Popular article (15%) + peer review (5%)

Draft submission for review: 2355 Friday April 1st, 2021

Peer review due: 2355 Friday April 9th, 2021
Final due date: 2355 Friday April 16th, 2021 ​on the Moodle assignment portal.

Word limit:​ 250 words (excluding title). Please include the word count at the end of your assignment. Note that this is a short article, so we will
be marking strictly.

In groups of 4, you are to choose a scientific article from the list provided on Moodle. Only three groups can choose a particular paper, after
which that paper will be unavailable (ie choices are on a first-come, first-served basis).

You are each required to ​individually​ write a short popular article on the chosen paper. At the end of your article, we would like you to come up
with a question that arises from the research in the scientific article. This could be an application of the research, future research questions, an
ethical dilemma raised by the research etc. This question should be unique for each member within your group, and will form the basis for your
poster presentation at the end of the semester.

Writing must be concise, exciting for the reader and manage to cover the content ​accurately​. This combination of characters is difficult, as
accuracy is often attained through verbosity. Identify what you want to cover from the article (remembering that it should be interesting for the
general public), write the draft and then ​edit, edit, edit​!

Peer review: ​A complete draft is to be submitted to Moodle. Submission of a completed draft by the review date (see above) will provide 2.5%
of your final grade - late submissions will lose marks. You will be allocated an article to review and must review within the following week. You
must make 10 comments, including at least one substantive comment, to gain another 2.5% of your final grade.
 Marking rubric for popular article (15%)
Accuracy (A) 7-10
Accurately portrays the results of the scientific article.
No exaggeration or misunderstanding of the
implications of these results.
Identifies a relevant question at the end of the article
which has a potential for an interesting investigation.
Structure (S) 4-5
Structure is logical and greatly eases reading. Broad
context is provided early, ideas flow between
sentences and concepts are kept near together.
Clarity (C​1​) 4-5
Writing is clear, with practically no mistakes. Any of
the few grammatical errors do not impede
understanding.
Concision (C​2​) 4-5
Article is concise.
Interest (I) 4-5
Identified the most interesting parts of the scientific
article and interesting implications of science for the
general public. Article was engaging from the first line,
and would successfully hold interest throughout.
T otal =
4-6
Some misunderstanding of the science ​or ​the
implications of the science.
Identifies a relevant question at the end of the
article with little further potential.
2-3
Structure slightly impedes easy reading. Or
context is not provided early and makes
reader temporarily lost.
2-3
Writing is not clear - poor grammar or word
choice. Any of the few grammatical errors
impede understanding
2-3
Some verbosity - words could be cut from
sentences without changing the meaning of
the sentence, but overall the sentence
structure is concise.
2-3
Identified the most interesting parts of the
scientific article and interesting implications of
science for the general public. Article was not
instantly engaging, but was overall interesting.
(A + S + C 1 + C 2 + I)
2
0-3
Complete misunderstanding of the
results ​and ​implications of the science.
Question is either irrelevant to the article
or non-existent.
0-1
Structure is illogical or obviously disjunct
which impedes understanding of article.
Or context is missing.
0-1
Writing is unclear. Poor word choice and
grammatical errors illustrate a lack of
proofreading. Difficult to understand.
0-1
Extreme verbosity - words and sentences
could be cut without changing the
meaning of the writing.
0-1
Did not identify any interesting aspects of
the scientific article. Boring...