Academic Unit A

Academic Unit A

CAEL Academic Unit A Part 4 Long Writing Sample Answer

Your professor asks you a question. You will write an answer on the next page. Use the information from the reading and lecture. 

Answer the question in your own words. Write at least 250 words. You have 35 minutes to complete this task.

Answer the following question by typing your response on the right.

Using the tabs above, you may refer to the reading passage and lecture notes.

Support your answer with details and examples from the source materials.

Use the source information but do not copy directly.

Your response should be at least 250 words.

You will be evaluated on: 
    the content and structure of your response

the accuracy of your language

your use of the source material


Should scientists go back and reanalyze established conclusions and facts? Should we spend time on new questions and new research instead? Explain your position, build an argument, and provide support.


A common phrase that almost everyone has heard at some point is, "It is a scientific fact that..." What many people (including too many high school teachers!) fail to recognize, however, is that science is not a dead collection of facts; rather, it is a living process: scientists continually reanalyze established conclusions and inch closer and closer towards a clearer understanding of our world. I will explain my position, build an argument, and provide support.

To begin. The lecture on the history of animal domestication cites the Oasis Theory which claimed that animal domestication resulted from the concentration of animals and humans around scarce sources of water-oases However, scientific findings discredited the Oasis Theory; the earliest animal domestication, it turns out, occurred elsewhere. Additional theories exist, incorporating evidence from many scientific fields, but, in all likelihood, these theories will continue to be refined.

The idea of returning to reanalyze long-held beliefs is even more forcefully supported by the reading passage. The historical account of the Achaemenid Empire concludes that critical to the process of moving history studies forward is revisiting existing views." Without such a reanalysis, the passage argues, much of the Western world would continue to view Persia (modern-day Iran) unfavourably, now, however, we can better understand and appreciate Persia's cultural, scientific, and philosophical legacy (thanks to it's library collections of the Middle Ages).

We live in a changing world, so, yes, we should spend time on new questions and research. As a result, given the definition of "science," reanalyzing established conclusions and facts is not something scientists should do-it is something scientists must do. The lecture and reading passage both give clear evidence of this. If scientists fails to do this, then science no longer truly exists, and we all the poorer for it.