Fill in Order Details

  • Submit paper details for free using our simple order form

Make Payment Securely

  • Add funds to your account. There are no upfront payments. The writer will only be paid once you have approved your paper

Writing Process

  • The best qualified expert writer is assigned to work on your order
  • Your paper is written to standard and delivered as per your instructions

Download your paper

  • Download the completed paper from your online account or your email
  • You can request a plagiarism and quality report along with your paper
Posted on by admin

clarity, organization, mechanics

ORDER A SIMILAR PAPER AND DELEGATE FULFILMENT OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT TO EXPERT ACADEMIC WRITERS. PLAGIARISM-FREE, GUARANTEED A, TIMELY DELIVERY.

strategic planning visioning session

WHAT OUR CURRENT CUSTOMERS SAY

  • Google Rating
  • Sitejabber
  • Trustpilot
Zahraa S
Zahraa S
Absolutely spot on. I have had the best experience with Elite Academic Research and all my work have scored highly. Thank you for your professionalism and using expert writers with vast and outstanding knowledge in their fields. I highly recommend any day and time.
Stuart L
Stuart L
Thanks for keeping me sane for getting everything out of the way, I’ve been stuck working more than full time and balancing the rest but I’m glad you’ve been ensuring my school work is taken care of. I'll recommend Elite Academic Research to anyone who seeks quality academic help, thank you so much!
Mindi D
Mindi D
Brilliant writers and awesome support team. You can tell by the depth of research and the quality of work delivered that the writers care deeply about delivering that perfect grade.
Samuel Y
Samuel Y
I really appreciate the work all your amazing writers do to ensure that my papers are always delivered on time and always of the highest quality. I was at a crossroads last semester and I almost dropped out of school because of the many issues that were bombarding but I am glad a friend referred me to you guys. You came up big for me and continue to do so. I just wish I knew about your services earlier.
Cindy L
Cindy L
You can't fault the paper quality and speed of delivery. I have been using these guys for the past 3 years and I not even once have they ever failed me. They deliver properly researched papers way ahead of time. Each time I think I have had the best their professional writers surprise me with even better quality work. Elite Academic Research is a true Gem among essay writing companies.
Got an A and plagiarism percent was less than 10%! Thanks!
prevnext

ORDER NOW

CategoriesUncategorized

Consider Your Assignments Done

“All my friends and I are getting help from eliteacademicresearch. It’s every college student’s best kept secret!”

Jermaine Byrant
BSN

“I was apprehensive at first. But I must say it was a great experience and well worth the price. I got an A!”

Nicole Johnson
Finance & Economics

ORDER NOW

Our Top Experts

————-

See Why Our Clients Hire Us Again And Again!


OVER
10.3k
Reviews

RATING
4.89/5
Avg Rating

YEARS
12
Experience

Elite Academic Research Promises You:


Always on Time

If we are a minute late, the work is on us – it’s free!

Plagiarism-free

If the work we produce contains plagiarism we’ll pay out a £5,000 guarantee.

Quality

Providing quality work is core to our beliefs, which is why we will strive to give you exactly that, and more!

Written to Standard

All of our assignments go through a stringent quality checking process from start to finish.

ORDER NOW

Success Guarantee

When you order form the best, some of your greatest problems as a student are solved!

Reliable

Professional

Affordable

Quick

See our Results

ORDER YOUR ASSIGNMENT NOW

Using this writing service is legal and is not prohibited by any law, university or college policies. Services of Elite Academic Research are provided for research and study purposes only with the intent to help students improve their writing and academic experience. We do not condone or encourage cheating, academic dishonesty, or any form of plagiarism. Our original, plagiarism-free, zero-AI expert samples should only be used as references. It is your responsibility to cite any outside sources appropriately. This service will be useful for students looking for quick, reliable, and efficient online class-help on a variety of topics.

rticulation of Response (clarity, organization, mechanics) 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides unsatisfactory articulation of response. The candidate provides weak articulation of response. The candidate provides limited articulation of response. The candidate provides adequate articulation of response. The candidate provides substantial articulation of response.
Criterion Score:3.00

A1. Digestive Structures 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate accurately labels 0–3 of the digestive structures in the attached digestive system diagram. The candidate accurately labels 4 of the digestive structures in the attached digestive system diagram. The candidate accurately labels 5 of the digestive structures in the attached digestive system diagram. The candidate accurately labels 6 of the digestive structures in the attached digestive system diagram. The candidate accurately labels more than 6 of the digestive structures in the attached digestive system diagram.
Criterion Score:4.00

Comments on this criterion: The response has provided labels for several digestive system structures on the included diagram.

A2. Function  
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide an accurate description of the function of each labeled organ or accessory organ. The candidate provides an accurate description, with no detail, of the function of each labeled organ or accessory organ. The candidate provides an accurate description, with limited detail, of the function of each labeled organ or accessory organ. The candidate provides an accurate description, with adequate detail, of the function of each labeled organ or accessory organ. The candidate provides an accurate description, with substantial detail, of the function of each labeled organ or accessory organ.
Criterion Score:3.00

A3. Digestion 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical summary of mechanical and chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of mechanical and chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of mechanical and chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of mechanical and chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of mechanical and chemical digestion.
Criterion Score:3.00

A4. Enzymes 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate provides 0–3 appropriate examples of enzymes that digest carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides 4 appropriate examples of enzymes that digest carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides 5 appropriate examples of enzymes that digest carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides 6 appropriate examples of enzymes that digest carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides more than 6 appropriate examples of enzymes that digest carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids.
Criterion Score:4.00

Comments on this criterion: Several enzymes are identified for the response including protease, lipase, and nuclease.

A5. Experiments 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical summary of 2 experiments that have been personally researched and that involve enzyme activity in food sources. The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of 2 experiments that have been personally researched and that involve enzyme activity in food sources. The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of 2 experiments that have been personally researched and that involve enzyme activity in food sources. The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of 2 experiments that have been personally researched and that involve enzyme activity in food sources. The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of 2 experiments that have been personally researched and that involve enzyme activity in food sources.
Criterion Score:3.00

B1a. Independent and Dependent Variables 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical discussion of the independent and dependent variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with no detail, of the independent and dependent variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with limited detail, of the independent and dependent variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with adequate detail, of the independent and dependent variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical discussion, with substantial detail, of the independent and dependent variables for the experiment.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the ileum in the digestive process. Not evident are the identification of the independent and dependent variables for the lab.

B1b. Controlled Variables 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of the controlled variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of the controlled variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of the controlled variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of the controlled variables for the experiment. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of the controlled variables for the experiment.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the jejunum in the digestive process. Not evident are the identification of the controlled variables for the lab.

B2a. Relationship Between Independent and Dependent Variables – Hypothesis 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical prediction of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical prediction, with no support, of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical prediction, with limited support, of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical prediction, with adequate support, of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical prediction, with substantial support, of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables.
Criterion Score:1.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the liver in the digestive process. Not evident are the identification of the relationship that exists between the independent and dependent variables.

B2b. Explanation of Hypothesis 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the hypothesis was reached. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of how the hypothesis was reached. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of how the hypothesis was reached The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of how the hypothesis was reached The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of how the hypothesis was reached.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the pancreas in the digestive process. Not evident are the identification of the explanation of the hypothesis for the lab.

B3a. Steps of Experiment 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide an appropriate description of the steps of the experiment. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with no detail, of the steps of the experiment. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with limited detail, of the steps of the experiment. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with adequate detail, of the steps of the experiment. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with substantial detail, of the steps of the experiment.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the rectum in the digestive process. Not evident are the steps of the experiment.

B3b. Measurement 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how to measure the results. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of how to measure the results. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of how to measure the results. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of how to measure the results. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of how to measure the results.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the salivary organs in the digestive process. Not evident is an explanation how the results were measured for the experiment.

B3c. Data Table Template 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not create an appropriate data table template to record the results. The candidate creates an appropriate data table template, with no detail, to record the results. The candidate creates an appropriate data table template, with limited detail, to record the results. The candidate creates an appropriate data table template, with adequate detail, to record the results. The candidate creates an appropriate data table template, with substantial detail, to record the results.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the sigmoid colon in the digestive process. Not evident is a data table template.

B3d. Explanation of Controlled Variables 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how to ensure that the controlled variables are held constant. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of how to ensure that the controlled variables are held constant. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of how to ensure that the controlled variables are held constant. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of how to ensure that the controlled variables are held constant. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of how to ensure that the controlled variables are held constant.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the stomach in the digestive process. Not evident is an explanation of the controlled variables.

C1a. Record of Data 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not accurately record the data for the experiment using the blank template created in part B3c. The candidate accurately records, with no detail, the data for the experiment using the blank template created in part B3c. The candidate accurately records, with limited detail, the data for the experiment using the blank template created in part B3c. The candidate accurately records, with adequate detail, the data for the experiment using the blank template created in part B3c. The candidate accurately records, with substantial detail, the data for the experiment using the blank template created in part B3c.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the transverse colon in the digestive process. Not evident is a record of the data in the data template.

C1b. Visual Representation 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not create an accurate visual representation of the results. The candidate creates an accurate visual representation, with no detail, of the results. The candidate creates an accurate visual representation, with limited detail, of the results. The candidate creates an accurate visual representation, with adequate detail, of the results. The candidate creates an accurate visual representation, with substantial detail, of the results.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the cecum in the digestive process. Not evident is a visual representation of the experiment results.

C1c. Explanation of Results 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of the results of the experiment with reference to the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of the results of the experiment with reference to the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of the results of the experiment with reference to the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of the results of the experiment with reference to the independent and dependent variables. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of the results of the experiment with reference to the independent and dependent variables.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the bile in the digestive process. Not evident is an explanation of the experiment results.

C2a. Summary of Results 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical summary of the results of the experiment. The candidate provides a logical summary, with no detail, of the results of the experiment. The candidate provides a logical summary, with limited detail, of the results of the experiment. The candidate provides a logical summary, with adequate detail, of the results of the experiment. The candidate provides a logical summary, with substantial detail, of the results of the experiment.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the rising colon in the digestive process. Not evident is a summary of the experiment results.

C2b. Comparison with Hypothesis 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the results compare with the hypothesis. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no support, of how the results compare with the hypothesis. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited support, of how the results compare with the hypothesis. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate support, of how the results compare with the hypothesis. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial support, of how the results compare with the hypothesis.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the throat in the digestive process. Not evident is a comparison of the experiment results with the hypothesis.

C2c. Findings 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide a logical explanation of how the findings relate to chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with no detail, of how the findings relate to chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with limited detail, of how the findings relate to chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with adequate detail, of how the findings relate to chemical digestion. The candidate provides a logical explanation, with substantial detail, of how the findings relate to chemical digestion.
Criterion Score:0.00

Comments on this criterion: 09/29/2014 The response explains the function of the nerve bladder in the digestive process. Not evident is a discussion of the experiment findings.

D1. Flow Chart 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not create an accurate flow chart that shows the step-by-step absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate creates an accurate flow chart, with no detail, that shows the step-by-step absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate creates an accurate flow chart, with limited detail, that shows the step-by-step absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate creates an accurate flow chart, with adequate detail, that shows the step-by-step absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate creates an accurate flow chart, with substantial detail, that shows the step-by-step absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids.
Criterion Score:2.00

Comments on this criterion: The response includes a flow chart that shows the absorption process for fats, carbohydrates, and proteins.

D2. Steps 
(0) Unsatisfactory (1) Does Not Meet Standard (2) Minimally Competent (3) Competent (4) Highly Competent
The candidate does not provide an appropriate description of each of the steps involved in the absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with no detail, of each of the steps involved in the absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with limited detail, of each of the steps involved in the absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with adequate detail, of each of the steps involved in the absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids. The candidate provides an appropriate description, with substantial detail, of each of the steps involved in the absorption of carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids.