Discussion Board 3: Skeleton Story
There are 2 parts to this discussion. Details on what is expected in both parts is found below the prompt.
Comic book characters have all kinds of exciting and rare anatomical and physiological features that define their storyline. Apply what you have learned in
Hands On Lab: Skeletal System to design your own comic book character (superhero or villain). You do not need to be a comic book expert at all!
You will need to describe changes to the skeletal system (Wolverine and Mr. Glass are not allowed to be copied but may certainly be used for inspiration) on a detailed level that gives your character some benefit. Conversely, you will also need to describe a weakness or cost to the body from this change to the skeletal system. This is up to you!
Have fun with it but base your choices on evidence. If you could enhance one part of our skeletal system to make us superheroes or supervillains, what would it be?
In your posts to your classmates, evaluate their choices. Is there anything you want to borrow from their design to build a better comic book character? Are you able to offer them advice to how their design could be improved? Is there a weakness that they haven’t realized?
Example: I may want to have a character who can easily move through treetops so I would redesign the bones of the upper body. I would discuss this in correct anatomical terms (Ex: femur, proximal) and include details on a cellular level (Ex: osteoblast). I may also look at the skeletal structure of animals, like an orangutan, to help guide me. The weakness may be how the skeleton may now be off balance so mobility would be affected or could be an issue with the joints now being overworked.
Part 1: Initial Post (Worth up to 50 points)
· You will need to use at least 3 reputable scientific references to support your post (not including your textbook). Reputable sources= peer reviewed scientific journal articles, accredited websites, or books. Google, Wikipedia, etc. are not acceptable sources.
Part 2: Responses (Worth up to 50 points)
Comment on at least
2 classmate’s discussion submissions.
· Each comment must be
150-200 words!
· Evaluate their post
· You are looking at their design choice to offer constructive feedback
· Offer questions or responses to what is said. Offer Research that backs or refutes a point being made (“Good Jobs”, or “I agree” are NOT allowed as your response!!).
How will I be graded?
The rubric to this assignment is located after the citation information below. Take a look prior to starting the assignment and let your instructor know if you have any questions regarding expectations.
WHAT KIND OF SOURCES SHOULD I USE?
Your information must be credible, accurate, and well supported by evidence. The best sources of information are the research journals and the books as well as webpages maintained by professional societies and organizations. Search for articles and academic material should start with the electronic databases of libraries such as
FTCC’s Paul H. Thompson Library (opens new window),
PubMed (opens new window) or other such resources.
HOW SHOULD I CITE IN THIS ASSIGNMENT?
You must cite all sources. Citation format must be MLA or APA (Visit the
Purdue Owl Writing Lab (opens new window) for instructions on proper formatting)
Examples:
In science we primarily use APA. These are basic examples of common citations. Please see the Purdue Owl (linked above) for more details/examples.
In-text citation: When you are paraphrasing from an author, so whenever you a
taking information form a source and putting it in your own words:
According to Jones (1998), APA style is a difficult citation format for first-time learners.
In-text citation quote: If you are taking a quote, you need to include the page number:
According to Jones (1998), “students often had difficulty using APA style, especially when it was their first time” (p. 199).
Reference Page: At the end of the document, you want to make sure you reference all of the sources you took information from.
Article:
Scruton, R. (1996). The eclipse of listening.
The New Criterion, 15(3), 5–13
Book:
Stoneman, R. (2008). Alexander the Great: A life in legend. Yale University Press
Electronic Source/Website:
Price, D. (2018, March 23). Laziness does not exist. Medium.
DISCUSSION BOARD RUBRIC: Total possible point value 100
· INITIAL POST -40pts
·
Excellent (40pts) = Clear, strong and supported explanation of the prompt and all the components. There is an adaptation to the skeletal system that is supported with scientifically based evidence. There is a description both anatomically and physiologically.
·
Sufficient (32pts) = Explanation is clear, but is incomplete or unsupported. There is an adaptation to the skeletal system that is supported with scientifically based evidence. The description includes either anatomical or physiological aspects.
·
Needs Improvement (24pts) = Explanation is unclear, incomplete, and not supported. There may be adaptations described but not to the skeletal system.
·
Not Evident (0pts) = No explanation
· RESPONSE POSTS – 30pts
·
Excellent (30pts) = A minimum of two responses are used and sufficient detail is used (150-200 words). Comments are thoughtful, reflective, and respectful of other’s postings
·
Sufficient (24pts) = Two responses that are not reflective of the topic or other students posting. Either or both are less than 100 words
·
Needs Improvement (18pts) = One response is used or two responses show a minimum effort in reading and understanding other student’s post. (e.g. “I agree with Bill”)
·
Not Evident (0pts) = Sources are not cited at all, are not credible, and/or are not cited correctly.
· SOURCES – 20PTS
·
Excellent (20pts) = The required number of sources are provided (minimum of 3, not including the textbook) All sources used for quotes, statistics, and facts are credible and cited correctly.
·
Sufficient (16pts) = Fewer than required number of sources are provided. Most sources used for quotes, statistics, and facts are credible and cited correctly.
·
Not Evident (0pts) = Sources are not cited at all, are not credible, and/or are not cited correctly.
· WRITING MECHANICS – 10pts
·
Excellent (10pts) = Post is of required length. Author makes fewer than 2 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content
·
Sufficient (8pts) = Post is at least one half of the required length. Author makes 2-3 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content
·
Needs Improvement (6pts) = Post is about one fourth of the required length. Author makes 4-5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content
·
Not Evident (0pts) = Post is less than one fourth of required length. Author makes more than 5 errors in grammar or spelling that distract the reader from the content.
1
