OR discusses problems as well as current solutions. Meets requirement of 3 pages of double-spaced writing. Methods section is missing or unclear. |
12 pts. Minimally discusses topic through scholarly literature to address the environmental health topic of your choice. Does not evaluate the progress or outcomes of this issue over time OR problems and current solutions. Meets requirement of 2 pages of double-spaced writing. Methods section is missing. |
0 pts. Missing |
| Conclusion (Page 5) |
10 pts. Clearly summarizes the research. Discusses and makes recommendations for future research questions and program considerations. |
8 pts. Summarizes the research in a somewhat clear manner. Discusses and makes recommendations for future research questions and program considerations. |
6 pts. Limited summary of the research. Limited discussion and/or recommendations for future research questions and program considerations. |
4 pts. Makes erroneous conclusion of the research. Lacks discussion and makes no recommendations for future research or programs. |
0 pts. Missing |
| References (Page 6) |
15 pts. Has included at least 10 references (with at least 5 from peer-reviewed journals) |
12 pts. Has included 8-9 references (with at least 3 from peer-reviewed journals) |
9 pts. Has included 5-7 references (with at least 2 from peer-reviewed journals) |
6 pts. Has included 1-4 references (with at least 1 from peer-reviewed journals) |
0 pts. Missing or poor references used |
| Quality of work, visuals, and grammar, APA 6th Edition formatting | 15 pts. The paper is well organized both overall and at the paragraph level. Sentences are smooth and carefully crafted. There are virtually no errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar or usage. Visuals are incorporated, as needed, and properly cited/referenced. Paper, citations, and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. All claims are supported with a quality references. |
12 pts. The paper is well organized, but the paragraph structure may sometimes be disjointed. The paper may have a few awkward passages and a few errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar and usage. Visuals are incorporated, as needed, and properly cited/referenced. Paper, citations, and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. Some claims leave the reader looking for a reference. |
9 pts. The paper is basically well organized, though individual paragraphs may be disjointed or misplaced. The writing is competent, but often wordy, overly general, imprecise or trite. Visuals are somewhat incorporated, but lack proper cited/references. Paper, citations, and references are in proper APA format. Ample sources are cited. Many claims leave the reader looking for a reference. |
6 pts. The paper is poorly organized. Some sentences may be so confused that their meaning does not clearly emerge. Words may be imprecise, incorrect, trite or vague. Errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar and usage are distracting. Visuals are not incorporated properly. Paper, citations, and references are limited, missing, or incorrect. |
0 pts. The paper lacks clarity. The language or sentence structure is so muddled that its meaning is unclear in several spots. Errors in punctuation, spelling, grammar and usage are highly distracting. Paper relies on generalizations. Citations and references are missing or incorrect. Paper is incorrect format completely. |
| Journal References in PDF attached and renamed (submission online) |
6 pts. PDFs of all peer-reviewed journal papers were attached and renamed as directed |
4.5 pts PDFs of all peer-reviewed journal papers were attached, but not renamed as directed |
2 pts PDFs of most peer-reviewed journal papers were attached and renamed as directed |
1 pts PDFs of some peer-reviewed journal papers were attached and renamed as directed |
0 pts No PDFs were attached with the assignment |
| Total Points Possible = 100 points |
All written assignments must be in APA format, including in-text citations and reference list, excluding title page and abstract (general orientation on APA format: http://www.nu.edu/LIBRARY/ReferenceTools/citations.html ;
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/).