This performance task was intended to assess students' ability to conduct scholarly and responsible research and develop an evidence-based argument that clearly communicates a conclusion or new understanding stemming from a clearly articulated research question or project goal. More specifically, this performance task was intended to assess students' ability to: • Generate a focused research question that is situated within or connected to a larger scholarly context or community; • Explore relationships between and among multiple works representing multiple perspectives within the scholarly literature related to the topic of inquiry; • Articulate what approach, method, or process they have chosen to use to address their research question, why they have chosen that approach to answering their question, and how they employed it; • Develop and present their own argument, conclusion, or new understanding while acknowledging its limitations and discussing its implications to a larger community of practice; • Support their conclusion through the compilation, use, and synthesis of relevant and significant evidence generated by their research; • Use organizational and design elements to effectively convey the paper's message; • Consistently and accurately cite, attribute, and integrate the knowledge and work of others, while distinguishing between the student's voice and that of others; • Generate a paper in which word choice and syntax enhance communication by adhering to established conventions of grammar, usage, and mechanics.
lawsuit against an AI-based vendor is now looking to ratchet up the pressure and expand his claim into a national class action.他的最初论点:Workday的AI筛查工具不公平地导致他因种族,年龄和残疾地位而被拒绝了数百个工作。His new argument?自2020年9月以来,有40岁以上的数百万申请人也被Workday的AI系统拒绝了,应该能够加入其联邦要求。What do employers and AI developers need
以下哪个语句最准确,并为支持相关索赔提供了有效的论点?a。权利要求1的论点:在一个人的红细胞中存在疟疾人寄生虫会触发镰状细胞等位基因形成。b。权利要求1的论点:蚊子唾液中的化学物质刺激红细胞中的镰状细胞等位基因。c。权利要求2的论点:在许多世代中,蚊子对杂合个体中存在的镰状细胞等位基因具有抵抗力。d。权利要求2的论点:当一个人出生并提供一些保护疟疾时,存在镰状细胞等位基因。
1 上诉人及时请求委员会进行口头辩论。20 CFR § 501.2(b)。根据委员会的《议事规则》,委员会可酌情决定是否进行口头辩论。20 CFR § 501.5(a)。上诉人请求有机会解释他在工作中接触有毒物质的情况及其不良影响。委员会行使其自由裁量权,拒绝上诉人的口头辩论请求,因为此事涉及对所提供医学证据的重要性的评估。因此,上诉中的论点可以在基于案件记录审查的决定中得到充分解决。此次上诉中的口头辩论将进一步推迟委员会决定的发布,并且不会起到任何作用。因此,口头辩论请求被拒绝,该决定基于提交给委员会的案件记录。
在教育研究和实践中使用的抽象当前方法评估书面论点的质量通常取决于结构分析。在此类评估中,由于存在论证,索赔,证据和反驳等论点的结构性要素而获得信用。在本文中,我们讨论了这种方法的局限性,包括缺乏评估论证元素质量的标准。然后,我们基于理性力量模型(RFM)提出了一个替代框架,该框架起源于北欧哲学家Næss的工作。使用论证论文的示例,我们通过关注论证元素的可接受性和相关性来证明RFM改善论证分析的潜力,这两个标准被广泛认为是论证强度的基本标志。我们概述了在教育环境中使用RFM的可能性和挑战,并通过提出未来研究的方向来得出结论。
The title is descriptive, precise, and content-oriented The introduction contextualizes the paper and leads to the thesis or guiding statement The thesis or guiding statement sets up the main idea or argument of your paper Each topic sentence introduces the main idea of the paragraph and ties back to the thesis Each body paragraph provides evidence to build on the main idea of the paragraph Each body paragraph includes your own analysis that fully制定您的想法结论性的句子将身体段落绑在论文或指导陈述主题或结论性句子中可以用来从一个身体段落过渡到另一个段落论文的结论重新审视了主要思想,解释了重要性,并提供了闭幕
有人建议,在道德上,基因编辑人类胚胎以防止遗传疾病在某种意义上比出于相同目的使用遗传选择的方面更可取:基因编辑将有益于特定的未来人,而遗传选择只会替代它们。我们首先构建了对这一建议的最合理的辩护,即受益的论点,并捍卫了它免受可能的异议。然后,我们提出了另一个反对意见:只有仅限于基因编辑的儿童即使没有使用基因编辑的案件,则受益论点才能成功。我们的论点依赖于比较收益的标准说明,该标准是最近批评的,理由是它屈服于所谓的“先发制人问题”。我们结束时考虑了我们的论点将如何影响标准帐户修订以避免此问题。我们考虑了三个修订的帐户,并认为在这三个中,我们对受益论点的批评均为。
有人建议,在道德上,基因编辑人类胚胎以防止遗传疾病在某种意义上比出于相同目的使用遗传选择的方面更可取:基因编辑将有益于特定的未来人,而遗传选择只会替代它们。我们首先构建了对这一建议的最合理的辩护,即受益的论点,并捍卫了它免受可能的异议。然后,我们提出了另一个反对意见:只有仅限于基因编辑的儿童即使没有使用基因编辑的案件,则受益论点才能成功。我们的论点依赖于比较收益的标准说明,该标准是最近批评的,理由是它屈服于所谓的“先发制人问题”。我们结束时考虑了我们的论点将如何影响标准帐户修订以避免此问题。我们考虑了三个修订的帐户,并认为在这三个中,我们对受益论点的批评均为。