Keep in mind that your final paper should show complexity, as in showing opposing viewpoints and treating all sides fairly. Show the ups and downs of whatever options you discuss. That's how you can stay away from the "report" which (in my personal definition) can be information that only has one answer.
Examples:
"How does electricity work?" - um, it's pretty well accepted so unless there's a viable new theory, avoid or modify this research question.
"How does nuclear power compare to coal power?" - better, but it's pretty common knowledge by now, so this paper wouldn't contribute much new knowledge.
"How do nuclear and other power sources compare economically?" - much better. You're making it more complex now with additional sides to compare, and by getting more specific (economical aspect), you can probably get into more depth, and that has some complexity, too - upfront costs, operational costs, and future costs.
"What are the newest energy-producing technologies?" - potentially great. I know a guy with a machine that creates more electricity than it uses. There's fascinating stuff out there. Or maybe you could mention advances in solar technology that makes it more affordable and tell how that changes the playing field. On the other hand, this could also result in a list of energy sources and not get into any interesting depth.
I hope that helps! We'll keep working on this as we go along.
No comments:
Post a Comment