Please help me with this.

COM120

Instructions

• Look over the pass requirements, layout, example, and tips sections below (to get a better idea of what you have to do).
• Open a new word.doc (or equivalent), and within it, draft an essay question and main claim (in line with the layout and example sections). You may choose any essay question and claim you wish, provided they fulfil the pass requirements indicated below.
• Save your work (so you have a copy), then copy and paste it into the relevant test in the "Assignments" section in INTERACT.
• If you receive a zero for this assessment, do not be alarmed (it is very common). It is just a placeholder mark that allows you to try again (it doesn't mean your work is worth zero). Just go into "My Grades" on the subject INTERACT site and click on the zero mark. You will see the feedback you need to resubmit.

Pass Requirements

For your work to be deemed satisfactory, markers must be assured that (in regard to your work) the answers to the following questions are "yes":

• Is the question on a topic from the approved topic list (i.e. one of the topics listed on the Assessment 1 Information page)?
• Is the question normative (i.e., a should question, such as "Should Australia be a republic?")?
• Is the question appropriately worded (i.e. contains one complete sentence, concise and simply put)?
• Does the main claim directly answer the question (e.g. if the question is "Should I smoke?" the main claim should either be "I should smoke" or "I should not smoke")?
• Is the main claim singular (i.e. it does not provide more than one claim, e.g. don't state "Australia shouldn't be a monarchy, it should be a republic", as this contains two separate claims)?
• Is the main claim just a claim (i.e. it does not provide anything other than a claim, e.g. don't state "Australia shouldn't be a Monarchy, because the notion of royalty is outdated", as this contains a claim and support for the claim)?
• Is the main claim appropriately ambitious (i.e. not too hard to argue for, but not too easy either, e.g. don't state "We shouldn't believe in God" as this is not something you will be able to properly argue for in just 1### words). Likewise, don't state "Pedestrians should look both ways before crossing the road" as this is too easy to argue for)?
• Does the main claim employ uniform language (i.e. use the same language as the question, e.g. if the question is "Should I smoke?" the main claim should either be "I should smoke" or "I should not smoke" and not "Yes - smoking would be a good idea")?

• Layout

• This assessment should have the following layout:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ThJ1T8mVtxzsYO5SrNd4UTvOlNP0Tfs4DxiGxpUlhK8/edit

Example

This is an example of what your assessment should look like:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Im4Y4lGsRZujv7c_hiZkOTXwREIWljsFUXYfpFnHc90/edit

Approved Topics

Your essay question should be a normative question (i.e. a should question) related to one of the approved topics below:

• The limits of civil disruption
• COVID-19 and personal freedom
• Evidence and climate change (this is the topic I would like to work on)
• Violence against women
• Incarceration and Punishment
• Conflicts between political parties
• Cultural and personal biases
• Socioeconomic class and life chances
• Foreign interventions into sovereign states
• Ethics and history
• Nationalism
• Public perceptions of crime
• Australia Day and invasion

Tips

• Although there is word limit this is only a maximum. Please don't feel that you have to write close to the maximum. Just try to write clearly and succinctly - far fewer words is fine (words for the sake of a word count are words not worth wasting).
• Don't provide us with more information at the moment (save this for later). We just want a question and a claim.
• Keep the language used in your question and claim uniform. So, if your question is "Should I floss?"" your claim should just be either "I should floss" or "I shouldn't floss". Nothing more.
• Your claim needs to be something that you can put together a good argument for. There are essentially two types of claims you might make: an empirical (scientific) claim and a normative claim (i.e. a "should" claim). To argue that an empirical claim is true (e.g. "Social media has a negative effect on youth") you would need to do careful scientific experiment. But you won't be able to do that. The best you will be able to do is report on the results of experiments done by others, but this won't require much argument on your part. So, this is why you need to choose a normative claim (that is, a should claim. Many of the best claims are "should" claims (e.g. "Recreational cannabis use should not be legalised in Australia"; "Men and women should receive equal pay in the entertainment industry"). These are normative claims, i.e. they claim that something should or ought to be some way rather than some other way. These claims allow plenty of scope for argument on your part.
• If you've identified a good question but you're having trouble articulating it clearly and succinctly, try expressing it in the "discussions" tool in INTERACT - perhaps your peers can help. Or consult with your tutor, who has a good deal of experience in helping to formulate research questions.
• One common problem is choosing a question that is 'too big'. If you are having trouble refining your initial question into something more manageable, your teachers or peers may be able to help (get in contact).