Microeconomic Op-Ed Writing Assignment
(12% of course grade – 96 marks)
One goal of this course is to help you understand and apply basic economic concepts to daily life. Part of your role as an informed citizen involves making sound arguments about economic issues that matter to you and communicating these arguments effectively to others. This assignment will give you practice developing a convincing written argument about an economic issue for a general audience.
How to (Re-)Write an Abstract.
e.g. “(490 words).”
Copy and paste your draft into the text box in the CREATE step, including: 1) Your Title; 2) Your Op-Ed (with word count- excluding title – in parentheses at end); 3) Leave some space; 4) Put in some cut-and-paste form of the original article. This could be just a URL, or text from the
article. If the original article is a print-only source, provide a complete reference. When in doubt, include more original article material rather than less. Save a copy of your draft.
If you submit by this deadline, you are eligible to earn up to 15 marks for assessing your peers’ Op-Ed assignments. If you miss this deadline, you will miss the assessments in 2) and so lose the 15 marks for assessments. You also lose the benefit of getting feedback from classmates that might improve your final draft. Without feedback from classmates you also lose on the Reflection — the highest grade you can get on the Reflection is 6 marks instead of 9.
students’ abstracts in peerScholar. For each, give: a Rating (out of 5 stars); List 1 thing done well; List 1 thing needing improvement; an Overall Rating paragraph. You can also comment on specific sections of your peer’s assignment using the Highlight and Comment feature.
Address your suggestions to the writer, not to the Professor/TA.
If you submit by this deadline, you receive a maximum of 15 marks, according to this grading
15 Strengths and weaknesses for each assigned paper, with specifics
10 Fair attempt but weak, lacking specifics
5 No real effort
0 Missed 22 January 2021 deadline, or did not attempt assessments
a maximum of 72 marks for the final draft (marked according to the rubric below) and a maximum of 9 marks for the reflection (6 marks if missed assessments). If you miss this deadline, you lose all 72 marks as well as the 9 marks for reflection. Avoid this fate by at least submitting your first draft the day this submission opens, the resubmitting a final draft.
9 Thoughtful and detailed, refers to peer comments, incorporated revisions
6 Fair attempt but lacking specifics — maximum if missed assessments
3 No real effort
0 No reflection
Your audience is the general reading public. Assume your audience has some education and background in current affairs and understands basic economic concepts, but is not knowledgeable about the details of economic theory or policy. In other words, you’ll need to explain any economic concepts and specialized vocabulary in a way that keeps their interest and respects their intelligence.
Your audience is not the professor or the TAs. You need to write more like a journalist than an academic.
Unlike an essay you don’t need a long introduction.
THE ECONOMIST STYLE GUIDE
If you want additional advice on writing, see the Style Guide of The Economist Magazine posted on
Quercus. The Economist is widely recognized as the world standard for economic journalism.
To find news articles to comment on, try the following sources. Other sources are also acceptable.
Globe and Mail Report on Business http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/
Toronto Star Business http://www.thestar.com/business
CBC News http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/
You can access The Economist through Robarts Library at http://go.utlib.ca/cat/7704354 . Click on any link beside the word “Web” to browse by issues, or use the search box to find a specific topic.
For other examples of commentaries you might use as models for you own commentary, or use as articles to comment on, try the following sources.
Globe and Mail
Report on Business Commentary https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/
The Star Opinion Pages http://www.thestar.com/opinion
Financial Post Opinion FPComment http://business.financialpost.com/category/opinion
Wall Street Journal
The best source for conservative (hands-off) opinions on economic issues, but you must pay for access. http://online.wsj.com/home-page
New York Times Economix Blog https://www.nytimes.com/section/opinion Look for the economics articles in all sections.
The final draft of your op-ed will be evaluated on how well you make reasoned economic arguments and write clearly, convincingly, correctly, and concisely. In addition, your participation in the peer assessment and reflection processes is worth 24 of the 96 marks, based on the rubrics above for assessment and reflection.
Here is a sample rubric that will be used in marking your final draft, worth 72 marks. A 0 – 100% scale is rarely used for writing assignments, as it is impossible to discriminate that finely between papers.
Letter grades are more commonly used.
Since we have to integrate the score on this assignment with your other numerical scores, your grade will be based on the marks you earn in each category of the rubric below. You will receive a numerical mark (for Excellent, Good, Competent, Problematic) in each of the four categories, which will be added to get a score out of 72 marks. For example, if you get the top (Excellent) score in each category, you score will be (14+29+15+8 =) 66/72 = (92)%. If you get the second (Good) score in each category, your score will be (12+24+12+7 =) 55/72 = (77)%. With the lowest score in each category, your score will be (8+14+7+5 =) 34/72 = (47)%.
Title, Intro, Audience, Background Information
Clear title/intro, but could be more interesting.
Boring title and/or too long/short intro.
Unsatisfactory or missing title and/or intro.
|Aimed at appropriate audience.||Mostly aimed at appropriate audience
|Appropriate audience questionable.||Wrong audience.|
|Right amount of background information.||Some background information.||Minimal or excessive background information.||Missing relevant background information.||
Economic Argument, Reasoning, Counter- argument, Evidence
Clearly stated argument, use of economic reasoning.
Presents and effectively refutes counterargument.
Fairly clear, convincing argument. Adequate use of economic reasoning.
Adequate use of counter-argument and refutation.
Somewhat confusing argument. Weak in applying economic reasoning.
Missing counter- argument or refutation.
No clear argument. Confused/no use of economic reasoning.
Confused/no use counter-arguments.
|Reader convinced by at 1-2 solid reasons or examples.||1-2 reasons or examples, although may leave questions for reader.||Weak or no supporting reasons or examples.
Reader left confused.
|Poor quality and few, if any, supporting reasons or examples. Reader unconvinced and/or put off.||
Logical order of ideas. Excellent paragraph structure (very clear topic sentence & 1 main idea per paragraph).
Mostly logical order of ideas. Good paragraph structure (fairly clear topic sentence & mostly 1 main idea per paragraph).
Somewhat logical order of ideas. OK paragraph structure (topic sentence and attempt to structure each paragraph focused on 1 main idea).
Confusing order of ideas. Illogical or inconsistent paragraph structure (confusing or missing topic sentences and paragraphs no clear focus).
|Closing gives a clear and convincing call to action.||Closing gives a fairly clear and convincing call to action.||Closing gives a call to action, although not well supported.||No clear or convincing call to action at close.||
Quality of Writing
Pleasure to read. Writing enhances understanding and interest.
Mostly easy to read.
Some problems with clarity, concision, and correctness at the sentence level.
Many problems with clarity, concision, and correctness at the sentence level.
[minus 2 from any score for not meeting word count]
|Clear, correct, concise sentences with active voice.
Very few errors and none that impede meaning.
|Mostly clear, correct, concise sentences with active voice.
A few errors that slightly impede meaning, if at all.
|Some passive voice and/or jargon.
Some errors that impede meaning.
|Considerable passive voice and/or jargon.
Many errors that impede meaning.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more