Topic: Should hospital emergency departments be used to treat mental health patients? InstructionsThis week, you will complete your argumentative essay. Following the direction offered by Jackson and

Topic:  Should hospital emergency departments be used to treat mental health patients?

InstructionsThis week, you will complete your argumentative essay. Following the direction offered by Jackson and Newberry (2016) in Chapter 12, write an argumentative essay on the issue you chose in Week 2. Be sure your essay contains the following:

• An introduction containing a thesis that states the issue, your position on the issue, what the paper will cover, and in what order
• At least 2 paragraphs that each contain a well-supported (and documented) claim or sub-argument that will provide strong support for your fallacy-free argument
• At least 1 paragraph discussing a documented, reasonable counterclaim to your position that needs to be a legitimate claim that someone has actually made as a counter-position on your issue
• At least 1 paragraph offering a reasonable, documented response to that counterclaim
• A conclusion that summarizes the argument and conclusion

Note: As you do your research, it is permissible to change your sources. Also, because of the recency and relevance of these issues, no sources older than 5 years should be used other than as historical information. Critical thinkers do the research first and then side with the preponderance of evidence. You might want to follow that principle.

Writing Requirements (APA format)

• Length: 750-1000 words - approx. 3-4 pages (not including title page or references page)
• 1-inch margins
• Double spaced
• 12-point Times New Roman font
• Title page
• References page (5 sources)

GradingThis activity will be graded using the Argumentative Essay Grading Rubric.

Argumentative Essay Grading Rubric - 150 pts

You've already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.

Argumentative Essay Grading Rubric - 150 pts

CriteriaRatingsPts

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntro Paragraph: Thesis Preview of Argument _4121

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.5 pts

Well-developed introductory paragraph with stated thesis, detailed description of issue, necessary background; and preview (roadmap) to essay.

_9906

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.5 to >7.5 pts

Thesis stated with some background and description of issue but somewhat vague or unclear, and incomplete or unclear preview.

_8760

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5 to >6.0 pts

Thesis is largely unclear; contains extraneous material not relevant to topic with little or no preview.

_7103

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >0.0 pts

Thesis is completely unclear, not relevant, or missing entirely. No preview of argument is present. Largely opinion or irrelevant material.

_6270

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No thesis statement; no argument stated.

_4269

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 10.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBody Paragraphs _130

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

40.0 to >34.0 pts

Main points are well-developed, relevant and well-connected to thesis; preview developed as stated in introduction.

_9042

Edit ratingDelete rating

34.0 to >30.0 pts

Main points develop preview, but not all are explicitly linked to thesis.

_7578

Edit ratingDelete rating

30.0 to >24.0 pts

One or more points not developed or with minimal development.

_8663

Edit ratingDelete rating

24.0 to >0.0 pts

Ideas are poorly developed; lacks central theme or development of thesis.

_5599

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

Ideas are disjointed; there is no central theme.

_8720

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 40.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOpposing View _4648

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >17.0 pts

Refutation fairly recognizes strongest points of opposing view; refutation is relevant and responsive.

_52

Edit ratingDelete rating

17.0 to >15.0 pts

Acknowledges opposing view but does not address with relevant and responsive refutation.

_4691

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >12.0 pts

Vague refutation of opposing view.

_5879

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >0.0 pts

No refutation of opposing view.

_1083

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No opposing view mentioned.

_9670

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 20.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConcluding Paragraph _1714

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.5 pts

Conclusion effectively sums up and restates argument without repetition.

_9047

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.5 to >7.5 pts

Conclusion merely restates thesis but does not sum up argument.

_6774

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5 to >6.0 pts

Conclusion does not effectively capture thesis and/or argument.

_3817

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >0.0 pts

Conclusion merely repeats intro.

_5520

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No conclusion.

_3956

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 10.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization _875

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >17.0 pts

Focused and well-organized. Logical and convincing progression of ideas. Clear premises leading to clear conclusions. Smooth transitions. No “filler” or extraneous material.

_9214

Edit ratingDelete rating

17.0 to >15.0 pts

Organized and focused. Logical presentation of ideas developed as arguments, but some parts conclusory without adequate support/premises. Some awkward transitions. Little to no extraneous material is included.

_3042

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >12.0 pts

Somewhat disorganized or lacking in focus; progression of ideas difficult to follow. Awkward or no transitions. Extraneous material.

_7004

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >0.0 pts

High degree of disorganization. No transitions. Lacks focus. Does not employ argumentative forms.

_3060

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

Disorganized; no focus.

_1597

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 20.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntegration of Sources _2162

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >17.0 pts

References are scholarly; all points well-supported by credible and authoritative sources, used accurately, appropriately, offering solid support to points, without excessive quotation. Presented concisely in paraphrase or summation with no long quotes.

_4034

Edit ratingDelete rating

17.0 to >15.0 pts

Most references are scholarly. May have some incorrect citations, long quotations as opposed to summations; may have few or weak connections to sources; some support maybe weak or not well-integrated.

_9869

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >12.0 pts

Sources are few or are not scholarly; source may lack credibility, be dated. Sources do not actually offer support for points for which they are cited; weak support; support not well-integrated.

_2514

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >0.0 pts

Sources are not scholarly. Points are unsupported by credible, reliable and authoritative evidence.

_197

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No sources cited.

_80

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 20.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatting of Sources _112

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.5 pts

All references/in-text citations are properly formatted per APA style.

_2203

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.5 to >7.5 pts

Most references/in-text citations are properly formatted per APA style.

_8304

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5 to >6.0 pts

Some references/in-text citations are properly formatted per APA style, but there are several errors.

_8131

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >0.0 pts

Several major errors in formatting of references/in-text citations that indicate a lack of understanding of APA format.

_8253

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No sources cited/formatted.

_2880

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 10.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics _4849

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >17.0 pts

The writing is free of major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that would detract from a clear reading of the paper.

_6870

Edit ratingDelete rating

17.0 to >15.0 pts

The writing contains a few major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation, but the errors do not detract from a clear reading of the text.

_6757

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >12.0 pts

The writing contains some major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that need to be addressed for a clearer reading of the paper.

_732

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >0.0 pts

The writing contains several major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that impede a clear reading of the paper.

_7553

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

No effort

_4904

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 20.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion

view longer description

Range

threshold: 5 pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5to >0 pts

Full Marks

blank

Edit ratingDelete rating

0to >0 pts

No Marks

blank_2

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5 pts

--

Total Points: 150.0