The relative significance of nature and nurture on the development of human language has been a historical debate spanning decades of cognitive and developmental psychology. For many years, people have debated and discussed the importance of nature and nurture and which has greater significance in human development. In this assignment, you will focus on the roles of nature and nurture in the process of language development.
Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:
- This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
- Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
Write an essay (1,650-2,000 words) in which you discuss how the evolution of computer-generated speech affects the nature-nurture debate in the process of language development. In your essay address the following:
- The roles nature and nurture have in the process of language development.
- Does the successful development of computer-generated speech, which allows computers to communicate with one another, orally, effectively eliminate the nature-nurture debate regarding human language development?
- Nature-Nurture and Language Development RUBRIC (must follow also)
Less Than Satisfactory
|30.0 %Discusses the Roles Nature and Nurture Play in Human Language Development||Discussion of the roles nature and nurture play in human language development is either not present or not evident to the reader.||Discussion of the roles nature and nurture play in human language development is present, but incomplete.||Discussion of the roles nature and nurture play in human language development is present, but the discussion is cursory and lacking in depth.||Discussion of the roles nature and nurture play in human language development is evident. Arguments are convincing, are presented logically, and support claims.||Discussion of the roles nature and nurture play in human language development is evident. Arguments support claims and are insightful and convincing. Discussion is detailed and perceptive, demonstrating a deep grasp of course material. Research is from current, scholarly, and original and/or highly respected sources.|
|30.0 %Discusses How the Evolution of Oral Communication Between Computers Affects/Eliminates the Nature-Nurture Discussion Regarding Human Language Development||Discussion about how the evolution of oral communication between computers affects/eliminates the nature-nurture discussion regarding human language development is either not present or not evident to the reader.||Discussion about how the evolution of oral communication between computers affects/eliminates the nature-nurture discussion regarding human language development is present but incomplete.||Discussion about how the evolution of oral communication between computers affects/eliminates the nature-nurture discussion regarding human language development is present, but the discussion is cursory and lacking in depth.||Discussion about how the evolution of oral communication between computers affects/eliminates the nature-nurture discussion regarding human language development is clearly evident. Discussion is convincing and supports claims. Research is from scholarly sources, most of which are authoritative, but some are outdated.||Discussion about how the evolution of oral communication between computers affects/eliminates the nature-nurture discussion regarding human language development. is clearly evident. Arguments support claims and are insightful and convincing. Discussion is detailed and perceptive, demonstrating a deep grasp of course material. Research is from current, scholarly, and original and/or highly respected sources.|
|10.0 %Synthesis and Argument||No synthesis of source information is evident. Statement of purpose is not followed to a justifiable conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses non-credible sources.||Synthesis of source information is attempted, but is not successful. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.||Synthesis of source information is present, but pedantic. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.||Synthesis of source information is present and meaningful. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.||Synthesis of source information is present and scholarly. Argument is clear and convincing presenting a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative. The synthesis and argument in the paper are of publication caliber.|
|20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness|
|20.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose||Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim.||Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear.||Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. They are descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.||Thesis and/or main claim are clear and comprehensive; the essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. The development indicated by the thesis and/or main claim is acceptable for publication.|
|5.0 %Mechanics of Writing||Mechanical errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.||Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.||Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.||Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.||Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.|
|5.0 %APA Format||Required format is rarely followed correctly. An appropriate number of topic-related scholarly research sources and related in-text citations is not present. No reference page is included. No citations are used.||Required format is attempted, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Some included sources are not scholarly research or topic-related. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.||Required format is used correctly, although some minor errors may be present. Scholarly research sources are present and topic-related, but the source and quality of some references is questionable. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.||Required format is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. Scholarly research accounts for the majority of sources presented and is topic-related and obtained from reputable professional sources. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.||The document is correctly formatted to publication standards. All research presented is scholarly, topic-related, and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error. The paper could readily be accepted for publication.|