Dear Class, I want to give you some instruction on the 1000-word essay that you must write based on any one of the three optional papers that are posted under the, "Content Link" on the left margin of the MC Blackboard course site. The objective is for you to read, understand, and discuss a technical science paper; one that has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in a credible journal. Each of these three papers qualify, and I thought they would help you understand how scientists think. Clearly the studies the papers are structured using accepted scientific methods, and each has come to various conclusions based on the research conducted. Your job is to choose a paper and describe the "angle" that the authors took to study their topic. What is YOUR *opinion* of the results the authors got? Is it reasonable? Would you have taken any other approach if you were the Principal Investigator? What was the most interesting part of the paper to you? How can this information/ support global environmental/marine sustainability? What are the problems as you see it with the approach or with the conclusions? Can you "transfer" what you learned from the paper to other courses and/or career pathway or your own long-range future? How might the conclusions inform policy in today's political environment, or possibly even your vote in the elections? Finally, would you recommend any of these papers to your colleagues, friends, or family. Explain (why). LINK TO THE ARTICLE: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2016.00174/full

Dear Class, I want to give you some instruction on the 1000-word essay that you must write based on any one of the three optional papers that are posted under the, "Content Link" on the left margin of the MC Blackboard course site. The objective is for you to read, understand, and discuss a technical science paper; one that has been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in a credible journal. Each of these three papers qualify, and I thought they would help you understand how scientists think. Clearly the studies the papers are structured using accepted scientific methods, and each has come to various conclusions based on the research conducted. Your job is to choose a paper and describe the "angle" that the authors took to study their topic. What is YOUR *opinion* of the results the authors got? Is it reasonable? Would you have taken any other approach if you were the Principal Investigator? What was the most interesting part of the paper to you? How can this information/ support global environmental/marine sustainability? What are the problems as you see it with the approach or with the conclusions? Can you "transfer" what you learned from the paper to other courses and/or career pathway or your own long-range future? How might the conclusions inform policy in today's political environment, or possibly even your vote in the elections? Finally, would you recommend any of these papers to your colleagues, friends, or family. Explain (why). LINK TO THE ARTICLE: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2016.00174/full