D#6,HW#8, Deadline Reflection

Well wave byebye to WP#1, first glance...looked menacing...glance back...piece of cake

I absolutely agree that no paper from any grade school student up to expert English professor should go un-peer edited. Being one of the best ways for someone, such as me, to have mistakes that i would glaze over, being highlighted and getting a chance to notice habits and attempt to break them.



Postings:
Justin D#6, HW#8
Pestrada D#6, HW#8
SemperBusy D#6, HW#8
Coralee D#6, HW#3
Camille D#5, HW#5

D#6, HW#7, Grammer Assignment

I review my mistakes on WP#1, i saw some errors in using the correct tense also i missed a few commas, although i revised the sentence to flow better without commas. In due, i went back to Purdue Owl online site and reviewed the advanced depth tabs i did not notice on last grammer deadline that contained much more information and examples. Then in turn with everyone else i summited my paper to turnitin.com following the syllabus.

D#6,HW#5, Evidence Needed

Due to my time restraints and high profile for target interviewees my primary source of information will be second hand. I have grown accustomed of using the MCC research resources informational page containing links to all the source. This in turn has allowed me to collect data from multiple sources and databases to base my research paper upon. Also i prefer not having to deal with library fines and the awkward silence, instead i do my best writing at home in my "zone" of my room.

D#6,HW#4, Annotated Bibliographies x3

Committee on Science. Scientific and Medical Aspects of Human Reproductive Cloning. National Academies, 2002. Ebrary. Mesa Comm. Coll., Mesa, AZ. 5 Oct. 2007 . In this source i was able to find a chapters on should and how banning cloning would be carried out. Also, the source documents what current legislature actions have taken place and are currently in action. Most interesting is it list 12 findings on why cloning should be banned.

Gerdes, Louise I, Ed. “Human Cloning Will Harm Society.” Opposing Viewpoints: Genetic Engineering 2005. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Thomson Gale. Mesa Comm. Coll., Mesa, AZ. 5 Oct. 2007 . This source claims that cloning will produce a controlled world ran by corporations that control reproduction and traits of any human. Also, included in source is documentation of the patent on cloning. Furthermore, the source claims it is owed to humans to naturally reproduce and have offspring.

Human Dignity and Human Cloning. Ed. Silja Voneky. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2004. ebrary. Mesa Comm. Coll., Mesa, AZ. 5 Oct. 2007 . This source contains multiple aspects and different religious beliefs and culturing. This demonstrates the religious viewpoint which could pertain to the audience selected for human cloning. Near the end of the book there are a few chapters that cover the legal in U.S. and internationally.

D#6,HW#3, Writing Project Reflection

In completing my WP#1 rough draft, i reviewed all my peer editing that was completed last week and strengthened areas of my paper that were pointed out to be weak or needing rewording.For my next project, i believe i will use the same ideas such as going back and looking at the work a period of time after writing my paper in a single sitting. I was most proud of peoples comments on the topic choice and presentation of information. I was most concerned that i would have missed a section of the guidelines or be completely wrong. In this project i was able to successfully improve i believe in my understanding of the structure and importance of a research proposal.In WP#2, i believe i will be able to complete with ease due to the single solution likeness to mathematical functions.

D#6, HW#2, Final WP#1

Published to Turnitin.com

Thank you all for the good feedback on my paper.

D#6, HW#1, Reading Reflection

Well start of another week with even less homework time cause of extended work hours. First off, i found the reading such as on chapter 16, p 488, to be interesting to me as my first off position on my research topic has gone from extreme one sided to now a mixed variety depending on area of topic. Throughout my education up to this point i have experienced multiple papers that going in i had a strong opinion but after getting sources completed and reading material, i often have to rethink my position.
In Chapter 19, which goes on to talk about sources, is almost something that should have belonged in a "How to for Dummies..." book. It hopefully is common sense to not included information from celebrity bashing news publications or from some guy that lives in remote Canada that hosted his own site on information about aliens abducting him. Just my two cents.
This week i hope to put to use the helpful spotting of last weeks peer reviews and collect reliable sources to add to my collection.