As you have been witnessing, historically science has been an elite road traveled by the rich, religious leaders, and the privately educated. Today, we are seeing a movement in STEM and STEAM to promote scientific endeavors in the public school system and in the community. In fact, you have just finished a community based science project. Your job is to compare and contrast the ways in which science was disseminated throughout the culture in the renaissance to today. Your ultimate question to answer is Is our education system serving scientific thought and the creation of new scientists and scientific discovery?
Hint: You may wish to look at what STEM and STEAM programs are and what the NGSS standards are for public education.
Requirements:
Four different sources using APA citation
A minimum of 500 words
A complete thesis statement
Evidence and Analysis that prove your point of view
Accurate quotations from your sources / I will be checking for plagerism
Please edit your work for grammar and spelling
Rubric
ClEAR Writing Style Rubric
ClEAR Writing Style Rubric
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeClaimThe text introduces a clear, arguable claim that can be supported by reasons and evidence.
5.0 pts
Skilled
Text contains a compelling claim that is clearly arguable and takes a purposeful position and relates directly to the experimental design.
4.0 pts
Proficient
Claim is easily identified OR clearly stated but continues to relate directly to the experimental design.
3.0 pts
Developing
Claim is vague but does attempt a structure to support the position.
2.0 pts
Revise
Claim is not related to the experimental design but still attempts some organization to support a position.
1.0 pts
Inadequate
Arguable claim is missing.
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvidenceThe text provides sufficient data and evidence to back up the claim as well as a conclusion that supports the argument.
10.0 pts
Skilled
Excellent supporting evidence AND concrete details directly related to claim.
8.0 pts
Proficient
Sufficient supporting evidence OR concrete details to support claim.
7.0 pts
Developing
Vague supporting evidence OR concrete details, may wander from claim.
6.0 pts
Revise
Claim is not supported accurately, some support does not favor the claim, lack of concrete details.
5.0 pts
Inadequate
Missing concrete evidence to support claim.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysisThe text uses words, phrases and clauses to link the major sections of the text, creates cohesion, and clarifies the relationships between the claim and evidence.
10.0 pts
Skilled
Clear focus and unity of analysis. Direct comparison of outcomes and explains relationships between the claim and evidence.
8.0 pts
Proficient
Clear focus of analysis with some attempt at comparing the evidence.
7.0 pts
Developing
Lacks focus or unity. No real comparison of evidence, more of a summary of evidence.
6.0 pts
Revise
No clear focus or unity, merely restates the evidence.
5.0 pts
Inadequate
Text does not connect the claims and evidence.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReasoningGives scientific and supportable reasons to claim.
10.0 pts
Skilled
Use of correct science principles WITH extra relevant information.
8.0 pts
Proficient
Correct science principles WITHOUT extra relevant information.
7.0 pts
Developing
Vague use of scientific principles.
6.0 pts
Revise
No supporting scientific principles, but some indirect attempts at explanations.
5.0 pts
Inadequate
No scientific reasons provided, purely speculative.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStyleThe text presents a formal objective tone that demonstrates proper grammar, spelling, usage, and mechanics appropriate to science.
5.0 pts
Skilled
Engaging and formal tone. Use of scientific vocabulary, no repetition of ideas, proper grammar and spelling.
4.0 pts
Proficient
Good tone. Sentence structure is grade level appropriate. Some repetition of ideas. Limited errors in mechanics.
3.0 pts
Developing
Proper tone, but limited use of science vocabulary, repetitive ideas and frequent spelling and grammar errors.
2.0 pts
Revise
Limited awareness of tone. Frequent spelling and grammar errors. Lack of usage of science vocabulary.
1.0 pts
Inadequate
Frequent and inaccurate use of English conventions in mechanics and tone, no use of science vocabulary.
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAudienceThe text anticipates the audiences knowledge level and concerns about the claim. The text addresses the specific audiences needs and presents an appropriate register.
5.0 pts
Skilled
All requirements met and consistently refers to the claim while addressing concerns of audience.
4.0 pts
Proficient
All requirements met and text does address needs but does not always refer specifically to the claim.
3.0 pts
Developing
Most of the requirements met. Text occasionally addresses the needs of the audience but often wanders from the claim.
2.0 pts
Revise
Text inconsistently addresses requirements and needs of audience.
1.0 pts
Inadequate
Text lacks an awareness of the audiences knowledge and needs.
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCitationsEvidence is correctly cited and the Works Cited is correctly formatted in APA.
5.0 pts
Skilled
Number of citations met and formatted properly
4.0 pts
Proficient
Missing one citation but all formatted properly
3.0 pts
Developing
Missing two citations or use of one repeated often, some formatting problems.
2.0 pts
Revise
Repetitive use of same citation, missing more than two.
1.0 pts
Inadequate
APA format not applied
5.0 pts
Total Points: 50.0
