Order Description
Topic:
Animal Rights: Nothing more than disposable test tubes?
Or
Animal Rights: To Test or Not to Test?
NOTE: The paper should be based off ?not? supporting testing on animals. Argument should be AGAINST animal testing and experimentation!!
Paper must:
? Research one aspect of a contemporary social problem.
? Define the problem.
? Propose a possible solution for the problem.
? Create an argument that supports the thesis position. The argument must present a thesis statement and evidence to support the thesis statement.
? Evaluate the ethical outcomes that result from the position you take on the issue and explain how those outcomes would influence society and culture.
? Interpret statistical data from at least two peer-reviewed scholarly sources.
? Evaluate evidence using the following standards: validity, reliability, and bias related to the chosen topic and accurately identify strengths and weaknesses.
Research and Define the Problem
Explain in paper what that perspective is and how it informs your view of the topic.
Example: If you are an economics major, and you are interested in immigration reform, you should approach a very specific aspect of immigration reform through the lens of economic theory and practice. A specific thesis question would not be, ?How does illegal immigration influence the U.S. economy?? One could write thousands of pages on such a topic. Instead, a better question would be, ?How do illegal immigrant hotel workers in Chicago impact the economy of Northern Illinois?? You would then want to do the research and determine the positive and negative impacts they have, ultimately trying to conclude how illegal immigration in this area should be approached ethically.
How to Hone Your Thesis: Try to find the most important contemporary questions and theories in animal rights and being used for testing.
Your Argument
You must present a complete argument, including a major claim with at least five points of evidence, information, or data that will prove the claim.
? The thesis statement must be A clear, simple declarative sentence as the first or last sentence in the opening paragraph of the essay.
o Of such a nature that it can be substantiated, corroborated, verified, and proved through appeal to primary or secondary academic research source materials.
? The introductory paragraph must
o Present the thesis statement, an explanation for the importance of the topic, and its relation to the student?s field of study
.
? Beliefs, opinions, and personal opinions must not be introduced at any point in the essay.
? All beliefs and opinions should be supported with academic evidence. Sweeping generalizations with no supporting academic evidence do not reflect adequate critical thinking skills.
? Do not include rhetorical questions in essays. All the questions that are pertinent to project need to be answered in essay and answers again need to be supported with evidence from peer-reviewed journal articles and academically published books.
Attributes of Good Critical Thinking in Papers
? Your paper should include academic sources that explain multiple sides of the issue.
? The evidence that you use should come from high-level researchers engaged in your field of study.
? Your interpretations of the evidence should be objective and state the conclusions and theses presented in the evidence clearly and fairly.
? Your paper should place the various forms of evidence in relation to one another and demonstrate why one form or perspective is stronger than the other positions that one could take on the issue.
? Your paper should point out the limitations of current evidence and attempt to indicate areas for future research.
Ethical Outcomes of the Position You Take
After you have defined the problem and created an argument about how one ought to respond to the issue, you need to explain the ethical outcomes of the position you have taken. There might be different ethical outcomes that result from your analysis. It is your goal to draw out the ethical implications of your thesis and explain the underlying rationale that is the foundation for your claim that one action is better than another.
? Critical thinkers are those who can outline the positive and negative ethical impacts of their positions. In addition, they are able to provide a rationale for why they believe a specific position is the right position, even when it leads to negative outcomes.
? Critical thinkers are also able to be honest and objective about the limitations and gray areas that pertain to their theses.
There must be no more than 15% quoted content in the body of your essay. All quoted material must bear quotation marks and a full quotation citation.
Source Documents:
? There must be 10 or more source documents used, cited, and referenced.
? Multimedia sources (such as videos) may be used, but no more than two such sources may be used. If multimedia sources are used, then they must be authored and distributed by credible sources, such as universities, law schools, medical schools, or professors, or found in the Ashford University Library.
? Where print documents are used for source materials, those must be peer-reviewed, scholarly journal articles, and academically published books. Popular media sources (e.g., newspapers, magazines, television and radio shows, etc.) may not be used. Materials from advocacy groups (e.g., Greenpeace, Human Rights Campaign, National Organization for Women, etc.) may not be used.
? Two of the peer-reviewed scholarly sources used must include statistical evidence, which must be accurately interpreted.
? Sites such as ProCon.org and Wikipedia should not be used.
? Religious texts are neither peer-reviewed nor scholarly and so may not be used in any way.
Summary Conclusion:
You must have a summary conclusion as the last paragraph(s) of the project, presenting the major point of the essay and the evidence supporting that point.
References (will load)
Conn, P. M., & Parker, J. (1998). Animal rights: Reaching the public. Science, 282(5393), 1417. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/213567997?accountid=32521
Ferdowsian, H. (2011). HUMAN AND ANIMAL RESEARCH GUIDELINES: ALIGNING ETHICAL CONSTRUCTS WITH NEW SCIENTIFIC DEVELOPMENTS. Bioethics, 25(8), 472-478 7p. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01923.x
Balcombe, J., Ferdowsian, H., & Durham, D. (2011). Self-Harm in Laboratory-Housed Primates: Where Is the Evidence That the Animal Welfare Act Amendment Has Worked?. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 14(4), 361-370. doi:10.1080/10888705.2011.600667
Pal, T. K. (2015). Animal experimentation-Part II: In periodontal research. Journal of The International Clinical Dental Research Organization, 7(2), 92-99. doi:10.4103/2231-0754.164360
Green, J. (2014). The animal rights movement : the challenge for corporate resilience.
Jain, A. (2008). The evaluation of bone strength.
Conlee, K. M., & Rowan, A. N. (2012). The case for phasing out experiments on primates. The Hastings Center Report, SupplS31-S34. doi:10.1002/hast.106
Daston, G., Knight, D. J., Schwarz, M., Gocht, T., Thomas, R. S., Mahony, C., & Whelan, M. (2015). SEURAT: Safety evaluation ultimately replacing animal testing–recommendations for future research in the field of predictive toxicology. Archives of Toxicology.Archiv F?r Toxikologie, 89(1), 15-23. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-014-1421-5
Zurlo, J. (2012). No animals harmed: toward a paradigm shift in toxicity testing. The Hastings Center Report, SupplS23-S26. doi:10.1002/hast.104
Marks, J. (2012). Accept no substitutes: the ethics of alternatives. The Hastings Center Report, SupplS16-S18. doi:10.1002/hast.102
Carbone, L. (2012). The utility of basic animal research. The Hastings Center Report, SupplS12-S15. doi:10.1002/hast.101
Holder, T. (2014). Standing up for science. EMBO Reports, 15(6), 625?630. https://doi.org/10.1002/embr.201438837
