EH1020 II Columbia Southern Unit IV Abortion Debate Literature Review Follow the directions below for the completion of the introduction and literature rev

EH1020 II Columbia Southern Unit IV Abortion Debate Literature Review Follow the directions below for the completion of the introduction and
literature review draft assignment for Unit IV. If you have questions, please
email your professor for assistance.Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is to begin drafting your
academic argumentative research paper.Description: In this assignment, you will first write your
literature review; then, you will write your introduction. Please see “Lesson
4: The Introduction” for details on why it is suggested that you begin the
drafting process with the literature review instead of the introduction. The
following details are requirements of the assignment:
Introduction (9-12 well-developed sentences/approximately 350 words): For
more details about what is expected for each of the
following sentences, please see “Lesson 4: The
Introduction.” You may also want to review the
“Example Introduction and Literature Review (with
comments).” The following components must be included in
the introduction (in the following order).
Sentence 1: Introduce the general topic
Sentence 2: Pro side (general)
Sentence 3: Con side (general)
Sentence 4: Narrow the scope (1)
Sentence 5: Examples of the narrowed topic
Sentence 6: Narrow the scope (2)
Sentence 7: Specific controversy
Sentence 8: Pro side (specific)
Sentence 9: Con side (specific)
Sentence 10: The thesis
Literature Review (800-900 words): For details about the structure of the
literature review, you will want to review “Lesson
3: The Literature Review: The Process.” You may
also want to review the “Example Introduction and
Literature Review (with comments).” The link is
below.
Literature review preface: This paragraph acts as a guide to what the
reader can expect in
the literature review.
Literature review body: This section includes three to four body
paragraphs that discuss the
history, terminology, and both sides of
the controversy (pro and
con).
Literature review conclusion: The conclusion signals that the literature
review is ending,
but it also acts as a kind of preface
for the body of the paper by
restating the thesis statement and
establishing your argument once
again.
Demonstrate how to summarize and paraphrase source materials.
Demonstrate the avoidance of plagiarism through proper use of APA
citations and references for all paraphrased and quoted
material.I have attached an example Unit IV Color Key:
? Blue: APA document formatting
? Red: Example common mistakes in APA style
? Brown: Paragraph number and label
? Green: Sentence-level number and explanation
Running head: SAFETY FIRST
1
APA header: Note that the
title is in capital letters and
prefaced by the words
“Running head.” The page
number is also included.
Full title of the paper with the
major words beginning with a
capital letter
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
Student Name
Columbia Southern University
Name of the institution,
which will always be
“Columbia Southern
University”
The student’s first and last
name
SAFETY FIRST
Para 1:
Introduction
Full title presented again at the top of
the page
2
Safety First: Open Carry Firearms on Higher Education Campuses in Arizona
S2 &3: Follows
S1 by
introducing the
position of the
pro side; again,
Amanda is
general,
focusing on the
larger
controversy
Much has been made in the past few years about gun restrictions in the U.S. Proponents
Sentence 1
(S1): Amanda
introduces the
main topic
(gun control) in
a generalized
manner; this
sentence also
introduces the
con side of the
controversy
S5: Specific
examples from
the news.
Note that
these are
examples of
school
shootings with
which most
people are
familiar. This
grounds the
project to what
is at stake in
making
arguments
about this
topic.
S7: In this
sentence, the
writer
introduces the
specific topic
of the project:
the
controversy
around
SB1474.
S10: Amanda
presents her
thesis
statement.
She responds
to the
controversy by
crafting a
thesis
statement that
simultaneousl
y agrees and
disagrees.
of gun regulation are in a constant state of lobbying for state and federal bills that restrict access
to firearms, whether that takes the form of more extensive background checks on potential gun
owners or longer waiting periods before guns may be sold to individuals. On the other side, the
National Rifle Association (NRA) and other like-minded individuals advocate for looser
restrictions on the sale and carrying of firearms. For these supporters of pro-gun legislation,
owning and carrying guns is a fundamental right—even a civil right. While this national debate
continues to loom over the hot topic of guns, there are breaking news stories, especially within
S4: Amanda
begins to narrow
the scope of the
project by pointing
towards a specific
debate within the
larger controversy
of gun control:
gun control in
educational
settings.
the last few months, that bring this fundamental debate to the threshold of our nations colleges,
high schools, even elementary schools. Seung-Hui Cho’s massacre at Virginia Tech (April 16,
2007) is perhaps one of the more infamous school shootings, but there are others that are perhaps
more difficult to remember, like the deaths of 27 killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in
Newton, Connecticut (December 14, 2012) (CNN, 2015). Shootings like these in educational
settings have drawn attention from both anti-gun proponents and pro-gun lobbyists, and the State
S6: Amanda
again narrows
the scope of
the project by
moving from
gun control in
educational
settings to this
debate as it
takes place in a
specific
location:
Arizona.
of Arizona is no exception to this firestorm. The Arizona State legislature has proposed SB 1474,
a gun bill that will allow students and faculty to carry guns on the campus grounds of its three
state-funded universities. Supporters of the bill claim that Arizona is an open carry state, and
those rights should not be restricted simply because the carrier crosses the border of a college
campus. Those against the bill assert that guns have no place in education and that those who
support the bill are only after their own election-year agendas. While the Second Amendment
should be upheld, the educational learning environment should be protected;
S8 & 9:
Following the
same order
from above
(con first, then
pro), Amanda
presents the
sides of the
controversy by
introducing
each specific
position.
SAFETY FIRST
Shortened version of the title in the
header and the page number on each
page
3
therefore, SB 1474 is a detrimental and dangerous bill that has the potential to change the
university campus culture in Arizona state universities.
Para 2:
Preface of the
Literature
Review
This is a
second-level
heading. It is
left-hand
justified and
bold. All major
words are
capitalized.
This tells the
reader that
this next
section is a
division of the
first-level
heading that
is directly
above.
The Literature Review
First-level heading: All major sections of the paper will
be first-level, including The Literature Review, Body, and
Conclusion. You may choose to mark the Introduction,
but it is typically not done because the title of the paper
stands for the heading level. Note that the title is
centered and bold with sentence-case capitalization.
In order to better understanding the origins of SB1474 and the controversy that surrounds
it, the history of gun violence in school settings must be taken into account; therefore, a brief
look at some of the events of the past few decades is presented. Further, this review will examine
in greater detail the positions of the two sides of the controversy, beginning with the pro-SB1474
side, which is in favor of allowing open carry on all Arizona state-funded campuses. Then the
position of those against SB1474 will be presented; again, this con side is arguing for Arizona
campuses to remain as they are now: a place without firearms.
A Brief Look at Gun Violence in Schools
Para 3: Brief
History
Amanda has made a mistake: Only
the ampersand (&) should be used
in a parenthetical citation.
The topic of gun control in educational environments exploded in 1999 when Eric Harris
and Dylan Klebold walked into a virtually unknown high school in Littleton, CO, and killed
This citation is
in APA. It
shows the
authors and
year of
publication.
This sentence
is a
paraphrase of
Gibbs and
Roche. The
reader can
look at the
references
page to find
the original
document.
Note how
Amanda
prefaces the
LR by giving
the reader an
idea of what
will be
included. You
might also
note that the
paragraph is
written in
passive voice
so that she
can avoid
using
personal
pronouns
such as “I.”
twelve students and one teacher (Gibbs and Roche, 1999). Questions of how such events could
occur and concerns about the violence of which teens and young adults are capable became the
concern of pressured administrators and horrified parents in big cities and small towns alike. A
string of school gun-centered violence followed over the next few years. Perhaps most striking
though was the way in which this one incident changed the culture of America: clear backpacks,
more metal detectors, and (of course) fear. Cloud (1999) points out some of the extreme, “zero
tolerance” actions taken by schools shortly following the Columbine shootings:
A seven-year-old boy in Cahokia, Ill., is suspended for having a nail clipper at school. A
10th-grader at Surry County High School in Virginia is booted for having blue-dyed hair.
This quotation is called a “block.” If a quotation is over 40 words long, then you must “block” it by
removing the quotation marks and indenting the entire quotation 1/2” from the left-hand margin.
If this quotation would have been from a print text, then the page number would have been
included at the end of the sentence, but it was an electronic source.
Here is another
way to include a
parenthetical
citation. Amanda
has incorporated
the author’s name
into the sentence.
Note that the year
of publication is
presented after
the author, but
there is no citation
at the end of the
sentence because
the information is
already presented
at the beginning.
SAFETY FIRST
There are three second-level headings in the LR. Headings help you and the reader to see
the organization of your paper.
4
A Minnesota high school nixes a yearbook photo of an Army enlistee in the senior class
because it shows her sitting atop a cannon outside a Veterans of Foreign Wars post.
Far from the exception, these actions considered these many years later seem unreasonable, even
in a post-9/11 world filled with uncertainty.
The Argument for Open Carry Everywhere in Arizona
Para 4: Pro side
However, in Arizona, the newly proposed SB 1474 would not seek to disarm students; on
the contrary, the bill would allow students the right to concealed carry on state-funded university
Amanda
presents a
closer look at
the pro side
before the con
side. Note that
she is not
engaging with
the arguments,
only presenting
them as fairly
as she can.
The LR is
about the
arguments of
others. Amanda
knows she will
be able to
make her own
arguments in
the Body of the
paper.
campuses. Proponents of the bill assert that such a measure is long over due. According to an
NRA poster that were taped to message boards all over The University of Arizona campus,
“[s]elf-defense is one of the most fundamental rights of every human being.” Further, the poster
states that the NRA has worked diligently over the past 25 years to expand the right of open
carry: the NRA has been “working for passage of fair Right-to-Carry laws, expansion of carry
reciprocity between the states and the elimination of many ‘no-carry’ zones that only affect the
law-abiding.” For the NRA, one of the major private-public backers of the SB 1474, the
restriction of concealed carry on college campuses is an infringement on these basic rights. The
flyer goes on to state the following:
Those who oppose campus carry [of firearms] argue that educational institutions should
be treated differently, based on emotional claims that places of higher learning are
somehow exempt from real-world violence. But the truth is, despite current prohibitions
on legally carrying on campuses, crimes already occur on campus, and the right to selfdefense from those violent acts should be respected. (NRA, 2012)
The NRA is correct. In fact, given the number of school-related shootings in the past few months
alone, it would seem that a student’s chances of being shot on campus seem greater than if that
SAFETY FIRST
5
same student were walking the streets of the community. From larger cities to small towns, it
seems that the size of the community does not matter: the violence of a shooting can occur
anywhere. However, even with this fact floating in the backs of students’ minds, students must
still attend classes and while it would seem obvious that lawmakers on both sides want student
safety, they just see the means to that safety from different sides of the same coin.
The Case for Campuses as Unique
Para 5: Con side
This citation is correct. Amanda did not have to include the
author’s first name, but it is fine to do so the first time that
the author’s name is mentioned.
Eugene Sander (2012), the Interim President of the University of Arizona, released the
following statement about SB 1474: “I have been a gun owner for all my adult life, and am fully
supportive of the right to own a gun. However, having faculty, staff or students bringing
weapons into classrooms and other campus activities will do nothing to make our campus safer.”
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
Each time
an author is
included,
the year of
publication
must
follow. So
this should
read as
follows:
“While
Sander
(2012)…”
While Sander does not go into detail about what this newly proposed bill does have to do with,
he makes his case on the basis that 50,000 students, staff, and faculty attend the campus daily,
along with over 20,000 visitors annually. For Sander (2015), the educational environment is a
“unique atmosphere that is dependent on open and vigorous debate. Introducing guns into
Amanda
has made a
mistake.
The actual
year of the
publication
is 2012. Be
careful
about
editing for
errors like
this in your
own paper.
classrooms would dramatically and negatively impact the ability to engage in constructive
dialogue.” In other words, even if the NRA does not believe that the university is a unique
atmosphere, as Sander and others do, then there is still a possibility that introducing the right to
carry concealed weapons on campus might lead to a change to the very culture of the university.
Para 6: LR
Conclusion
While Arizona lawmakers continue to debate the merits of SB1474, the public debate
grows, as this issue concerns both public safety and citizens’ rights. Because the three state
S1&2:
Amanda
creates a topic
sentence that
encapsulates
the concern of
the
controversy,
and she
includes a
second
sentence to
increase
understanding.
universities in Arizona are publically funded, the debate about allowing open carry is very much
a concern held by the communities in which these universities reside. Those who are in favor of
the change to an open carry status on university campuses wish (a) for the open carry laws of the
S3: Amanda
summarizes
the two main
arguments of
the pro side,
which favors
the passing of
SB1474.
S4: Amanda
summarizes
the main
argument of
the con side,
those who are
against the
passing of
SB1474.
SAFETY FIRST
6
State of Arizona to be extended to all areas, which includes all publically funding institutions,
such as the universities, and (b) for the open carry of firearms to act as a deterrent to gun-related
violence on college campuses. For those who are against the passing of SB1474, many of whom
occupy the space of the university as professors, students, or administrators, the question of
allowing the open carry of firearms is no actual question at all: there is simply no need to involve
weapons in a space that is meant for open dialogue and debate. In as much as the Second
Amendment should be observed and upheld in the fashion adopted by the State of Arizona in the
form of open carry, the university setting is unique in that concerns about open and free
expression should be at the forefront—essentially making this bill a potentially dangerous one
that should be reconsidered or withdrawn completely.
S5: Amanda
reiterates her
own position
by reasserting
her thesis
statement.
Note that the
thesis
statement is
slightly
different than
the original at
the end of the
Introduction
paragraph.
SAFETY FIRST
An APA list of references should be
labeled “References,” NOT “Works
Cited” or “Bibliography.”
The last
name is
presented
first; then the
first name
and middle
(if present) is
included as
initials. An
ampersand
(&) is used
for more
than one
author. Last
names are
always
presented
first.
7
Titles in APA are presented in sentence-case
capitalization, meaning that only the first
word or any proper noun should begin with a
capital letter.
References
CNN Library. (2015, October 19). 28 deadliest mass shootings in U.S. history fast facts. CNN.
Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/16/us/20-deadliest-mass-shootings-in-u-s-
Proper nouns
always begin
with a capital
letter.
history-fast-facts/
Cloud, J. (1999). The Columbine effect. Time. Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/
magazine/article/0,9171,35098,00.html
Gibbs, N. & Roche, T. (1999). The Columbine tapes. Time. Retrieved from
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,992873,00.html
National Rifle Association. (2012). Arizona self-Defense on campus [Flyer]. NRA: Author.
Sander, Eugene. (2012, March 20). UA President opposes campus guns bill. KGUN-TV.
Amanda has
made a
mistake by
including the
full name of
the author
here.
Retrieved from http://www.kgun9.com
Amanda has
made a
mistake. This
capital letter
“D” should not
be capitalized.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment