Enviroment

A scientific consensus on the relationship between environment and human activities has not yet been reached. Some believe that the environment, and our climate system, are inseparable from human activities. The emission of Carbon dioxide (CO2), for instance, causes changes in temperatures, sea-levels, as well as the occurrence of extreme weather events. On the other hand, climate change sceptics argue that there is no sufficient evidence shows human-caused effects on nature. Additionally, there is debate about whether extreme weather events experienced in specific regions should be seen as a global environmental issue.  

Research Ready Questions (for A3; no need to address for A2): 

Topic: Enviroment

Should we treat global warming as a transnational project? Engage with at least one example of la Nina and/or el Nino in Australia.  

How important is media narration in shaping the public’s understanding of climate change?

For each topic, we will provide a set of five relevant sources (see below). You must select one of these five sources as the basis for your Critical Analysis task. In addition, you need to find two additional sources. Your critical analysis should be informed by these three sources. We will focus on research processes and selecting sources in tutorials in week 5.

Of the two additional sources you find, one must be an academic article (ideally a peer-reviewed journal article found in the library catalogue) and one must be a ‘non-academic source’ that someone outside the University might encounter. The academic source cannot be one of the other articles found in the list of five sources below. The non-academic source might be a podcast, a newspaper article, a blog post, a youtube video, or something else entirely.

Structure

Part 1: Source Analysis (1000w)

For Part 1, we want you to examine your three sources through the lens of the C.R.A.P analysis, which is widely used in academic study. You need to use the provided template to conduct your C.R.A.P analyses and submit accordingly.

Each source analysis should be approximately 300-350 words. Please do a separate analysis for each of your sources, and use bullet points to outline each step of the C.R.A.P. analysis. You must provide a full reference in the style of Chicago 17th A (notes and bibliography) for each source, including a note about what type of source it is (journal article, podcast, YouTube video, blog post, etc.)

Quick guide to the C.R.A.P. test: 

Currency: How up-to-date is this information?

Reliability: How trustworthy is this information?

Authority: Who wrote this and what is their expertise?

Purpose / Point of view: Why does this information exist and what is its intent?

Part 2: Comparative Analysis and Formulating Argument (500-600w)

Building on the C.R.A.P analyses of your three sources, Part 2 should analyse how the sources function together. It’s important to remember that you must use the things you discovered in your critical analysis Part 1 to inform the writing of Part 2. 

For this section, you should focus on:

What connects these three sources? How do they relate to each other, and what are the grounds for comparison? What are their points of similarity and difference?

How has this body of sources contributed to your understanding of the topic? In what way have these sources enabled you to develop a more critically engaged mode of thinking about the topic?

Developing a clear and concise statement of argument in relation to your topic. 

Your comparative analysis is the basis for formulating an argument. Think of your argument as the central claim (overarching argument point) that underpins the position you’re taking. Ask yourself: what is your position in relation to your topic, in accordance to the research you have conducted? Can you offer a clear and concise statement of argument?

It is up to you how you structure Part 2; you might choose to do this in two paragraphs, but a more sophisticated structure that integrates your connection between the sources with your argument has the potential to be rewarded with a higher mark. Feel free to consult with your tutor as you work through your comparative analysis and formulation of a central argument. (Check the rubric for further details).

Remember, a claim is an opinion. An argument is a substantiated opinion; one backed with facts, or built on a set of premises.

Sources to choose from(pick only one of these)

Source 1: Bogert, Jeanne M, Ellers, Jacintha, Lewandowsky, Stephan, Balgopal, Meena M, & Harvey, Jeffrey A. “Reviewing the relationship between neoliberal societies and nature: implications of the industrialised dominant social paradigm for a sustainable future,” Ecology and Society, (2022) Vol. 27(2): 7-25

Source 2: Giorel, Curran. “Coal, climate and change: The Narrative Driver of Australia’s Coal Economy,” Energy Research and Social Science, (2021), Vol.74, 1-10. 

Source 3: McDonald, Matt. “After the fires? Climate change and security in Australia,” Australian Journal of Political Sciences, (2021) 56:1, 1-18, 

Source 4: Ranjini, Murali, Aishwarya, Kuwar, Harini, Nagendra. “Who’s responsible for climate change? Untangling threads of media discussion in India, Nigeria, Australia, and the USA,” Climate Change, (2021), Vol. 164: 51. 

Source 5: Tibby, John, Tyler, J.J., Barr, Cameron. “Post little ice age drying of easter Australia conflates understanding of early settlement impacts,” Quaternary Science Reviews, (2018) 202: 45-52A scientific consensus on the relationship between environment and human activities has not yet been reached. Some believe that the environment, and our climate system, are inseparable from human activities. The emission of Carbon dioxide (CO2), for instance, causes changes in temperatures, sea-levels, as well as the occurrence of extreme weather events. On the other hand, climate change sceptics argue that there is no sufficient evidence shows human-caused effects on nature. Additionally, there is debate about whether extreme weather events experienced in specific regions should be seen as a global environmental issue.  

Research Ready Questions (for A3; no need to address for A2): 

Topic: Enviroment

Should we treat global warming as a transnational project? Engage with at least one example of la Nina and/or el Nino in Australia.  

How important is media narration in shaping the public’s understanding of climate change?

For each topic, we will provide a set of five relevant sources (see below). You must select one of these five sources as the basis for your Critical Analysis task. In addition, you need to find two additional sources. Your critical analysis should be informed by these three sources. We will focus on research processes and selecting sources in tutorials in week 5.

Of the two additional sources you find, one must be an academic article (ideally a peer-reviewed journal article found in the library catalogue) and one must be a ‘non-academic source’ that someone outside the University might encounter. The academic source cannot be one of the other articles found in the list of five sources below. The non-academic source might be a podcast, a newspaper article, a blog post, a youtube video, or something else entirely.

Structure

Part 1: Source Analysis (1000w)

For Part 1, we want you to examine your three sources through the lens of the C.R.A.P analysis, which is widely used in academic study. You need to use the provided template to conduct your C.R.A.P analyses and submit accordingly.

Each source analysis should be approximately 300-350 words. Please do a separate analysis for each of your sources, and use bullet points to outline each step of the C.R.A.P. analysis. You must provide a full reference in the style of Chicago 17th A (notes and bibliography) for each source, including a note about what type of source it is (journal article, podcast, YouTube video, blog post, etc.)

Quick guide to the C.R.A.P. test: 

Currency: How up-to-date is this information?

Reliability: How trustworthy is this information?

Authority: Who wrote this and what is their expertise?

Purpose / Point of view: Why does this information exist and what is its intent?

Part 2: Comparative Analysis and Formulating Argument (500-600w)

Building on the C.R.A.P analyses of your three sources, Part 2 should analyse how the sources function together. It’s important to remember that you must use the things you discovered in your critical analysis Part 1 to inform the writing of Part 2. 

For this section, you should focus on:

What connects these three sources? How do they relate to each other, and what are the grounds for comparison? What are their points of similarity and difference?

How has this body of sources contributed to your understanding of the topic? In what way have these sources enabled you to develop a more critically engaged mode of thinking about the topic?

Developing a clear and concise statement of argument in relation to your topic. 

Your comparative analysis is the basis for formulating an argument. Think of your argument as the central claim (overarching argument point) that underpins the position you’re taking. Ask yourself: what is your position in relation to your topic, in accordance to the research you have conducted? Can you offer a clear and concise statement of argument?

It is up to you how you structure Part 2; you might choose to do this in two paragraphs, but a more sophisticated structure that integrates your connection between the sources with your argument has the potential to be rewarded with a higher mark. Feel free to consult with your tutor as you work through your comparative analysis and formulation of a central argument. (Check the rubric for further details).

Remember, a claim is an opinion. An argument is a substantiated opinion; one backed with facts, or built on a set of premises.

Sources:

Source 1: Bogert, Jeanne M, Ellers, Jacintha, Lewandowsky, Stephan, Balgopal, Meena M, & Harvey, Jeffrey A. “Reviewing the relationship between neoliberal societies and nature: implications of the industrialised dominant social paradigm for a sustainable future,” Ecology and Society, (2022) Vol. 27(2): 7-25

Source 2: Giorel, Curran. “Coal, climate and change: The Narrative Driver of Australia’s Coal Economy,” Energy Research and Social Science, (2021), Vol.74, 1-10. 

Source 3: McDonald, Matt. “After the fires? Climate change and security in Australia,” Australian Journal of Political Sciences, (2021) 56:1, 1-18, 

Source 4: Ranjini, Murali, Aishwarya, Kuwar, Harini, Nagendra. “Who’s responsible for climate change? Untangling threads of media discussion in India, Nigeria, Australia, and the USA,” Climate Change, (2021), Vol. 164: 51. 

Source 5: Tibby, John, Tyler, J.J., Barr, Cameron. “Post little ice age drying of easter Australia conflates understanding of early settlement impacts,” Quaternary Science Reviews, (2018) 202: 45-52A scientific consensus on the relationship between environment and human activities has not yet been reached. Some believe that the environment, and our climate system, are inseparable from human activities. The emission of Carbon dioxide (CO2), for instance, causes changes in temperatures, sea-levels, as well as the occurrence of extreme weather events. On the other hand, climate change sceptics argue that there is no sufficient evidence shows human-caused effects on nature. Additionally, there is debate about whether extreme weather events experienced in specific regions should be seen as a global environmental issue.  

Research Ready Questions (for A3; no need to address for A2): 

Topic: Enviroment

Should we treat global warming as a transnational project? Engage with at least one example of la Nina and/or el Nino in Australia.  

How important is media narration in shaping the public’s understanding of climate change?

For each topic, we will provide a set of five relevant sources (see below). You must select one of these five sources as the basis for your Critical Analysis task. In addition, you need to find two additional sources. Your critical analysis should be informed by these three sources. We will focus on research processes and selecting sources in tutorials in week 5.

Of the two additional sources you find, one must be an academic article (ideally a peer-reviewed journal article found in the library catalogue) and one must be a ‘non-academic source’ that someone outside the University might encounter. The academic source cannot be one of the other articles found in the list of five sources below. The non-academic source might be a podcast, a newspaper article, a blog post, a youtube video, or something else entirely.

Structure

Part 1: Source Analysis (1000w)

For Part 1, we want you to examine your three sources through the lens of the C.R.A.P analysis, which is widely used in academic study. You need to use the provided template to conduct your C.R.A.P analyses and submit accordingly.

Each source analysis should be approximately 300-350 words. Please do a separate analysis for each of your sources, and use bullet points to outline each step of the C.R.A.P. analysis. You must provide a full reference in the style of Chicago 17th A (notes and bibliography) for each source, including a note about what type of source it is (journal article, podcast, YouTube video, blog post, etc.)

Quick guide to the C.R.A.P. test: 

Currency: How up-to-date is this information?

Reliability: How trustworthy is this information?

Authority: Who wrote this and what is their expertise?

Purpose / Point of view: Why does this information exist and what is its intent?

Part 2: Comparative Analysis and Formulating Argument (500-600w)

Building on the C.R.A.P analyses of your three sources, Part 2 should analyse how the sources function together. It’s important to remember that you must use the things you discovered in your critical analysis Part 1 to inform the writing of Part 2. 

For this section, you should focus on:

What connects these three sources? How do they relate to each other, and what are the grounds for comparison? What are their points of similarity and difference?

How has this body of sources contributed to your understanding of the topic? In what way have these sources enabled you to develop a more critically engaged mode of thinking about the topic?

Developing a clear and concise statement of argument in relation to your topic. 

Your comparative analysis is the basis for formulating an argument. Think of your argument as the central claim (overarching argument point) that underpins the position you’re taking. Ask yourself: what is your position in relation to your topic, in accordance to the research you have conducted? Can you offer a clear and concise statement of argument?

It is up to you how you structure Part 2; you might choose to do this in two paragraphs, but a more sophisticated structure that integrates your connection between the sources with your argument has the potential to be rewarded with a higher mark. Feel free to consult with your tutor as you work through your comparative analysis and formulation of a central argument. (Check the rubric for further details).

Remember, a claim is an opinion. An argument is a substantiated opinion; one backed with facts, or built on a set of premises.

Sources:

Source 1: Bogert, Jeanne M, Ellers, Jacintha, Lewandowsky, Stephan, Balgopal, Meena M, & Harvey, Jeffrey A. “Reviewing the relationship between neoliberal societies and nature: implications of the industrialised dominant social paradigm for a sustainable future,” Ecology and Society, (2022) Vol. 27(2): 7-25

Source 2: Giorel, Curran. “Coal, climate and change: The Narrative Driver of Australia’s Coal Economy,” Energy Research and Social Science, (2021), Vol.74, 1-10. 

Source 3: McDonald, Matt. “After the fires? Climate change and security in Australia,” Australian Journal of Political Sciences, (2021) 56:1, 1-18, 

Source 4: Ranjini, Murali, Aishwarya, Kuwar, Harini, Nagendra. “Who’s responsible for climate change? Untangling threads of media discussion in India, Nigeria, Australia, and the USA,” Climate Change, (2021), Vol. 164: 51. 

Source 5: Tibby, John, Tyler, J.J., Barr, Cameron. “Post little ice age drying of easter Australia conflates understanding of early settlement impacts,” Quaternary Science Reviews, (2018) 202: 45-52