The Internet has many sites with ethnobotanical information and products. Some of this information is accurate and correct. Some of this information is wrong and possibly dangerous. Sorting out the facts from the fictions is difficult even for experts.
One way to begin to assess fact from fiction is to look at the Universal Resource Locator (URL). The URL is simply the web address. The web address usually begins with www for World Wide Web. After a period is the domain name: the name of the web site. Following the domain name is a two or three letter domain category. The category might be com for COMmercial, edu for EDUcation, gov for GOVernment, net for NETwork, or a two-letter country code for sites located outside the United States such as FM for the Federated States of Micronesia.
Commercial sites are out to make money, and unfortunately in the world of ethnobotany there are sites that are selling "fiction" in order to make money. Commercial sites are rarely, if ever, going to inform you when a product does not work as advertised, nor are they likely to warn you of possible side-effects of a treatment. Information on commercial sites should be treated as "buyer beware."
Education sites may be more likely to contain accurate information, but one should attempt to verify the qualifications of the individuals posting the information to the web site.
Governmental sites, both United States and elsewhere, are likely to contain useful information including warnings on ethnobotanical products. There is a good likelihood of the information being accurate, although it might not be the most up-to-date information. Thus government information from 2002 on hepatic toxicity and kava at http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/addskava.html is accurate but may be linked to the inclusion of aerial components of kava http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/ctahr2001/CTAHRInAction/May_03/kava.asp according to a 2003 study. Even more recent information is available at http://www.ikec.org/
Files that end in .html and .asp are web pages. Files that end in .pdf are in a format called "portable document format." Viewing PDF files requires special software from Adobe® called Adobe® Reader. The software is free, but on college computers you probably do not have the necessary administrative privileges to successfully install the software.
Each person will pick a single plant listed below to research. Produce an essay of on the order of 250 to 300 words on the chosen plant. Submit a typed essay either as an email message, a Word document attached to an email message, or a printed hard copy of your essay. The essay is due next week.
The essay will be worth up to 25 points. The essay score will be divided by 2.0 for entry into the grade book.
| Syntax | |
|---|---|
| 5 | No errors of grammar or word order. |
| 4 | Some errors of grammar or word order but communication not impaired. |
| 3 | Errors of grammar or word order fairly frequent; occasional re-reading necessary for full comprehension. |
| 2 | Errors of grammar or word order frequent; efforts of interpretation sometimes required on reader's part. |
| 1 | Errors of grammar or word order very frequent; reader often has to rely on own interpretation. |
| 0 | Errors of grammar or word order so severe as to make comprehension virtually impossible. |
| Vocabulary | |
| 5 | Appropriate terms used consistently, clear command of vocabulary, no misspelled words. |
| 4 | Occasionally uses inappropriate terms or relies on circumlocution; expression of ideas not impaired; or a few misspelled words. |
| 3 | Uses wrong or inappropriate words fairly frequently; expression of ideas may be limited because of inadequate vocabulary. |
| 2 | Limited vocabulary and frequent errors clearly hinder expression of ideas. |
| 1 | Vocabulary so limited and so frequently misused that reader must often rely on own interpretation. |
| 0 | Vocabulary limitations so extreme as to make comprehension virtually impossible. |
| Organization | |
| 5 | Material exceptionally well organized and connected. |
| 4 | Material well organized; links could occasionally be clearer but communication not impaired. |
| 3 | Some lack of organization; re-reading required for clarification of ideas. |
| 2 | Little or no attempt at connectivity, though reader can deduce some organization. |
| 1 | Individual ideas may be clear, but very difficult to deduce connection between them. |
| 0 | Lack of organization so severe that communication is seriously impaired. |
| Cohesion | |
| 5 | Consistent choices in cohesive structures. |
| 4 | Occasional lack of consistency in choice of cohesive structures and vocabulary but overall ease of communication not impaired. |
| 3 | 'Patchy', with some cohesive structures or vocabulary items noticeably inappropriate to general style. |
| 2 | Cohesive structures or vocabulary items sometimes not only inappropriate but also misused; little sense of ease of communication. |
| 1 | Communication often impaired by completely inappropriate or misused cohesive structures or vocabulary items. |
| 0 | A 'hotchpotch' of half-learned misused cohesive structures and vocabulary items rendering communication almost impossible. |
| Content | |
| 5 | Fully complete and thorough answer to the task set. |
| 4 | Relevant and adequate answer to the task set. Answers of less than 200 words will be penalized by dropping the score by one point from what would be appropriate for a full-length script. |
| 3 | For the most part answers the tasks set, though there may be some gaps or redundant information. |
| 2 | Answer of limited relevance to the task set. Possibly major gaps in treatment of topic and/or pointless repetition. |
| 1 | The answer bears almost no relation to the task set. Inadequate answer. |
| 0 | No evidence of assigned task. |
You must cite any online source used. The citation system for this essay is simple: just cite the URL from which the information came. Failure to cite sources, or copying and pasting information and not putting it in quotes with a citation will cause one to receive zero points for this assignment.