Coursework problem- do you think I made the right decision?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a student's dilemma regarding the inclusion of new information about the water table and springs in their project on biogeography predictions. The scope includes academic writing, research methodology, and ethical considerations in coursework.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • The student initially assumed that water bodies were directly fed by the water table, but new information suggests the presence of springs, which could affect their predictions.
  • Some participants propose that if this is a first-year course, the student might be justified in ignoring the new information to avoid complicating their work.
  • Others argue that the student should incorporate the new findings into their paper, suggesting that it would be intellectually dishonest to omit this information.
  • A suggestion was made to add a section discussing the new information and its implications, even if the main content of the paper remains unchanged.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the student should include the new information in their essay. Some advocate for ignoring it to simplify the work, while others emphasize the importance of academic integrity and suggest incorporating it.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects uncertainty regarding the implications of the new information on the student's predictions and the expectations of the coursework. There is no consensus on the best course of action.

Who May Find This Useful

Students facing similar dilemmas in academic writing, particularly in relation to incorporating new information and maintaining academic integrity.

matthyaouw
Gold Member
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
5
I have a piece of project work in which I have to make predictions about the biogeography in an area of diverse grassland in 20 years time if one of a number of changes occur (changes proposed by the tutor, not me). The change I chose was the regional water table rising 0.5 metres. I've written the majority of my essay already, but I thought that it would be useful to do a bit of research on the water table at present. Until now, I'd assumed that the water filling the ditches, the seasonal pond, and the wet flush plant communities was straight from the water table, as this was what the question implied; if it isn't, then I have no data on which to base my prediction.
I wrote most of an essay based upon this assumption, when I received an email from a university staff member anwering my query about the depth of the water table:

"To the best of my knowledge it has not been determined. The pond in the corner is spring-fed."

uh oh.
Now I hadn't been told anything about springs. Apparetly there is faulting in the clay (you can get faulting on quaternary boulder clay?) and water seeps up from the chalk below (possibly like in an artesian(sp?) well?).
With some research, I think it would be altogether possible to discover the nature of these springs, and adjust my essay accordingly, however its now monday night, and this is due on friday along with 4 other assignments. I simply do not have time to do it. I've decided to basically ignore this new information, and carry on with my work as if I had not learned this. I do wonder if I was supposed to learn this, or whether my tutor left the information out of her lectures purposefully and wanted us to write basing our predictions on the water being normal groundwater from a very high waer table.

Do you think I'm doing right to keep from over complicating this and ignoring this new information?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
If this is first year... ignore it.

Otherwise, I don't know myself.

I'd say if it's not a major course, then I'd ignore it.
 
I think that this information should leave your paper mostly unchanged, but you should add a section or two detailing this new information you found, and speculation on what it might imply. And if it fits well, it would be worth saying stuff about this new information in the other parts of the paper too.

I think it would be intellectually dishonest to just leave out this new information.
 
I'd go with Hurkyl actually.

Add a paragraph/note after the conclusion about the findings.
 

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
10K
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 76 ·
3
Replies
76
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K