Explain How Collaboration And Argument How And Does This Change A Research Paper
Collaboration and Argument, How and Does this Change a Research Paper?
Collaboration is defined as working jointly with other or together especially in an intellectual endeavor (www.webster.com/dictionary). When working collaboratively, you must consider views and ideas of others working within a specific topic or project. This collaboration should consist of each participant’s ideas or thoughts. These ideas and thoughts should equally contribute to the final outcome or result of the project. In collaboration, each participant’s views should equally be shared. Collaboration changes the research paper because it must involves more than one source, specifically for information or investigating. Instead of researching one creditable …show more content…
source, for collaboration, you must research one topic with multiple sources. Collaboration can make it easier or harder to evaluate sources. When collaborating, both sources must be creditable and share similar views in order for the sources to be compared apples to apples. In collaboration does not have to be the exact same as the other participants, however, it should collectively affect the final result.
Research is defined as: studious inquiry or examination; especially : investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical application of such (www.webster.com/dictionary). Research is when a person or group of persons set out to determine the root cause of the topic at hand. If the parties are working on a math equation and determining how is the result of the math problem 1,298,000 then each person would collectively ass their sections of the math problem for the final result. If a group is working on the solution of a problem, then they’d each collectively determine the result. When working with other parties or participants in research, all data should collaboratively be equated within the final result.
One definition of the word argument is: one of the independent variables upon whose value that of a function depends. Argument in collaboration serves as a contrast and does cause a vary to the final result. Argument is important to the success of any collaboration; it requires the parties involved to think beyond their own personal point of views. Although not always welcome, argument, in most collaborative circumstances is necessary. Writing collaboratively is a collaboration of everyone 's views. This can sometimes be different argumentative views versus individually.
Yes, Because, when a paper is written collaboratively, there will be different opinion, ideas, thoughts and facts given. Where one might say he or she feel a certain way about the matter, and have different ideas on how to fix it, another might feel different, and have facts to support his or her opinion. When a paper is written collaboratively by a team a topic would have to be chosen, the team would have to collaborate on it, research it analyze it, and collectively make a final paper. It could be because, where one would explain how he or she understood or what was Taken from the reading, another would be giving his or her opinion from a similar situation. This could cause an argument from what another is going through. At the time the collaboration was going on, one of the team members could be in the situation at the Present moment. A team member would support an argument that he or she does not find credible, because he or she do not have any credible evidence to support the argument. It would not weaken. The final paper, because if he or she do no find facts or evidence to make the argument credible, the team member would have a good argument. In teams, there will be similar connections and some that are not so similar. However, in a Team, there could be one that have a stronger connection than others, but at the end of the Collaboration, all opinions will be discussed to bring forth an good argument, which will fill the role for the team.
Collaboration makes it easier, because when collaborating, there are a team of People, putting their minds, opinions and sometimes their feelings together, bringing Forth one argument.
When evaluating sources, there will be different ideas that each Team member will have. After collaboration, all ideas will be considered and the best Argument will win. Yes, because when papers are written collaboratively, there are different opinion different people. One might say that the Arthur was being bias, and another might Say that the Arthur was being prejudice. When a paper is written individually, the Opinions and ideas are being made by one person.
There are many ways that a topic selected for an individual argument paper differ from Papers chosen for team papers. One being that an individual could select an topic base on a previous personal experience. A topic could be chosen on feelings for a person looking for sympathy. One could be selected based on a person sterotypes. Another could be based on the assumption of a person. The topic …show more content…
chosen could be based on the person being bias. And sometime the person could choose a topic based on his’s or her’s perception. A topic chosen for a team paper would have to be collaborated on. The team would Have to select the argument, and be able to answer question. The topic would have to be researched by the team, rather than an individual. There would be a difference which would imply a qualitative difference between the Two types of writing. The difference would be that the individual argument paper Would be based on one person’s understanding and the information that he or she Have research and analyzed.
There are many different methods of peer review that evaluate the quality of an argument in a paper. Reading into the content of the paper is a great way of evaluating the quality of a paper. Peers should not just look for grammar errors. Peer review methods should improve the actual paper and help the paper to become a creditable source.
In collaborative writing there are several different processes that should be used in order to make sure the sections of the project are logical between each different team member. A team working collaboratively should first assign roles. There should be a leader, an organizer and key workers. When there are too many leaders within the group, ideas and roles could be misunderstood. This could cause the team players to be confused as to what the assignment should consist of. Secondly, rules and expectations should be established. When all team members know the expectation of what is to be delivered, success is usually the outcome. Rules should be set so that everyone understands the fundamentals of what is being asked. Rules also play an important role if there are any team members that do not do what is asked of them. Rules and expectations is a valuable asset when it comes to collaborating as a team. Collaborating consistently should also include communication (Haycock, 2003). Communication should consist of more than just emailing. To ensure that your team’s collaboration is logical, team members should not email but they should also meet in person and talk over the phone. A face to face meeting helps team members understand each member’s thoughts and it gives you the ability to see expressions. You cannot see a person’s expression or understand their feeling or thoughts strictly through email. Therefore, it is imperative that you speak in person to ensure that your collaboration is logical (Shabo, 2013).
Plagiarism is not always used intentionally.
Plagiarism is sometimes difficult to dodge even as the only person completing the writing. It can become more difficult to evaluate plagiarism during a team assignment. The team members not only have to hold themselves accountable but they also have to account for their fellow team member’s assignment. Information can be retrieved from anywhere and it is up to each team member to ensure that information included in the team project is properly cited. Team members will need to be precise with listing their sources, paraphrasing and summarizing properly. Teams could also use different online sources to scan the document for
plagiarisms.
The three principles of argument produce the strongest argument if all three principles are used in the paper. The ethos principle of argument will allow the reader to her the authority and ethical aspects behind the argument. When the author uses pathos he tends to weigh on the readers emotions with a sympathetic theory. With logos, the facts and logic of the argument is always a strong point because it uses truth and facts (Real, 2012). The three principles used in one argument could enhance the reader’s ability to understand, believe and feel the argument.
Is there a difference between individual argument papers versus team argument papers? Technically, there is not a true difference. Each team member may have a different opinion on the topic. The key is to remember that members of the team are analyzing the argument paper; not providing feedback, an opinion or input on the subject. Effective team work and collaboration will enhance the product of the analysis of the argument paper. If team members use the Toulmin model of argument the outcome of the paper should grasp the reader’s beliefs. Explaining the reason and evidence is the start of capturing the reader’s attention. Warrants are chains of reasoning that connect the claim and evidence/reason. A warrant is the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim. Warrants operate at a higher level of generality than a claim or reason, and they are not normally explicit (Warren, 2010). The Toulmin model of argument is an effective, efficient and precise way of to analyze the argument of a paper.
Bibliography
Bornemann, T. H., & Bornemann, J. L. (2010). An argument for collaboration in methods to help people with mental illness.Psychiatry, 73(2), 125-6. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/psyc.2010.73.2.125
Cultures of collaboration: Leveraging classroom potential. (2012). Voices from the Middle, 20(2), 60-62. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1288617207?accountid=35812
Haycock, K. (2003). Collaboration. Knowledge Quest, 32(1), 54-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/194728700?accountid=35812
Real, Leslie A. (2012). Collaboration in the sciences and the humanities: A comparative phenomenology http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/11/3/250
Shabo, S. (2013). Free will and mystery: Looking past the mind argument. Philosophical Studies, 162(2), 291-307. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11098-011-9760-z
Warren, J. E. (2010). Taming the warrant in toulmin 's model of argument. English Journal, 99(6), 41-46. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/577298784?accountid=35812
Collaboration is defined as working jointly with other or together especially in an intellectual endeavor (www.webster.com/dictionary). When working collaboratively, you must consider views and ideas of others working within a specific topic or project. This collaboration should consist of each participant’s ideas or thoughts. These ideas and thoughts should equally contribute to the final outcome or result of the project. In collaboration, each participant’s views should equally be shared. Collaboration changes the research paper because it must involves more than one source, specifically for information or investigating. Instead of researching one creditable …show more content…
source, for collaboration, you must research one topic with multiple sources. Collaboration can make it easier or harder to evaluate sources. When collaborating, both sources must be creditable and share similar views in order for the sources to be compared apples to apples. In collaboration does not have to be the exact same as the other participants, however, it should collectively affect the final result.
Research is defined as: studious inquiry or examination; especially : investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts, revision of accepted theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical application of such (www.webster.com/dictionary). Research is when a person or group of persons set out to determine the root cause of the topic at hand. If the parties are working on a math equation and determining how is the result of the math problem 1,298,000 then each person would collectively ass their sections of the math problem for the final result. If a group is working on the solution of a problem, then they’d each collectively determine the result. When working with other parties or participants in research, all data should collaboratively be equated within the final result.
One definition of the word argument is: one of the independent variables upon whose value that of a function depends. Argument in collaboration serves as a contrast and does cause a vary to the final result. Argument is important to the success of any collaboration; it requires the parties involved to think beyond their own personal point of views. Although not always welcome, argument, in most collaborative circumstances is necessary. Writing collaboratively is a collaboration of everyone 's views. This can sometimes be different argumentative views versus individually.
Yes, Because, when a paper is written collaboratively, there will be different opinion, ideas, thoughts and facts given. Where one might say he or she feel a certain way about the matter, and have different ideas on how to fix it, another might feel different, and have facts to support his or her opinion. When a paper is written collaboratively by a team a topic would have to be chosen, the team would have to collaborate on it, research it analyze it, and collectively make a final paper. It could be because, where one would explain how he or she understood or what was Taken from the reading, another would be giving his or her opinion from a similar situation. This could cause an argument from what another is going through. At the time the collaboration was going on, one of the team members could be in the situation at the Present moment. A team member would support an argument that he or she does not find credible, because he or she do not have any credible evidence to support the argument. It would not weaken. The final paper, because if he or she do no find facts or evidence to make the argument credible, the team member would have a good argument. In teams, there will be similar connections and some that are not so similar. However, in a Team, there could be one that have a stronger connection than others, but at the end of the Collaboration, all opinions will be discussed to bring forth an good argument, which will fill the role for the team.
Collaboration makes it easier, because when collaborating, there are a team of People, putting their minds, opinions and sometimes their feelings together, bringing Forth one argument.
When evaluating sources, there will be different ideas that each Team member will have. After collaboration, all ideas will be considered and the best Argument will win. Yes, because when papers are written collaboratively, there are different opinion different people. One might say that the Arthur was being bias, and another might Say that the Arthur was being prejudice. When a paper is written individually, the Opinions and ideas are being made by one person.
There are many ways that a topic selected for an individual argument paper differ from Papers chosen for team papers. One being that an individual could select an topic base on a previous personal experience. A topic could be chosen on feelings for a person looking for sympathy. One could be selected based on a person sterotypes. Another could be based on the assumption of a person. The topic …show more content…
chosen could be based on the person being bias. And sometime the person could choose a topic based on his’s or her’s perception. A topic chosen for a team paper would have to be collaborated on. The team would Have to select the argument, and be able to answer question. The topic would have to be researched by the team, rather than an individual. There would be a difference which would imply a qualitative difference between the Two types of writing. The difference would be that the individual argument paper Would be based on one person’s understanding and the information that he or she Have research and analyzed.
There are many different methods of peer review that evaluate the quality of an argument in a paper. Reading into the content of the paper is a great way of evaluating the quality of a paper. Peers should not just look for grammar errors. Peer review methods should improve the actual paper and help the paper to become a creditable source.
In collaborative writing there are several different processes that should be used in order to make sure the sections of the project are logical between each different team member. A team working collaboratively should first assign roles. There should be a leader, an organizer and key workers. When there are too many leaders within the group, ideas and roles could be misunderstood. This could cause the team players to be confused as to what the assignment should consist of. Secondly, rules and expectations should be established. When all team members know the expectation of what is to be delivered, success is usually the outcome. Rules should be set so that everyone understands the fundamentals of what is being asked. Rules also play an important role if there are any team members that do not do what is asked of them. Rules and expectations is a valuable asset when it comes to collaborating as a team. Collaborating consistently should also include communication (Haycock, 2003). Communication should consist of more than just emailing. To ensure that your team’s collaboration is logical, team members should not email but they should also meet in person and talk over the phone. A face to face meeting helps team members understand each member’s thoughts and it gives you the ability to see expressions. You cannot see a person’s expression or understand their feeling or thoughts strictly through email. Therefore, it is imperative that you speak in person to ensure that your collaboration is logical (Shabo, 2013).
Plagiarism is not always used intentionally.
Plagiarism is sometimes difficult to dodge even as the only person completing the writing. It can become more difficult to evaluate plagiarism during a team assignment. The team members not only have to hold themselves accountable but they also have to account for their fellow team member’s assignment. Information can be retrieved from anywhere and it is up to each team member to ensure that information included in the team project is properly cited. Team members will need to be precise with listing their sources, paraphrasing and summarizing properly. Teams could also use different online sources to scan the document for
plagiarisms.
The three principles of argument produce the strongest argument if all three principles are used in the paper. The ethos principle of argument will allow the reader to her the authority and ethical aspects behind the argument. When the author uses pathos he tends to weigh on the readers emotions with a sympathetic theory. With logos, the facts and logic of the argument is always a strong point because it uses truth and facts (Real, 2012). The three principles used in one argument could enhance the reader’s ability to understand, believe and feel the argument.
Is there a difference between individual argument papers versus team argument papers? Technically, there is not a true difference. Each team member may have a different opinion on the topic. The key is to remember that members of the team are analyzing the argument paper; not providing feedback, an opinion or input on the subject. Effective team work and collaboration will enhance the product of the analysis of the argument paper. If team members use the Toulmin model of argument the outcome of the paper should grasp the reader’s beliefs. Explaining the reason and evidence is the start of capturing the reader’s attention. Warrants are chains of reasoning that connect the claim and evidence/reason. A warrant is the principle, provision or chain of reasoning that connects the grounds/reason to the claim. Warrants operate at a higher level of generality than a claim or reason, and they are not normally explicit (Warren, 2010). The Toulmin model of argument is an effective, efficient and precise way of to analyze the argument of a paper.
Bibliography
Bornemann, T. H., & Bornemann, J. L. (2010). An argument for collaboration in methods to help people with mental illness.Psychiatry, 73(2), 125-6. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/psyc.2010.73.2.125
Cultures of collaboration: Leveraging classroom potential. (2012). Voices from the Middle, 20(2), 60-62. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1288617207?accountid=35812
Haycock, K. (2003). Collaboration. Knowledge Quest, 32(1), 54-54. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/194728700?accountid=35812
Real, Leslie A. (2012). Collaboration in the sciences and the humanities: A comparative phenomenology http://ahh.sagepub.com/content/11/3/250
Shabo, S. (2013). Free will and mystery: Looking past the mind argument. Philosophical Studies, 162(2), 291-307. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11098-011-9760-z
Warren, J. E. (2010). Taming the warrant in toulmin 's model of argument. English Journal, 99(6), 41-46. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/577298784?accountid=35812