critique the essay
critique the essay
Instructions:
There is no need to re-state the paper’s argument as you have done in writing an annotated bibliographic reference or an abstract, but rather, your evaluation is to be primarily about describing the worth and/or problems you see in the paper as it treats its topic. You are to evaluate the argument, how the paper’s thesis is developed, and the way the paper is put together.
Keep in mind that it is the paper that you are to objectively evaluate, and not the author, whose name will be removed before you get the paper in any case. All of the insights and opinions that you offer in your Peer’s Paper Evaluation are to exhibit the same high standards for objectivity as was required for essays. The text of your Peer’s Paper Evaluation is to be 500 words, +/- 20 words. Do not count any reference citations you may use in your word count.
Finally, when scholars use the term ‘critique’ or “critical evaluation” – what your Peer’s Paper Evaluation is to be – this does not mean that your evaluation is meant to be ‘critical’ in the common pejorative sense of the word. What it means is that you need to use what you write to explore the findings and arguments of your fellow-student’s paper. You are to create an intellectual dialogue between the essay and your Peer Student Evaluation. As in the writing of your own essay, you will be asking the question, “is this true”, “is this proven”, and “what other things should be considered?”
Evaluation
The following rubric indicates those areas you should be focusing on in preparing your assignment, and how the instructor will weigh these components relative to one another.
Critical Analysis (55%)
a. Insights into strengths and weaknesses of the essay
/20
b. Appropriateness of comments (academic)
/20
c. Completeness of aspects assessed
/15
2.
Communication (25%)
a. Uses language clearly and effectively
/10
b. Essay assessment organized intelligently and systematically
/10
c. Proper introduction and conclusion to review
/5
3.
Attention to Detail (20%)
a. APA Referencing and formatting (title, headings & references)
/10
b. Spelling and grammar
/10
Total
100
Assignment Value (10%)
/10
critique the essay
Instructions:
There is no need to re-state the paper’s argument as you have done in writing an annotated bibliographic reference or an abstract, but rather, your evaluation is to be primarily about describing the worth and/or problems you see in the paper as it treats its topic. You are to evaluate the argument, how the paper’s thesis is developed, and the way the paper is put together.
Keep in mind that it is the paper that you are to objectively evaluate, and not the author, whose name will be removed before you get the paper in any case. All of the insights and opinions that you offer in your Peer’s Paper Evaluation are to exhibit the same high standards for objectivity as was required for essays. The text of your Peer’s Paper Evaluation is to be 500 words, +/- 20 words. Do not count any reference citations you may use in your word count.
Finally, when scholars use the term ‘critique’ or “critical evaluation” – what your Peer’s Paper Evaluation is to be – this does not mean that your evaluation is meant to be ‘critical’ in the common pejorative sense of the word. What it means is that you need to use what you write to explore the findings and arguments of your fellow-student’s paper. You are to create an intellectual dialogue between the essay and your Peer Student Evaluation. As in the writing of your own essay, you will be asking the question, “is this true”, “is this proven”, and “what other things should be considered?”
Evaluation
The following rubric indicates those areas you should be focusing on in preparing your assignment, and how the instructor will weigh these components relative to one another.
Critical Analysis (55%)
a. Insights into strengths and weaknesses of the essay
/20
b. Appropriateness of comments (academic)
/20
c. Completeness of aspects assessed
/15
2.
Communication (25%)
a. Uses language clearly and effectively
/10
b. Essay assessment organized intelligently and systematically
/10
c. Proper introduction and conclusion to review
/5
3.
Attention to Detail (20%)
a. APA Referencing and formatting (title, headings & references)
/10
b. Spelling and grammar
/10
Total
100
Assignment Value (10%)
/10
Abstract
This paper investigates the social and psychological impact consequences of self-driving cars. A variety of vehicles today have some aspect of autonomy in them whether its in lane driving or self-parking. But what implications can be gleaned from current technology as it continues to advance? There is still a general lack of knowledge of what makes an autonomous car truly autonomous? Research has demonstrated that society and the general population at large can become too comfortable and too trusting with technology. The legal considerations are still in their infancy. What this paper ultimately deduces is some version of a future in which collisions have been virtually eliminated but social expectations as a result of having commuting attention back, changes society’s expectations.
Introduction
What does a world of self-driving cars look like? Is it akin to something like an automobile version of the Jetsons? Is it the accident free utopia we would all expect it to be? Is it the start of the lazy, self-destroying lifestyles that led to population in Wall-E? Could it be none of those things? While self-driving cars are still in their infancy, the assists built into cars today and the expectations drivers have of them can provide the first glimpses of the future. This modern age of driving sees the advent of self-driving cars and features like auto-pilot which can keep a car moving without driver intervention for miles.
But what are the legal implications of the future state? What are the expectations of drivers and passengers? While insurance companies and law makers wrestle with the transition, their expectations are that drivers would essentially be liability free. But what implications are there for the public at large? Would people feel safer getting into a vehicle if all vehicles operated by the exact same set of rules? Are people more likely to indulge in vices like drinking knowing that they can enter a vehicle intoxicated and arrive home without risk of crashing? Has automation in other areas provided a glimpse into the potential complacency a general public may enter?
The following paper asks these questions and attempts to postulate the answers. It attempts to understand the direction this technology is moving and understand the implications to the public and industries at large. There are multiple companies working on varying levels of automation and the transition from vehicles that need full driver attention to those that require no input besides a destination is fraught with uncertainty.
What Are Self-Driving Cars?
There is no specific definition of a self-driving or autonomous car. Instead, there are degrees of automation. There are five distinct levels that begin at 0 (traditional vehicles with completely driver dependent intervention systems) to level 4 (where a destination is entered and no further driver interaction is required) to everywhere in between (Browne, 2017). Most vehicles with some kind of significant driver assisted mechanisms will fall into Level 1 or Level 2 (Hendrickson, 2019). Adaptive cruise control is an example of Level 1 while Tesla’s autopilot mode would be considered a Level 2. The degree that the driver’s input or attention is required determines the Level the vehicle is rated at.
Difficulty of Design
There are significant challenges in designing autonomous vehicles that are practical. Ford in particular has been vocal when describing the difficulty of designing a vehicle that can follow the many and varied (from country to country) rules of the road (Boudette, 2019). This is compounded by unpredictable factors such as pedestrians, cyclists, poor road or weather conditions. The early results of algorithmic tweaking to derive a 100% collision free car have yielded vehicles that and constantly slamming brakes and a general nuisance to other drivers (Boudette, 2019).
Real world testing and results have provided significant data in terms of why current autonomous systems result in collisions. This article outlines the various reasons that self-driving cars have been involved in collisions. This can include: braking false positives (where another driver may slam on their brakes in situations that would otherwise make no sense), drivers not understanding the assist systems of their vehicles and what autopilot systems actually do (Cardinal, 2018). Some common challenges that haven’t resulted in collisions but are difficult to solve with software or hardware includes: emergency vehicles, pedestrians and weather/night conditions.
Progress to Full Automation
While the public’s expectations are that fully autonomous vehicles are around the corner (Boudette, 2019), the reality is much further down the road. Regardless of the research and development in progress at most automakers, market forces and competition require car companies to release incremental updates (Cardinal, 2018). These updates are a competitive advantage and differentiator. Ford cannot remain competitive hoping to achieve the holy grail of autonomous driving if Volkswagen has attractive stay in lane autopiloting features or the ability to handle turns in city. The result is an arms race to include new or improved features and technologies to attract buyer’s attention now, while using that data to improve and continue development of future automation algorithms.
Regardless of where most car companies are in development, there are a few organizations that are completely focused and committed to fully autonomous vehicle development. In this regard, Waymo is…
