WHAT IS THE OFFICIAL TITLE OF CONNECTICUT’S LAWMAKING BODY?
Depаrtment оf Liberаl Arts Acаdemic Year 2025-2026 Semester Fall Spring Summer Cоurse Cоde - Name Engl 260: Written Argument Instructor Mirosh Thomas Exam Quiz/Test Assignment Mid Debate/Agumentative Essay Final Other Duration 1 hour Date March 23, 2026 Student ID: Student Name: CLOs: At the end of this course: Analyze elements of persuasion (e.g., the rhetorical, ethical, emotional, historical, and logical aspects) as they relate to the premises, assumptions, contexts, and conclusions of written and visual arguments. Make claims, provide evidence, explore underlying assumptions, and anticipate counterarguments as they relate to different audiences or stakeholders. Write and rewrite, influenced by individual learning style, social context, purpose, feedback, technology, and audience. Support argument with properly documented sources of information according to appropriate conventions. Read and evaluate written and visual texts □ Check this box if this assessment maps to ONE and only ONE CLO (check the CAR section for final scores in this case). Otherwise, please complete this table: CLO Question/ Component Max Score Student Score 2 15 Total Marks 15 Argumentative Essay Artificial Intelligence and Writing in First-Year University Courses Assignment Context In the previous assignment, you wrote an autoethnography of reading and writing, reflecting on your experiences as a writer and engaging with ideas such as writing as a process, drafting and revision, feedback, rigid rules versus flexible strategies, and writer identity. This assignment builds directly on that work. Instead of focusing on your individual experience alone, you will now enter a broader academic conversation about an issue that directly affects you as a developing writer: the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in first-year university writing courses. Essay Topic Should the use of Artificial Intelligence tools (such as ChatGPT, Grammarly, or other AI writing assistants) be allowed in first-year university writing courses? Task Description Write an argumentative essay in which you take a clear position for or against the use of AI tools in freshman writing courses. Your goal is not to explain how AI works, but to argue a position about its role in writing education, especially in First year writing. Source Requirements You must use at least 7 sources in total, including: At least 3 course readings At least 4 external sources, of which: At least 2 must be scholarly (academic articles) All sources must be cited using APA format. Organization Requirements Your essay should include: Introduction Background/context Clear and focused thesis statement Body Paragraphs Each paragraph should develop one main claim Use evidence and explanation Counterargument & Rebuttal Section Present opposing views Respond thoughtfully Conclusion Reinforce your argument Leave a strong final impression Essay Requirements Length: 1000–1200 words Tone: Academic, clear, and respectful Focus: Writing, learning, and development (not just technology) Assessment Criteria Your essay will be evaluated based on: Thesis: Clarity and strength of your position Argumentation: Quality of reasoning and development of ideas Use of Sources: Effective integration and support Counterarguments: Depth of engagement and quality of rebuttals Organization: Logical structure and coherence Language: Clarity, grammar, and academic style Detailed Rubrics: Criteria Excellent (90–100) Very Good (80–89) Good (70–79) Satisfactory (60–69) Needs Improvement (40–59) Poor (0–39) Thesis (Clarity & Position) Clear, specific, and insightful thesis; strong, arguable position directly addressing the prompt Clear and focused thesis; position is evident Thesis is present but may be somewhat general or predictable Thesis is unclear, too broad, or partially off-topic Weak or inconsistent thesis; position not clearly stated No clear thesis or position Argumentation (Claims, Reasoning & Original Insight) 3–4 well-developed claims showing clear original thinking and independent insight; ideas are meaningfully connected to the writer’s own understanding/experience; reasoning is logical, persuasive, and sophisticated Clear claims with strong reasoning; some evidence of original thinking and independent development of ideas Claims are present but somewhat predictable; limited originality; relies more on sources than own thinking Basic claims with minimal development; little evidence of independent thinking; ideas are general or repetitive Weak or unsupported claims; heavily dependent on sources; little to no original contribution No clear argument; ideas are copied, irrelevant, or lack any independent development Use of Sources (Integration & Support) Skillful integration of sources; evidence strongly supports claims; correct APA style throughout; each body paragraph uses at least two different sources for strong synthesis of ideas. Very good use of sources; mostly well-integrated; minor citation errors; most body paragraphs include two or more sources. Good use of sources; generally integrated; some minor errors; some body paragraphs may lack multiple sources. Adequate use of sources; some integration issues; occasional citation errors; some body paragraphs rely on only one source. Limited or mechanical use of sources; weak connection to argument; body paragraphs generally rely on one or no sources. Minimal or inappropriate use of sources; frequent citation errors; sources missing, irrelevant, or plagiarized. Counterarguments & Rebuttals At least 2 counterarguments addressed thoughtfully; strong, logical rebuttals Counterarguments clearly addressed; rebuttals are effective Counterarguments present but responses may lack depth Limited or weak counterarguments; rebuttals unclear or incomplete Counterarguments poorly addressed or misunderstood No counterarguments or rebuttals Organization & Coherence Clear, logical structure; smooth transitions; ideas flow effectively Well-organized; minor issues with flow or transitions Generally organized; some paragraphs lack clarity or focus Basic structure present; weak transitions; some disorganization Poor organization; ideas are difficult to follow No clear organization; writing is confusing Language & Style (Clarity & Academic Tone) Clear, precise, and fluent academic language; minimal or no errors Mostly clear and appropriate language; few errors Understandable language; some grammar or style issues Frequent language errors; meaning sometimes unclear Serious language issues; difficult to understand at times Language errors severely affect readability
Trаditiоnаl Diаgnоstics + GIDEON: Repоrt the results of the above diagnostic tests and of your Gram-staining procedure to GIDEON. Please indicate the full scientific name (genus AND species) of your mystery organism. Once again, giving more information and elaboration can never hurt you. If you are unsure about your result here, talk about which diagnostic tests you may not have felt certain of and may have incorrectly reported, elaborate on the indicated Ecology of the organism and whether or not it makes any sense, or mention the second result and consider whether it is logical or not. Keep in mind that you will receive partial credit here if I input your results from the previous question into GIDEON and get the same answer, so manipulating your answers to the above question is not a good idea. You may submit a screenshot of the summary of your reported results to GIDEON in order to potentially earn partial credit in the event that your final answer is incorrect. These should populate instantly as you select responses to each of the relevant diagnostic tests. They appear in the form of blue bubbles above the test questions, summarizing your answers as short search terms. Please ensure that you have reported the results of your Gram-staining procedure to GIDEON (shape, Gram reaction, and arrangement).
Grаph #1 (including аll hypоtheticаl data): Yоur hypоthetical dataset is provided below. This dataset includes the absorbance readings for 5 students, the third one of which is "you." "YOUR Dataset" is highlighted in yellow below. In this question, you are expected to plot the data from EACH students' dataset, together on one plot, with the x-axis corresponding to the dilution factors (indicated in the dataset itself), and the y-axis corresponding to the optical density readings (at 600 nanometers). You will be graded on your ability to correctly plot the 5 datasets below, as well as your ability to properly and professionally title your graph, label the two axes, and include the dilution factors on the x-axis. To make the task easier for you, an Excel file is attached to this question with the below data already included. The dilution factors have already been formatted so that they are ready for plotting. Please feel free to download the Excel file and work directly in it by manipulating the provided dataset. When you are finished, take a screenshot of your graph and submit it in the provided text box. You can either screenshot it, copy the screenshot, and then paste it directly into the text box OR you can insert your screenshot as a file. MCB2000L_Midterm_PipettingandGraphing_AM.xlsx