Please use the grading chart attachment for checking work.
The other two attachment were for the collection of work to start the paper.
1. Document Format.
a. MS Word document
b. One-inch (1) margins
c. Times New Roman Font
d. Twelve (12) pitch
2. Citation Format: The Chicago Manual of Style. As stated in the Academic Integrity Briefings, information taken directly from another source must be placed in quotations and cited following the CMS format contained in the week one lessons folder.
3. Graphics are not allowed.
4. As stated in the grading rubric, students must (1) employ imaginative approaches to answer the question being asked; (2) display an impressive command of the subject matter beyond the immediately obvious; (3) demonstrate a high level of critical thinking y reflection current and world views, and genuine intellectual development; and (4) excel in explaining all major points using multiple examples from the course readings or individual research.
Title Page.
(a) Title of the paper: The PRC-Taiwan Crisis; Assessing Alternative Outcomes
(b) Student Name.
(c) Course Number.
(d) Instructor Name.
(e) Date the paper was completed.
Length: Minimum of six pages, no more than seven pages (double spaced, not including the title page and Selected Bibliography).
Section I: Introduction.
(a) This section briefly summarizes the scenario and the three potential outcomes (Diplomatic Solution or Limited Intervention or Direct Attack).
Section IIOutcome Assessed to be most likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the linchpin evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Section III Second Most Likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the linchpin evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Section IV- Least Likely to Occur: [enter outcome here]
(a) Provide insight as to how you arrived at your conclusion.
(b) Provide examples from the ACH Matrix supporting and refuting each hypothesis (Step #3).
(c) Identify the linchpin evidence and discuss how it ultimately drove your analysis (Step #4).
(d) State the underlying assumptions associated with your linchpin evidence (Step #6)
Section V: Conclusion
Citations – The Chicago Manual of Style Format
(a) If a citation comes directly from the PRC-Taiwan scenario, no citation is required.
(b) If a citation comes from a source other than the PRC-Taiwan scenario, then it must be cited using the CMS format.
(c) A Selected Bibliography is required only if information contained in a report comes from a source other than the PRC-Taiwan scenario. The Selected Bibliography contains all sources consulted and cited in preparing your paper.
Analytical Terms of Reference
Papers must incorporate the following analytical standards which are common
throughout the Intelligence Community. These standards equate to the content/subject knowledge, critical thinking, and writing conventions section of the grading rubric.
Terms of Estimative Probability. The narrative essay should be limited to the terms of estimative probability listed below. Please note, the terms and percentages are designed to provide students with a numerical range of probability and standardize submissions to allow for class comparisons.
(a) Highly Likely + 85% chance
(b) Probable 60-84% chance
(c) About Even 45-55% chance
(d) Possible 35-44% chance
(e) Unlikely 16-34% chance
(f) Highly Unlikely 0-15%
Objectivity: Analysis should be free of emotional content, give due regard to alternative perspectives and contrary reporting, and acknowledge developments that necessitate adjustments to analytic judgments.
Independent of Political Considerations: Assessments should not distort or alter with the intent of supporting or advocating a particular policy, political viewpoint, or audience.
Based on All Available Sources of Intelligence: Analysis should be informed by all relevant information that is available to the analytic element. Knowledge gaps must be identified.
Properly describes quality and reliability of underlying sources: Accurately characterize the information in the underlying sources and explain which information proved key to analytic judgments and why. Factors affecting the weighting that the analysts gives to available, relevant information, such as denial and deception, source access, source motivations and bias, or age an
