October 30, 2018 Joanna, Your second submission was mistakenly returned to you with a grade of zero and without any explanation. Please accept my apologies for that. That should never happen. It’s my responsibility to ensure that the grading is correct and complete. My apologies. In providing the needed feedback, I’m going to provide some lengthy comments, as well as a breakdown of your grade using the rubric. Don’t let the length of the comments discourage you. I’m just trying to be as complete and as clear as I can. You will be able to do better on the next assignments, as well as on the last assignment, in which you put everything together. I explain the situation in some general remarks, and then provide an breakdown of your points in the rubric. There is some redudancy to this, in that I cover some of the same issues in both the general remarks and the rubric breakdown. General Remarks. In grading your paper, I see that you’ve treated this as a general essay about a topic, but that’s not what the instructions called for. The instructions called for you to address four specific areas with respect to your target article: summary of the article; relate article to the course; relate article to your life; and give your opinion regarding funding of research in this area. We were expecting a section on each area. Your essay is completely missing two of those four areas. First, you haven’t related the article to the course or vice versa. We wanted you to say something like “This relates to the course in that….”, and we wanted you to then go into some detail about this. Secondly, you haven’t addressed the funding issue at all. The question is how should research in this area be funded? Should public funds be spent on it? What is the role of private funding? In regards to the summary, you summarized some general information about a topic. However, this waasn’t really a summary of an article. The article that you list as your target article, entitled “CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes” is far too technical for our purposes. You didn’t summarize it. It’s too technical for SCI115 anyway, but you were supposed to summarize some article. We had compiled a list of recommended articles for students to use. It would have been better to use one of those articles. Breakdown with the Rubric. Criterion Points possible Points earned Letter grade Comments 1. Summarize the article in one (1) or more paragraphs, using your own words. Weight: 25% 20 12.0 D- You summarized some material, but you didn’t provide the source. The target article you’ve listed wasn’t summarized – it was inappropriately technical. A summary of some article was expected. 2. Identify which biological concepts from the course 20 0 Zero This section is missing. I don’t see anywhere that you’ve related the concepts you’ve and / .