Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
4 pages/≈1100 words
Sources:
Check Instructions
Style:
APA
Subject:
Technology
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 21.6
Topic:

Book report Technology Essay Research Coursework Paper

Essay Instructions:

The Book is attached Please make it simple not too formal
Book Report – Writing Style Guidelines
Each book report question asks you to describe or analyze two or three ideas or topics. Separate each discussion into different paragraphs. You should label them (1, 2, 3 or a, b, c) as required. This will allow your TA to assess your work properly and see if you have met assignment guidelines.
Your report should be 4 to 6 pages long, double-spaced. Please do not exceed 7 pages.
Use 12-font (Times New Roman or Calibri) and standard 1 inch margins.
Feel free to write in first person (“I”).
Citations are required for this assignment. The only accepted citation style is APA. For more information:
While APA rules ask to you include page numbers for direct quotes only, you are required to include page numbers for all your citations for this assignment. (refer to academic integrity seminar slides if needed).
No works cited page is required if you only cite the book. However, if you use outside sources for this assignment, you will have to include a works cited page.
questions to answer after reading the book
1. In chapter 1, Seethaler provides a number of “myths” people have about science and the scientific method. In your own words, describe three myths that surprised or interested you the most and then analyze why you think this is important information everyday people should know about.
2.Describe the three most important things you learned from reading this book (each idea should come from a different chapter and you cannot use material from chapter 1).
3. Now that you have described the three most important things you learned from the book, analyze why you think each of these topics is worth knowing about.
4. In Seethaler’s book, which topic did you have the most trouble understanding and why?
Describing Sources
1. When you describe a topic or an issue, you are essentially summarizing the author’s arguments in your own words: WHAT topic, issue or idea did I learn about?
2. When I ask you to describe a topic or idea from the book, it doesn’t mean you have to regurgitate an entire chapter! It is perfectly okay to focus your attention on one particular idea from a chapter instead of many. For example, when Seethaler describes statistics, you may want to concentrate on one aspect of this argument such as sample size.
3. When you describe an argument or topic from the book, do not randomly write down facts without providing context. A great way to provide context is to include examples. In other words, state what you have learned and provide an example that supports the argument.
Analyzing Topics
1. In your analysis, you should try and answer the following question: WHY do you think this is meaningful information to know about?
2. Here, you may want to relate the issue to personal experience, society in general, or course materials. You do not have to apply all three criteria to each discussion point – be selective and vary your analysis as required.
Examples: Has this new knowledge changed the way you think about certain scientific or technical controversies? Will it change your purchasing or health habits? Are you critical of the author’s argument?
3. One of the biggest mistakes students make is confusing summarizing a source with analyzing it. If you find yourself repeating things (especially in Questions 2 and 3), make sure to re-examine your work.

Essay Sample Content Preview:

Book Report
Name
Institution
1 Among the myths presented by Sherry Seethaler, one of the myths I find interesting is that “Scientific models are visual representations of reality.” Seethaler dismisses this myth and suggests that scientific models explain and explore teaching (Seethaler, 2009, 37). Different models are used for various purposes, depending on the goal intended. For instance, models used to harness students' understanding of concepts are simple (Seethaler,2009, 35). On the other hand, models used to test hypotheses of fundamental scientific processes are more complex and are often impressions of the real world. Visual representation of real-world happenings helps to simplify complex scientific processes. This myth can help to develop significant interpretations of scientific experiments. Furthermore, it is essential to establish that scientific models are used primarily to make predictions on real-world happenings. Another interesting myth is that “Science is the progressive accumulation of new facts.” In light of this myth, science may be incomplete. Just like Seethaler, I think The definition of science as provided by the myth is misleading. However, scientists collect new evidence to support previous findings. For instance, scientists have provided both genetic and fossil evidence of the evolution of Whales (Seethaler, 2009, 40). One study suggests the close relationship between the hippopotamus while another dismisses the claim. Perhaps the society perceives findings that are commonly embraced by most scientists as facts. There is no standard way of determining information that should be perceived as facts. Scientists continually disagree with each other on various theories with variable evidence. By evaluating this myth, society can understand that science is speculative and new evidence only helps narrow the discord existing in science.
The other myth I found interesting is that “Disputes between scientists are an indication that there is a problem with the scientific process.” Science is vast, and it is true that scientists most often disagree on findings that have been embraced by society. For instance, some scientists have forged a new claim that exposure to sunlight reduces internal cancers' chances. However, the public is aware that increased exposure to sunlight makes the skin susceptible to cancer (Seethaler, 2009, 43). These disagreements could imply that there is still more research work needed to harmonize scientist's ideas. Society should understand that scientists' disputes are part of the step-by-step process involved in science.
2 One of the essential ideas in Sherry Seethaler's books is understanding the motivation behind each stakeholder. The spinning zones by different stakeholders may be unintentional, deliberate, while others ignore the scientific issues. To determine the truthfulness of information from stakeholders, one must understand the source of information and what the stakeholders tend to gain from such information. An example given by Seethaler is of advertisers who often try to imply that the company advertising the product has the client's best interest at heart, which is usually not the case (Seethaler, 2009, 66). Another critical fa...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These APA Essay Samples:

HIRE A WRITER FROM $11.95 / PAGE
ORDER WITH 15% DISCOUNT!
Order Now