Recent Question/Assignment

Essential Academic Writing Skills
Individual Assignment 02
July 2014 Presentation
This tutor-marked assignment is worth 50% of the final mark for COR160 Essential Academic Writing Skills.
The cut-off date for this assignment is 2359hrs on 3 October 2014.
Submit your solution document in the form of a single MS Word file on or before the cut-off date shown above.
Additional instructions:
1. You will need to indicate clearly on the front page your name, student ID, course title and assignment number. Note also the following:
? Spacing (between the lines): 1.5 or double spacing
? Font style: Arial or Times New Roman preferred
? Font size: 12 preferred (min 11 and max 13)
2. Summarise using your own words as much as possible. You must document all information that you use from another source, or you will be penalized severely. You must acknowledge these by using the APA documentation style. This includes both in-text citations and end-of-text referencing.
3. If you copy from the work of another student, regardless of the course or programme, you will be severely penalized. You are not permitted to re-use material from past assignments whether in part or in full. All of the above actions can result in your failing the TMA.
*Remember that accurate and proper documentation of information from secondary sources is essential because UniSIM takes a very serious view on plagiarism. All information from secondary sources will be detected by the Turnitin software that your assignment will be put through in Blackboard and anything that is not acknowledged and properly documented will be taken as an instance of plagiarism and your assignment may be failed.
You will find chapters 12a (Critical Reading), 12b (Summary, Paraphrase, Quotation), 12c (Synthesizing) and 12d (Synthesizing Sources) in your COR160 textbook useful. Refer also to the relevant on-line study units.
Learning outcomes
? Cite sources in writing using the proper citation and referencing style.
? Evaluate information critically from various sources to respond to a task.
? Synthesise information from various sources in writing in response to a given task.
? Use process writing to develop a rhetorical structure of an essay.
? Apply persuasive argumentative writing strategies in response to a given task.
Question 1
Cyberbullying happens when a bully uploads embarrassing photos of the victim on social media, sends threatening messages or puts up nasty posts meant to hurt the victim, for example. According to Dr Daniel Fung, chairman of the IMH medical board, teenagers who are bullied online can be very distressed by the harassment and some even refuse to go to school. Ms Esther Ng, founder of the non-profit group Coalition Against Bullying for Children and Youth, said a 13-year-old girl had to change school when she discovered -hate blogs- spreading lies that she had been sleeping around with different boys. The girl was so traumatised by the anonymous posts, which she thought were started by schoolmates, that she plunged into depression, became afraid to leave home and refused to go to school. Said Ms Ng: -Cyberbullying is more common now as people are wired all the time. And children are growing up in an age where they spend more time online than with other people, and are losing the human touch. People now have less empathy and are less forgiving.-
Singapore Children's Society senior counsellor Sylvia Ang said cyberbullying can be more damaging than face-to-face bullying because people are less restrained online and bullies can remain anonymous, leaving victims more helpless and fearful. Ms Ng said what adds to the victims' agony is that embarrassing pictures or nasty messages posted online can be spread widely and seen by an infinite number of strangers. In 2006, the anti-bullying group polled about 3,500 students here aged between 13 and 17, and one in four said they had been bullied online.
There has been much debate in the Singapore Parliament and public sphere with regards to punishing cyber bullies with the expansion of anti-harassment laws in Singapore. The two articles provided reflect the debate regarding the Protection from Harassment Bill in Singapore.
Do you think that the Singapore government should make cyberbullying a criminal offence?
In about 1000 words, write a persuasive argumentative essay defending your position in order to argue for your particular stance on this issue. Other than providing supporting arguments for the position you take on this issue, you MUST anticipate objections and provide counterarguments to write the paper. Relevant information for you to gather would be:
• Definition & types of cyberbullying
• Singapore’s laws on cyberbullying
• Issues (moral, ethical, and etc.) surrounding cyberbullying
• Arguments for criminalising cyberbullying
• Arguments against criminalising cyberbullying
(100 marks)
Guidance Notes
1. Your reasoning must be good. Use process writing to develop a rhetorical structure for your essay and apply persuasive argumentative writing strategies in your response.
2. Strengthen your argument by using examples and illustrations. Synthesise information from various sources in your writing.
3. You may include any additional but relevant information to the ideas that have already been given in the scenario and articles. Evaluate information critically from various sources in your response.
4. You should use at least 7 research sources to help you write your essay. The given articles are considered as a separate research source each and can count towards the 7 research sources.
5. You are to use credible and reliable sources to help you write this essay. Cite sources in your writing by using the proper citation and referencing style. Marks will be deducted for non-credible and unreliable content.
6. Remember to use accurate grammar, correct sentence structures and a tone appropriate to academic writing. Marks will be deducted for poor English.
Article 1:
Publication: The Straits Times 14/03/2014
Page: B10
No. of words: 1025
Parliament passed the Protection from Harassment Bill yesterday, after a four-hour debate that saw 15 MPs speaking on issues ranging from stalking to workplace harassment. Here are excerpts of their questions and Law Minister K. Shanmugam's replies.
MPs asked what constitutes harassment. Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) said there was a need to differentiate between expressions of views and anti-social comments online, while Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang GRC) asked if there was a danger of unintentionally criminalising some situations.
Mr Shanmugam: Whether an act amounts to harassment and should be punished will be decided by the courts, which will consider factors such as the nature of the act, the context in which it occurred and the effect it had on the victim.
For all offences under the Bill, reasonableness can be used as a defence.
Also, harassment is already an offence in the Miscellaneous Offences Act. The provisions of the Bill, which are already part of the Act, are therefore not new.
This means the courts here would have previously heard cases dealing with similar issues, and would have established a body of case law that judges can refer to.
On unlawful stalking, the issue of definition was again raised.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied GRC) wondered if journalists staking out near wakes in hopes of interviewing people would be considered stalkers, and Nominated MP Eugene Tan asked about the exception the law has made for surveillance done on behalf of the Government for the sake of national security, for instance.
Mr Shanmugam: The types of acts that can be considered stalking have to be wide ranging, and it is not practicable to try and prescribe beforehand the specific situations it should include.
In drafting the new laws, the Ministry of Law had tried to strike a balance between
-certainty-, so that people would know what constitutes unlawful stalking, and flexibility, so
that various forms of stalking will be caught.
The courts would have to review each case to decide if the alleged stalking in fact did happen, whether it was reasonable in the circumstances and if the alleged victim was being unreasonable.
Exceptions can be granted to those who have to conduct surveillance for national security, national defence or international relations purposes. Examples include operations to do with terrorism or serious crimes.
A certificate will be issued in these cases to exempt the conduct from the Bill, and the key consideration would be what the conduct is for.
Bullying among children and teenagers was a concern for many MPs, who asked that more be done to protect them and educate them about cyberbullying. Nominated MP Mary Liew and Ms Jessica Tan (East Coast GRC) also wanted to know how the Bill would apply if the bully was a child.
Mr Shanmugam: While the Bill applies equally to children and adults, it is also subject to existing laws governing conduct by juveniles and minors under the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and the rules of court.
So, if a child between the ages of seven to 16 is convicted under the new laws of an offence that attracts a fine or prison term, the court will be allowed to deal with him under the Children and Young Persons Act.
This allows the court to order counselling or probation where appropriate, for example.
The Ministry of Education has existing guidelines to help schools come up with disciplinary procedures for dealing with bullying among students. But it may refine these guidelines for more synergy with the Bill.
A school bullying management kit for all primary and secondary schools has also been developed by the MOE. Targeted at schools and teachers, it provides information on how to identify and respond to bullying.
Protecting children from the ills of online bullying, though, cannot be the job of schools alone. Parents, too, have a role to play.
MPs Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC), Zaqy Mohamad (Chua Chu Kang GRC),
Patrick Tay (Nee Soon GRC) and NMP Eugene Tan voiced concerns over the Bill's coverage of workplace harassment, and discussed educational efforts and the possibility of having workplace guidelines to deal with such conduct.
Mr Shanmugam: The Bill clearly prohibits harassment committed at the workplace; it is broader than that, but workplace harassment is covered. The Ministry of Manpower has been working with NTUC, the Singapore National Employers Federation as well as the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices to address issues of workplace harassment. There are also workshops to better educate employers on these aspects. Protection from harassment has to be an ongoing conversation between many different stakeholders, and it cannot end with this Bill. Other measures such as legislatively requiring employers to institute policies against workplace sexual harassment would have to be part of this conversation, and the feasibility of these will have to be considered.
MPs Tin Pei Ling (Marine Parade GRC) and Zaqy Mohamad (Chua Chu Kang GRC) sought clarifications about the removal of offensive content online, asking how the Bill provides for such removal.
Mr Shanmugam: If the offensive content contravenes certain clauses and a protection order can be made, as part of the protection order, the court can order that no person can publish or continue to publish an offending communication. This would include requiring the removal of the offending content and for there to be no further publication of that content. The protection order can be obtained on an expedited basis, and the expedited protection orders can even be obtained within the same day if the court agrees that it is urgent, and thereafter the publication of the offending communications would be proscribed.
Supposing the offensive content does not cross the threshold set out in the clauses for a protection order to be made or if, for some reason, the victim... wishes to proceed with a lesser remedy, in either of those situations, the victim can obtain a court order under Clause 15 of the Bill to make sure that the falsehood is set right and the true facts are brought out clearly.
Article 2:
Section: Home
Publication: The Straits Times 01/03/2014
Page: B7
No. of words: 544
But proposed expansion of law will give courts more teeth, say lawyers
THE proposed expansion of anti-harassment laws will give courts more teeth to act against the most serious online threats, but lawyers have warned that rogue behaviour online is unlikely to be eradicated.
Under the Protection from Harassment Bill, which will be tabled in Parliament next Monday, a victim who can prove that there are -false facts- alleged against him online can ask the court to direct the harasser or website owner to notify other readers about the untruths.
The court can also give a protection order requiring the harasser – even if he posts anonymously – to remove the offending material, including that on websites hosted overseas.

What gives the proposed laws more muscle is that if the harasser does not comply with the protection order, he could face a fine and go to jail.
-It's a step in the right direction,- said lawyer and MP for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC Christopher de Souza.
-When we were debating the Penal Code in 2007, we were already aware of how the Internet was being used to manipulate the vulnerable.
-This is an extension of that realisation, and I support it. The prevalence of online bullying needs to be dealt with head-on.-
Said law professor and Media Literacy Council chairman Tan Cheng Han: -Online harassment can be just as bad (as real-world harassment), because it can both spread and induce others to gang up against the victim... It is its wide reach that gives it its particular sting.-
But the kind of mob mentality that besieged road bully Quek Zhen Hao and the vet who put down a healthy puppy named Tammy will probably not go away, said Professor Tan.
Both of them had to endure insults on their Facebook pages, while self-styled vigilantes plastered their personal addresses and photographs on online forums in a process sometimes dubbed -CSI-, after the TV series Crime Scene Investigation.
-I don't think all online 'CSI work' will stop because some of it will be equivalent to whistleblowing and unlikely to amount to harassment,- said Prof Tan.
He added: -In other cases, it may be difficult to prove that what was put up was intended to disturb, annoy or upset the subject, as the person posting the information may claim that there is a public interest objective in flagging bad behaviour.-
There is also the issue of enforceability, said social media lawyer Lionel Tan, of law firm Rajah & Tann. -It's impossible to go through all 1,000 people if they spam someone's wall on a one-off basis,- he said.
-Only those who continually barrage the victim or make threats to his physical well-being will be taken to task, and perhaps the ringleader, if he can be proven to have instigated everyone else.-
Lawyers also said that it will remain to be seen how cyberbullying involving children will be handled in a court of law.
This is because there are questions over how the law can take minors to task. According to a poll conducted by local cyberwellness firm Kingmaker Consultancy last year, a third of 1,800 students aged 13 to 14 said they had been targets of cyberbullying.
----- END OF COR160 TMA02 -----