Research Review

University Senior level writing. MLA format. 2000-2500 words. Chosen topic and selected sources attached(cybersecurity: Internet of Things and how policy should regulate IoT in the future). Need to find more sources. Please stick to the requirement attached below.

Cybersecurity Universitypolitical

The paper will focus on how policy should regulate the future implementation of the internet of things as the fast-developed field is facing many potential problems related to cybersecurity and ethics. It falls in the template of “history of interest in the research questions that this research strives to answer”. 

 online science-related periodical:

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/internet-of-things-what-is-explained-iot

-A simplified introduction of the current IoT situation

special-interest website or blog meant for specialists in the subject of the research:

ttps://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/corporate-information/policy-iot-framework

-Possible solutions for IoT related policy and regulations

A peer reviewed science journal:

Costigan, Sean S., and Gustav Lindstrom. “Policy and the Internet of Things.” Connections, vol. 15, no. 2, 2016, pp. 9–18. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/26326436.

Accessed 19 Feb. 2021.

-The article examines the possible and necessary trend for future IoT related policy.

Girard, Michel. Standards for Cybersecure IoT Devices: A Way Forward. Centre for International Governance Innovation, 2020,

www.jstor.org/stable/resrep25237.

Accessed 19 Feb. 2021.

-The article introduces current problems with IoT and speculates a possible solution in the future. 

WR

IT

340: Natural Sciences Dr. Muniz

WRITING PROJECT TWO:
WRITING THE RESEARCH REVIEW

OVERVIEW:

We will work on a research review of multiple documents on the same issue, phenomenon, or event
from science-related publications. Chapter Seven of Writing Science will be very important to your
understanding of this assignment and carrying it out successfully.

My aim in this assignment is to increase your attentiveness to both the overt and the subtle
differences among documents concerning the “same” event, issue, or phenomenon, as produced in
different writing situations. Whether as a producer or consumer, you need to be aware of these
differences in building your own informed perspectives on the issues, as well as in creating documents
for different types of readers.

With that in mind, we will be developing aspects of a project that will be based on your investigation of
books, articles, and other pertinent resources in an area of scientific inquiry of interest to you. Your
investigation will lead you to an understanding of the current state of knowledge and theory in this
area of scientific inquiry. You will choose the subject of the investigation, with my approval. In class, we
will discuss methods, materials, and presentation of the projects.

Chapter 7 of WS will be important in helping you develop the research review and evaluate the
materials you will be studying. Aspects of the project include the project research proposal, peer
review, and the full report of the research.

PURPOSE:

I intend this project to provide guided practice in designing and revising a review of scientific literature,
one of the most common genres in scientific research. Not original research in itself, the research
review is an integral part of the reports of original research. It is also a recognized genre of the
scientific research enterprise, as it brings scientists up to date on the current state of knowledge in an
area of inquiry.

The project will also give you guided practice in collaborative research and writing through the peer
review process. Learning to collaborate is essential to research.

AUDIENCE:

Although the actual readers in this context will be your beloved professor and the rest of the class, you
should imagine as your principal readers other scientists with a deep interest in the area of inquiry you
choose—in other words, people who would regularly read the “peer-reviewed” journals that you will
be reading for this project. For example, if the journals you are reading for this project expect readers
to know certain acronyms or equations, you may also expect your imagined reader to know them.

WRIT 340: Natural Sciences Dr. Muniz

Note: A number of STEM students from past semesters have used this assignment as their ‘writing
sample’ when applying to graduate programs in their field so you might also include future graduate
school admissions committees as part of your audience, if applicable.

TOPIC:

The review of literature is a key feature in many scholarly essays. It is also a great way of making sense
of a topic you are interested in. The goal of this project is that it will lead you to an argument or
provide new insights into an argument you are developing. By understanding the context of the
arguments already made by other scholars, you are much more likely to develop a nuanced and
interesting take on the topic. It may also inspire you to go in a direction you never thought of or
anticipated!

Developing a topic will be your first task and one that I am giving you free reign to develop. While the
class is a STEM-themed course, I understand that a number of you are not from a traditional science
major and am open to discussing topics that might traditionally fall outside of the range of what might
be considered appropriate for this assignment.

With that said, your research should include documents from the following three categories, no matter
your topic:

One of the three documents you choose must be an article from:

a. a national general interest online/print news source (such as The Washington Post, New
York Times, etc.)
-or-

b. a print or online science-related periodical such as Wired, Scientific American, Popular
Mechanics, Discover, or The Smithsonian.

The audience for such publications is usually not specialized in the subject matter of the article.

The second of your documents must be from a special-interest website or blog meant for specialists in
the subject of the research; for example, a technical report written for scholars or fellow
scientists/specialists in an agency, lab, university, or professional society.

The third document must be an article on the topic from a peer-reviewed science journal.

You are free to choose your sources beyond these initial three. There is no maximum number of
sources you can include but should aim for at least a minimum of six sources in order to have a fully
developed review.

FORMAT:

IT

WRIT 340: Natural Sciences Dr. Muniz

The research review itself will consist of the following components, appropriately headed in the text
and presented in the following order:

(1) an abstract of the review (roughly 200 words) (HINT: the abstract is usually written after the report
is complete); following the abstract, add a few keywords, as if the review were going to be indexed in a
research journal (see Chapter 5 of WS, Section III, on writing abstracts)

(2) an introduction to the subject of the inquiry, including some history of interest in the topic and why
people are so interested in it now (in other words, why should scientists pay attention to this inquiry?)

(3) the major changes in theory related to this inquiry and a summary of the research that have
brought about these changes

(4) a description of the most important research that has led to the present state of theory related to
the inquiry

(5) your conclusion: the current state of theory related to this inquiry and some of the important
questions that remain.

(6) a “Works Cited” page in either APA, CSE, MLA style.

Length: The entire revised, carefully edited version of the Research Review should include roughly
2000-2500 words. Feel free to adjust the length based on the specifications of your field or intended
publication.

PROCESS:

Once you have decided on a topic and gathered the requisite documents, we will turn to developing
questions to ask about your documents by which to do a well-informed comparison. Key areas of
comparison will be addressed in the proposal and peer review process (as outlined below).

If this sounds like a lot, don’t worry, I am here to guide you step-by-step through the process. To help
us develop a compelling framework, here are the three components we will be working on and turning
in along the way:

1. THE PROPOSAL:

Your process for doing this assignment will begin with my approval of your proposal of the topic and a
preliminary selection of at least four pieces you wish to compare. The proposal must include:

(1) A brief description of the topic your documents concern and why you think this topic is suitable
for this project (no more than 150 words)

o_

WRIT 340: Natural Sciences Dr. Muniz

(2) For each of the pieces, the title of the piece, the name of the publication and/or the URL of the
websource; date, author (if given), number of words, and where you located the piece (for
example, in a journal, on a specific website, or in a database).

(3) Why each of these pieces suits this assignment (no more than 50 words per article)

Your proposal will be reviewed by both myself and your peers.

2. THE RESEARCH REVIEW:

Once your topic is approved, you will complete the research review proper. We will look at a variety of
models and structures but should follow the general guidelines as outlined in Chapter 7 of our Writing
Science textbook.

3. THE CHANGE MEMO:

Your revised draft will be followed by a one-page “change” memo that describes and justifies the
changes in the final version you submit.

The change memo you’ll include with your final draft should be no longer than one page and should
account for the changes you’ve made in your draft—and why you’ve made them. For example, if your
peer reviewers have suggested particular changes and you’ve followed their advice, describe what
you’ve done. Conversely, if your peer reviewers have suggested a change and you decided not to
follow their advice, say why. One purpose of the change memo is to increase your awareness of your
process of revision and your process of editing. It should help your decision-making process moving
forward.

DOCUMENTATION STYLE:

I recommend MLA, American Psychological Association (APA) style or any style that you are most
familiar with. Whatever style you choose, please apply that style consistently. This style should be used
both for “in-text” citations and for your list of sources at the end of the analysis.

FINAL DRAFT DUE VIA BLACKBOARD/TURNITIN: MONDAY, MARCH 1

Too