SCI100 Southern New Evidence Perspectives in Natural Science Paper Two Assignments 1. 2-1-2 Short Answer: Describing Evidence 2. 2-3-1 Project 1: Topic Exploration Graphic Organizer Southern New Hampshire University
SCI-100: Perspectives in Natural Science
Assignment: 1-2-1 Short Answer: Science in the News
Student: Stacey Nelson
Referring to the news story that you located, answer the following questions:
1. Article: Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years
2. The new story is regarding the eventuality of the Earth’s oceans going into anoxia (oxygen
depletion) that is said will last for many years. This will result in mass marine life death.
3. Oxygen Depleted Ocean Water and the Effects
4. The article represents the Life Science sub-categories of Zoology and Botany. However, there
are also references to the Physical Science sub-category of Oceanography.
1-5-1 Discussion Submission:
Article: Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years
What will be the impact on the world’s food supply if the ocean does go into anoxia?
What type of environmental impact will occur if mass amounts of marine life die off from a lack of
oxygen in the ocean?
PART 1- Four total attachments
2-1-2 Short Answer: Describing Evidence
Now you will turn your attention back to your chosen news story and apply what you have learned to
evaluate the evidence provided in the story.
In one paragraph, describe the evidence that supports the main idea or thesis of
the news story (Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years) (Attached) in learning
block 1-2-1 Short Answer: Science in the News (Attached)
• What specific data is discussed or referenced?
• Are any additional research studies discussed?
1. Make sure you are as specific and objective as possible as you explain the data discussed in the
news story.
2. Be detailed in your description, providing scientific background cited in the article or discovered
in your search process.
3. Are you able to get more information on the original research if you want to?
4. Is there information about where the information was originally published?
5. Based on the previous analysis, do you feel that the information presented in your news story is
valid and reliable? Support your answer with three reasons that are grounded in evidence.
As you complete this assignment, keep in mind that your answers to these questions or similar
questions will be part of your Project 1 submission. It is recommended that, in addition to entering the
answers to the questions below, you save your answers in a Word document that you can refer to later
when completing Project 1.
To complete this assignment, review the 2-1-2 Short
Answer Rubric .(Attached) and
CRAAPO- Source Evaluation Rubric for a guide. (Attached)
PART 2
2-3-1 Project 1: Topic Exploration Graphic Organizer
To complete this assignment, review the Project One Guidelines and Rubric document
(Attached)
In Project 1, take your news story Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years and explore the
natural science topic of the news story using the Topic
Exploration Graphic Organizer
Template (Attached).
Your exploration of the topic will include a description of the evidence surrounding the topic,
potential questions that a natural scientist might ask related to the topic, and a discussion of where
you can find more information about your topic. The work done in this project will directly
support your work in next two projects.
Project 1 will assess the following course outcome, which you will focus on throughout Theme:
Understanding the Scientific Process:
Determine fundamental approaches to scientific research in addressing questions related to the
natural world
Prompt
Review the graphic organizer template (Attached)
and the graphic
organizer sample (Attached).
Your graphic organizer should address the following
prompt: Visit the news story Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years .
Answer the questions in the graphic organizer template, based on your chosen news story.
Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed and will be
graded using the Project 1 Rubric:
I. Describe the science topic discussed in your news story. Be detailed in your description, providing
scientific background about the topic.
II. Identify the main idea or thesis in the news story you selected. In other words, what is the key
concept being expressed or examined in the news story?
III. Describe the evidence that supports the main idea of the news story. For example, if the main idea
of your news story is that volcanoes can cause massive amounts of damage, your supporting evidence
should consist of examples of volcanoes and the damage they caused.
IV. Pose questions that a natural scientist might be interested in, based on the main idea and
supporting evidence that you identified. For instance, you
might ask questions about volcano prediction or the causes of volcanic eruptions.
V. Where could you look for more information about the science topic discussed in the news story and
the questions that you posed? You do not need to
list specific sources, but your response should focus on the types of sources you could use to research
the topic and questions.
(All attached)(1-2,1-4,1-5) 2-1 is part one of this assignment
1. In learning block 1-2, you will find a news story on a subject that is interesting to you and then answer
a few questions related to that story. The news
story must be related to the natural sciences, Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years , and
should have been published within the past six
months. You will use this same news story throughout the theme.
2. In learning block 1-4, you will summarize the news story that you chose in learning block 1-2. You will
also begin to search various sources to start to learn
more about the science topic you identified. ( I received an F on this assignment because I forgot to
summarize. Here is part two requirement – and feed back from my professor.
it is required to always include your sciencedaily.com article’s summary and a reference for it when
you discuss anything that pertains to your article in future assignments.
3. In learning block 1-5, you will have an opportunity to ask some scientific questions of your own.
4. In learning block 2-1, you will be turning your attention back to your own news story and considering
the data or evidence that is provided in support of
the research that is being reported. Also, you will answer the question “Do you feel that the information
presented in your news story is valid and
reliable?”
SCI 100 2-1-2 Short Answer Rubric
Describing Evidence
Critical Elements
Evidence
Data
Validity and Reliability
Support
Communicates Clearly
Proficient (100%)
Describes the evidence that supports
the main idea or thesis of the news
story
Explains the data discussed in the
news story
Explains whether the information in
the news story is valid and reliable
Supports answer with evidence
Clearly communicates key ideas and
thoughts in a short-answer response
Needs Improvement (75%)
Describes the evidence that supports
the main idea or thesis of the news
story, but description is unclear or
inaccurate
Explains the data discussed in the
news story, but explanation is unclear
or inaccurate
Explains whether the information in
the news story is valid and reliable,
but explanation is unclear or
inaccurate
Supports answer with evidence, but
evidence is unclear or inaccurate
Response needs clarification in order
to support understanding of key ideas
and thoughts
Not Evident (0%)
Does not describe the evidence that
supports the main idea or thesis of
the news story
Value
25
Does not explain the data discussed
in the news story
20
Does not explain whether the
information in the news story is valid
and reliable
25
Does not support answer with
evidence
Key ideas or thoughts are not
understandable
20
10
Total
100%
CRAAPO- Source Evaluation Rubric
Author(s):_________________________________________________ Title:_________________________________________________________
Publish Date/Last Update: __________________ Publisher Name/Organization:_______________________________________________________
Publisher Location (for print & ebooks):_________________________ Volume & Issue# (for periodicals):________________
URL/Permalink (for electronic resources):_______________________________________Retrieval Date (for electronic resources):_____________
One (1)
Two (2)
Three (3)
Four (4)
Currency
No publish date listed — or
No revisions in the last
eighteen months*.
No updates in the past year*.
Updated in the last six months*.
Publish date included — or
Updated in the last three
months*.
Relevancy
Content is unrelated to your Content is either related and
topic — and / or level is too incorrect level – Or unrelated and
simple / too advanced.
correct level.
Content is related — And at
correct level — But you are not
comfortable using the source in
your research.
Content is related — And at
correct level – And you are
comfortable using the source in
your research.
Authority
No author is listed — and
No contact info provided.
No author is listed – but includes
contact information.
Author is listed without
credentials — You are unsure if
the author is the creator of the
material.
Author is listed with credentials
— Is the originator of the
information– Contact
information provided
Accuracy
Information is not
verifiable — Resources not
documented.
Some resources are not documented
— some links do not work*.
Most resources are documented – links work*.
Well organized source -Resources documented — links
work*.
Purpose
A lot of advertising makes
the content unclear.
Purpose is to sell, entertain, or
persuade — Source contains a lot of
advertising and bias.
Purpose is to inform and teach-Contains some advertising -Minimal bias.
Purpose is to inform and teach -Contains little advertising -Bias free.
It is unclear if author has any
connection with a larger institution – Source is .com, .org, or other
generic domain type*
Source is supported by larger
institution — But some bias is
apparent.
It is unclear what
Objectivity institution published and
support the source.
Score
It is clear the source was
published and supported by a
reputable institution — Bias free.
Total Score (A good source will have a total score of 20 to 24):
*For electronic resource/website evaluation
The C.R.A.A.P. Test was created by Sarah Blakeslee (University of California at Chico, Meriam Library). With her permission, this content was based off her original text with some modification.
CRAAPO- Source Evaluation Rubric
Currency:
When was the information created or last updated?
Date should be prominently displayed.
For electronic sources — are links functional on site?*
Relevancy:
Does the information relate to your topic or answer your
question?
Who is the intended audience?
Is the information at an appropriate level (not too simple/not
too advanced)?
Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this
is one you will use?
Would you be comfortable citing this source in your research
project?
Authority:
Who is the author?
Is the author the original creator of the information?
Are the author’s occupation, education, or other credentials
listed?
Who are the author’s organizational affiliations?
For websites — what does the URL reveal about the author or
source, i.e. .com, .org, .edu, .gov?*
Accuracy:
Is the information verifiable?
Is it accurate?
Are their resources documented?
What does this source offer compared to other resources?
Are there spelling, grammar, or typographical errors?
Is the language or tone unbiased and free of emotion?
Can you verify the information in another source?
Is the information crowd sourced or vulnerable to changes by
other authors, i.e. Wikipedia or other public wiki?*
Purpose:
What appears to be the purpose of the information — to inform,
teach, sell, entertain, public services, or persuade?
Is the information biased?
Are there any advertisements?
Why is the author/creator providing this information?
Objectivity:
What institution (company, organization, government,
university, etc.) supports this information?
Does the institution appear to exercise quality control over the
information appearing under its name?
Does the author’s affiliation with this particular institution
appear to bias the information?
Is there advertising and does it affect the content and message
of the source?
*For electronic resource/website evaluation
The C.R.A.A.P. Test was created by Sarah Blakeslee (University of California at Chico, Meriam Library). With her permission, this content was based off her original text with some modification.
9/16/2019
Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years — ScienceDaily
Your source for the latest research news
Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years
Date:
Source:
Summary:
May 12, 2017
University of Exeter
Dramatic drops in oceanic oxygen, which cause mass extinctions of sea life, come to a natural end – but it takes about a million years.
FULL STORY
Dramatic drops in oceanic oxygen, which cause mass extinctions of sea life, come to a
natural end — but it takes about a million years.
The depletion of oxygen in the oceans is known as “anoxia,” and scientists from the University of Exeter have
been studying how periods of anoxia end.
They found that the drop in oxygen causes more organic carbon to be buried in sediment on the ocean floor,
eventually leading to rising oxygen in the atmosphere which ultimately re-oxygenates the ocean.
Scientists believe the modern ocean is “on the edge of anoxia” — and the Exeter researchers say it is “critical” to
limit carbon emissions to prevent this.
“Once you get into a major event like anoxia, it takes a long time for the Earth’s system to rebalance,” said lead
researcher Sarah Baker, a geographer at the University of Exeter.
“This shows the vital importance of limiting disruption to the carbon cycle to regulate the Earth system and keep it
within habitable bounds.”
The researchers, who also include Professor Stephen Hesselbo from the Camborne School of Mines, studied the
Toarcian Oceanic Anoxic Event, which took place 183 million years ago and was characterized by a major
disturbance to the global carbon cycle, depleted oxygen in Earth’s oceans and mass extinction of marine life.
Numerical models predicted that increased burial of organic carbon — due to less decomposition and more plant
and marine productivity in the warmer, carbon-rich environment — should drive a rise in atmospheric oxygen,
causing the end of an anoxic event after one million years.
To test the theory, the scientists examined fossil charcoal samples to see evidence of wildfires — as such fires
would be more common in oxygen-rich times.
They found a period of increased wildfire activity started one million years after the onset of the anoxic event, and
lasted for about 800,000 years.
“We argue that this major increase in fire activity was primarily driven by increased atmospheric oxygen,” said
Baker.
“Our study provides the first fossil-based evidence that such a change in atmospheric oxygen levels could occur in
a period of one million years.”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170512081327.htm
1/3
9/16/2019
Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years — ScienceDaily
The increase in fire activity may have also helped end ocean anoxia by burning and reducing the amount of plants
on land.
This is because plants can help to erode rocks on the land that contain nutrients needed for marine life — therefore
with fewer plants, fewer nutrients are available to be carried to the sea and used to support marine life in the
oceans.
Less marine life — that would use oxygen to breathe — would mean less oxygen being used in the oceans, and
could therefore help the oceans to build up a higher oxygen content, ending anoxia.
It may therefore be essential to maintain the natural functioning of wildfire activity to help regulate the Earth system
in the long-term, the researchers say.
The charcoal sediment tests were carried out at Mochras in Wales and Peniche, Portugal.
The research was funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC).
Story Source:
Materials provided by University of Exeter. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
1. Sarah J. Baker, Stephen P. Hesselbo, Timothy M. Lenton, Luís V. Duarte, Claire M. Belcher. Charcoal
evidence that rising atmospheric oxygen terminated Early Jurassic ocean anoxia. Nature
Communications, 2017; 8: 15018 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms15018
Cite This Page:
MLA
APA
Chicago
University of Exeter. “Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 12 May
2017. .
RELATED STORIES
Widespread Ocean Anoxia Was Cause for Past Mass Extinction
May 21, 2018 — For decades, scientists have conducted research centered around the five major mass
extinctions that have shaped the world we live in. The extinctions date back more than 450 million years with the …
read more
Battered Earth Revived by Mineral Weathering After Mass Extinction
May 5, 2017 — Bedrock of Earth got severely beaten up by hothouse climate conditions during one of planet’s
mass extinctions some 200 million years ago. But the process also allowed life to bounce … read more
Scientists Find Link Between Comet, Asteroid Showers and Mass Extinctions
Oct. 20, 2015 — For more than 30 years, scientists have argued about a controversial hypothesis relating to
periodic mass extinctions and impact craters — caused by comet and asteroid showers — on Earth. Now …
read more
New Evidence Adds the Capitanian Extinction to the List of Major Extinction Crises
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170512081327.htm
2/3
9/16/2019
Jurassic drop in ocean oxygen lasted a million years — ScienceDaily
Apr. 15, 2015 — Since the Cambrian Explosion, ecosystems have suffered repeated mass extinctions, with the
‘Big 5’ crises being the most prominent. Twenty years ago, a sixth major extinction was recognized … read more
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170512081327.htm
3/3
Purchase answer to see full
attachment