ASSIGNMENT BRIEF An op-ed derives its name from originally having appeared opposite the editorial page in a newspaper. In essence, it is a column that represents the strong, informed and focused opinion of the writer with the aim to change the minds of the public or in some cases, with the intention to reshape public …
Continue reading “NIE201 Interdisciplinary Processes for a Better World Group-based Assignment 1”
The post NIE201 Interdisciplinary Processes for a Better World Group-based Assignment 1 appeared first on My Assignment Help SG.
ASSIGNMENT BRIEF
An op-ed derives its name from originally having appeared opposite the editorial page in a newspaper. In essence, it is a column that represents the strong, informed and focused opinion of the writer with the aim to change the minds of the public or in some cases, with the intention to reshape public policies.
Topics
For this assignment, your group will write an op-ed that focuses on one of the following topics*, shaped in line with this module’s emphasis on interdisciplinary processes for a better world:
- Building food security
- Practicing environmental conservation
- Inclusive urban design
- Enabling social equality
- Live well, age well
* Please note that your group will be expected to complete GBA01 and GBA02 focusing on the same selected topic. This is meant to enable groups to build their content knowledge on particular issues across the group assignments. If you would like to change your topic, please consult your TG instructor for approval prior to doing so.
Suggested questions to guide your preparation:
- What problem does your op-ed wish to spotlight? What is one issue you think the public needs to know?
- How do we know the problem is a wicked problem? What evidence do you need to prove that your problem is wicked?
- What disciplines are implicated in the wicked problem?
- How would different disciplines view the problem? What is at stake for these disciplines?
- Are there points of convergence or divergence in the different disciplinary perspectives?
Note: the above pointers are non-exhaustive and are simply suggested questions to guide your thinking process for the completion of GBA01. You are not expected to answer them one by one in the op-ed!
For an extended definition and guides to writing op-eds, you may refer to:
The Washington Post (2022) and
Duke University (n.d.).
Environment Health News collates a variety of good opinion articles from various sources which you can refer to as examples.
Your op-ed will be graded based on the rubrics attached. Please look at this before starting work on your assignment!
Hire a Professional Essay & Assignment Writer for completing your Academic Assessments
SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
- This assignment will constitute 25% of your final grade.
- Your submission must be no more than 1,000 words, excluding the list of references. Please include your word count in the submission.
- Each group is required to submit a declaration of original work via Canvas by 19th Sep 2025, Week 6, Friday, 23:55 hours.
- Each group is required to upload your op-ed on the Canvas course site by 19th Sep 2025, Week 6, Friday, 23:55 hours.
- Please use the Cover Page provided on Canvas. The Cover Page includes a declaration of use of GenAI and an example of how to report it appropriately.
- You may submit using APA or Chicago referencing styles. A list of cited material must be appended.
- Diagrams/illustrations/photos/charts (optional but encouraged) must be properly captioned/credited.
- You may submit multiple versions over the period before the close of the folder – Instructors will only take into consideration the last version submitted before the deadline.
- Late submissions will be penalised.
- Please use one page along with your cover page to include the following declaration, and indicate your use of GenAI accordingly.
CONSULTATIONS
Instructors are available for group consultations (up to 15 mins per group). Group consultations are optional and not compulsory. Please email your instructors to arrange for a mutually agreeable date and time for consultations. This can be conducted in person or over zoom meetings.
REFERENCES
- Environment Health News (n.d.). Top news in Opinion. Environment Health News. https://www.ehn.org/opinion/
- Duke University (n.d.). Writing Effective Op-Eds. Duke University. https://communicators.duke.edu/writing-media/writing-effective-op-eds/
- The Washington Post (2022). The Washington Post guide to writing an opinion article. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/op-ed-writing-guide-washington-post-examples/
RUBRICS
| Criterion | Needs Work | Borderline Pass | Fair | Good | Exceptional | Score |
| Understanding of wicked problem 30 marks | (0-11.5) The op-ed provides little to no context of the problem. It demonstrates little to no understanding of the wickedness of the problem. | (12-14.5) The op-ed provides a somewhat relevant context of the problem. It demonstrates a superficial understanding of the wickedness of the problem. | (15-17.5) The op-ed provides a mostly relevant context of the problem. It demonstrates a fair understanding of the wickedness of the problem. | (18-22) The op-ed offers highly detailed insights and relevant context of the problem. It demonstrates a deep understanding of the wickedness of the problem. | (22.5-30) The op-ed provides comprehensive insights and relevant context of the problem. It demonstrates a deep understanding of the wicked problem with original insights. | |
| Engagement with disciplinary perspectives of the problem 30 marks | (0-11.5) Able to identify only few of pertinent perspectives. Lacks analysis and synthesis of positionalities and assumptions of disciplines. | (12-14.5) Able to identify some pertinent perspectives. Superficial analysis of positionalities and assumptions of disciplines, without synthesis. | (15-17.5) Able to identify and analyse several pertinent perspectives. Analysis of positionalities and assumptions of disciplines, with synthesis of perspectives. | (18-22) Able to identify and critically analyse pertinent perspectives. In-depth analysis of positionalities and assumptions of disciplines with thorough synthesis of perspectives. | (22.5-30) Able to identify and critically analyse the pertinent perspectives. In-depth analysis of positionalities and assumptions of disciplines. Thorough synthesis of perspectives with original insights. | |
| Use of Evidence and Examples 20 marks | (0-7.5) The essay lacks sufficient evidence and examples to support the argument. The evidence provided is weak, irrelevant, or absent. There is little to no integration of evidence into the argument, resulting in a lack of persuasiveness and depth. | (8-9.5) The essay uses some evidence and examples, but they are often weak, irrelevant, or insufficient. The integration of evidence into the argument is inconsistent, and the examples provided do not significantly enhance the argument’s persuasiveness or depth. | (10-11.5) The essay uses evidence and examples to support the argument, but they may be limited in variety or relevance. The evidence is somewhat integrated into the argument but may occasionally lack depth or fail to fully support the points being made. | (12-14) The essay uses highly relevant evidence and examples to support the argument, with high level of variety and detail. The evidence is integrated well and highly supports the main points. | (15-20) The essay effectively uses a variety of strong, highly relevant evidence and examples to support the argument, demonstrating depth and insight. The evidence is seamlessly integrated into the argument, enhancing the essay’s persuasiveness and depth of analysis. | |
| Structure of essay 10 marks | (0-3.5) No structure | (4-4.5) Not quite structured and materials are disconnected | (5-5.5) Well-structured but materials are not well connected | (6-7) Well-structured and coherent | (7.5-10) Well-structured and materials are presented in a coherent manner, with incisive linkages | |
| Grammar 5 marks | (0-1.9) Full of errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling | (2-2.4) Contains many errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling | (2.5-2.9) Contains some errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling | (3-3.5) Almost no errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling | (3.8-5) Completely free of errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling | |
| References 5 marks | (0-1.9) Full of errors and/or missing references | (2-2.4) Contains many errors and/or missing references | (2.5-2.9) Contains some errors and/or missing references | (3-3.5) Almost no errors and/or missing references | (3.8-5) Completely free of errors and/or missing references | |
| Final Grade |
—- END OF MARKING GUIDE —-
Buy Custom Answer of This Assessment & Raise Your Grades
The post NIE201 Interdisciplinary Processes for a Better World Group-based Assignment 1 appeared first on My Assignment Help SG.
