|
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
| Explanation of Claims |
Our explanation of claims specifically provides accurate, detailed information on what is responsible or not responsible for the illness.
We provide a detailed explanation of how gas laws were applied to help solve the problem. |
Our explanation of claims provides a brief amount of information on what is responsible or not responsible for the illness.
We provide some explanation of how gas laws were applied to help solve the problem. |
Our explanation of claims provides vague information on what is responsible or not responsible for the illness.
We provide minimal explanation of how gas laws were applied. |
Our explanation of claims provides no information on what is responsible or not responsible for the illness.
We do not provide an explanation of gas laws. |
| Analysis of Evidence |
Our analysis shows a thorough understanding of the complex ways in which evidence relates to and supports or opposes the claims.
Our rationale of support and nonsupport reflects an understanding of the complex interaction of factors causing the illness. |
Our analysis shows a basic understanding of how evidence supports or opposes the claims.
Our rationale of support and nonsupport reflects some understanding of the complexity of the various factors causing the illness. |
Our analysis shows a vague understanding of how evidence relates to the claims.
Our rationale of support and nonsupport reflects a superficial understanding of the various factors causing the illness. |
Our analysis shows a general lack of understanding regarding how evidence and claims relate to each other.
Our rationale does not support our rating. |
| Conclusion |
Our conclusion reflects a well-developed understanding of the factors that are most to blame for the illness based on evidence gathered.
Our final focus on what is ultimately to blame is convincing. |
Our conclusion reflects an adequate understanding of the factors that are most to blame for the illness based on evidence gathered.
Our final focus on what is ultimately to blame is somewhat convincing. |
Our conclusion reflects a basic understanding of the factors that are most to blame for the illness based on evidence gathered.
Our final focus on what is to blame is not clearly related to the claim. |
Our conclusion is not related to our claim and does not show a relationship between claim and evidence.
Our final focus shows no understanding of what is to blame. |
| Organization |
Our presentation is clear and logical, supports the message, uses a detailed diagram to explain the message, and cites sources appropriately. |
Our presentation is somewhat clear and logical, adequately supports the message, uses a diagram, and cites most sources appropriately. |
Our presentation is not sequential, minimally supports the message, does not include a diagram or uses a diagram that does not enhance the message, or does not cite most sources appropriately. |
Our presentation is unclear, does not use a diagram, and does not cite sources. |
| Time |
Our presentation thoroughly covers all of the required topics within the 5 to 8 minute time limit. |
Our presentation covers the required topics within the 5 to 8 minute time limit. |
Our presentation covers most of the required topics within the 5 to 8 minute time limit, but one or two topics are skipped or not adequately addressed. |
Our presentation address very few required topics within the 5 to 8 minute time limit. |
| Writing: Style |
We use an appropriate technical writing style in our presentation, organizing the information by headings, subheadings, and bullets with parallel construction so adequate information is conveyed in as few words as possible. |
We use an appropriate technical writing style in our presentation, using headings, subheadings, and bullets to convey information efficiently. |
We attempt to use an appropriate technical style of writing in our presentation, but our information is sometimes confusing, wordy, or difficult to find. |
We do not use technical writing in our presentation, and the audience has difficulty understanding our presentation. |
| Writing: Conventions |
The writing in our presentation has no errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, or usage, unless they are deliberately used to enhance the meaning. |
The writing in our presentation has no errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, or usage that detract from meaning. |
The writing in our presentation has some errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, or usage that detract from meaning. |
The writing in our presentation has many errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and usage that detract from meaning. |