a.w wk2 biol180

Overview: Technology makes vast amounts of information (and misinformation) readily available. The challenge is navigating this sea of information. Our goal for your general science education is to develop your scientific literacy. A critical skill you must develop is the ability to find reputable sources of academically and scientifically credible information. There are many sources of high-quality scientific information on the open web; you just need to learn how to spot them by identifying any “green” or “red” flags.

Instructions: There are two required elements to every weekly discussion:

• Main Post (See Requirements section below for details)
• Weeks 2-8 (due by Wednesday)
• Reply Posts (See Requirements section below for details)
• Weeks 1- 8 (due by Sunday)
• Reply to a minimum of two classmates’ main posts
• Monitor your main post and reply to those who commented within the active discussion week
• Participate throughout the week (on more than one day)

Evaluation: Refer to the for a detailed breakdown of the grading criteria requirements. Meeting the minimum requirements noted above will not result in a score of 100. To understand how to maximize your overall Discussion grade, I suggest you refer to the “Exemplary” criterion column in the grading rubric to learn more about what is expected. NOTE: All listed requirements in a given criterion box must be met to achieve that criterion score. Contact me should you have any questions.

Late posts: Main and reply posts submitted after the scheduled due dates may be assessed a penalty according to the late policy in the syllabus.

Main Post Requirements:

• First, decide which species of organism you will choose for your Course Project topic. (Only one species!) Share your species’ correct scientific name.
• This species will be the SAME TOPIC you will research throughout all your Course Project assignment steps through Week 8.
• Next, select only ONE article from a source of information relevant to any of the topics and subtopics of your species (Physical Description, Life Cycle/Reproduction, Structure/Function, Energy Ecology, and Habitat) from the open web or the Trefry Library.
• Note: Our Week 2 Discussion helps students kick off researching their selected species. I strongly advise you to review the Outline assignment instructions for more details.
• Use the name of your article and its source as the title of your initial post (e.g., “Bare-nosed Wombat – Australian Museum.”) You cannot use a source that one of your classmates has already used, or you will not receive credit.
• Recall that Wikipedia is not considered a credible source for our purposes and should not be used in class.
• Evaluate your selected source and write it in APA reference list format:

1. Evaluate the source by explaining why it is or is not an academically and scientifically credible source of information. Do not summarize the article or focus your post on details about your organism! The focus of your post should be on identifying three pieces of evidence and explaining your rationale as to why each is evidence for or against credibility.

A. Provide a minimum of three pieces of evidence to support your thoughts and state if they are green or red flag examples.

Some evidence to consider is the credibility of the author as a subject matter expert, the quality of the reference sources included in the article or lack thereof, the credibility of the publisher or website, etc. Review the and (Criteria to Determine Credibility).

Green-Flag evidence example:

• Author is a subject-matter expert (e.g., “Dr. Mary Smith holds a Ph.D. in zoology.”)

Red-Flag evidence example:

• Author is not a subject-matter expert and does not provide academically and scientifically credible reference sources. (e.g., “John Jones is a freelance writer with a journalism degree and did not include any credible reference sources.”)

B. Based on the evidence you have provided, state if you feel this source is an overall credible source.

Examples:

• “All three pieces of evidence I found were green flags; therefore, I feel this is a credible source overall.”
• “All three pieces of evidence I found were red flags; therefore, I feel this is not a credible source overall.”
• “The evidence I found was a mix of red and green flags. Because Wikipedia was one of the sources noted in the article, I believe this is not a credible source overall.”

2. Provide attribution for your source, including a functioning URL for classmates and your instructor to reach it for review.

• You can opt to practice your APA formatting if you’d like, considering you will be required to use it in your upcoming assignments.
• Use our Trefry Library APA Style resource:
• And/or use the Owl at Purdue site for assistance with APA format:
• Additional Resources: Access the Natural Sciences Program Guide from the Trefry Online Library at. Select the “Websites” tab. Review the links in the “Internet Research: Tips for Science Students” box.

Reply Posts Requirements: Replies should be focused on the week’s topic and biology. They should be substantive* and demonstrate understanding to be eligible for maximum credit. Respectful and professional discussion is expected.

Important! Your replies should address the following for Week 2:

• When substantively replying to your classmates’ main posts, review their source critically, explain whether you agree or disagree with their assessment, and explain why. It is not sufficient to simply agree and reiterate their points.

*”Substantive” means comments that contribute something new and relevant to the discussion. Thus, a reply that simply conveys agreement or reiterates the original poster’s thoughts is not substantive. Rather, a best-practice reply:

• contributes a new idea or perspective
• asks good follow-up questions to points made
• provides examples or illustrations of a key point
• points out inconsistencies in an argument
• shares a new and relevant resource to further the discussion

Attribution Requirements and Academic Honesty: It is expected that most discussion topics will require the use of course materials or other outside sources. Those must be properly attributed so that the reader understands the source of the information (e.g., source URL). Cutting-and-pasting text from any source is unacceptable unless properly displayed as an attributed direct quote; however, the use of direct quotes should be very limited (less than 10%). It is expected that the bulk of any post will be in your own words (paraphrase). Please review the sections on in the Student Handbook, as you are required to comply with the standards described therein.

Please remember that, per the Student Handbook, “…content generated by an Artificial Intelligence provider and representing them to be one’s own” is considered cheating. Per the APUS Gen-AI Policy, “When requested, students must reveal how and to what extent Gen-AI tools were used. Failure to adhere to this Gen-AI Policy or any other policies and guidelines may result in disciplinary action up to and including dismissal from the University.”

Rubrics

• GE-EVSP Discussion Rubric (JAN 2024)

reply to:

• demetrius merriweather posted Mar 9, 2026 2:17 PM
• Hi Everyone,
• For my course project species, I selected the gray wolf, Canis lupus.
• Green Flag #1
• One indicator of credibility is that the article is published by the Smithsonians National Zoo & Conservation Biology Institute. The Smithsonian Institution is a well-known scientific and educational organization that conducts wildlife research and conservation work.
• Green Flag #2
• The content is produced by scientists and researchers who work with wildlife and conservation biology. Institutions like the Smithsonian employ subject-matter experts who study animal behavior, ecology, and biology.
• Green Flag #3
• The website is designed to provide educational and scientific information about wildlife, not to sell products or promote opinions. Educational institutions typically review their information for accuracy and reliability.
• Step 3 Overall Credibility Statement
• All three pieces of evidence I found are green flags, so I believe this is a credible scientific source of information.
• Smithsonians National Zoo & Conservation Biology Institute. (n.d.). Gray wolf.
• Thank you,
• Demetrius
• 2 Unread
• 2
• Unread
• 2 Replies
• 2
• Replies
• 2 Views
• 2
• Views
• View profile card for Brandi Cole
• Last post 1 hour ago by Brandi Cole

Venus Fly Trap

• Contains unread posts
• Jessica Schall Galgano posted Mar 9, 2026 11:46 AM
• Hello everyone,
• I have chosen Venus Flytrap as the organism for my Course Project topic. It is also known as Dionaea muscipula (scientific name).
• Article: Venus Fly Trap
• Link:
• Green Flags

1. This article has been reviewed periodically from 1993-2024 by NatureServe Conservation Status Factors
2. This article references university research papers, the U.S. Fish and wildlife service among many others.
3. The Article was published by the Nature Serve Explorer, a nonprofit organization made up of biodiversity scientists who want to make sure good and scientifically accurate information is easily assessable to the public. For over 50 years, NatureServe and the NatureServe Network have worked together to develop and manage the most comprehensive data for over 100,000 species and ecosystems.

• Based on the evidence above I find this source to be a green flag. It pulled its evidence from reputable sources and is constantly updated and evaluated. Its also always a good sign when a URL has .org as this means its connected with an organization and used as a top-level domain. A premier, globally recognized domain for non-profits, charities, open-source projects and education institutions (What Does. Org Mean?, 2025). This does not mean you dont do your diligence.
• -Jessica
• References
• What does .org mean? (2025, November 21). IONOS Digital Guide.