Overview
| Insect Identification | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Originality | 4 points Original student drawings are included and detailed enough to ID insect. | 2 points Original drawings are not detailed enough to ID insect. | 0 points No original student drawings are present. | Score of Originality, / 4 |
Clarity | 2 points Original student drawings are presented clearly. | 1 point Original student drawings are present but are not presented clearly. | 0 points No original student drawings are present. | Score of Clarity, / 2 |
Drawing Size | 2 points Original student drawings are large. | 1 point Original student drawings are present but are too small. | 0 points No original student drawings are present. | Score of Drawing Size, / 2 |
Labeling | 2 points Labels indicating appropriate features present. | 1 point Labels are present but do not indicate the appropriate features of the insect for identification. | 0 points No labels and/or original student drawings are present. | Score of Labeling, / 2 |
Clarity of Labeling | 2 points Labels are easy-to-read. | 1 point Labels are unclear and/or are too small. | 0 points No labels and/or original student drawings are present. | Score of Clarity of Labeling, / 2 |
Identification to Order | 4 points Appropriate insect Order is identified. | 2 points Student identified incorrect insect Order. | 0 points No insect Order is identified. | Score of Identification to Order, / 4 |
| Background Information on Insect Order | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Habitat | 1 point Habitat of members of insect Order is correctly described. | 0 points An attempt to present the habit of members of insect Order is made but problems exist. | 0 points No correct information about the habitat of members of the insect Order is included. | Score of Habitat, / 1 |
Diet | 1 point Diet of members of insect Order is correctly described | 0 points An attempt to present the diet is made but problems exist. | 0 points No correct information about the diet of members of the insect Order is included. | Score of Diet, / 1 |
Life Cycle | 1 point Life cycle of members of insect Order is correctly described. | 0 points An attempt to present the life cycle of members of the insect Order is made, but problems exist. | 0 points No correct information about the life cycle of members of the insect Order is included. | Score of Life Cycle, / 1 |
Unique Trait | 1 point A unique trait (which is NOT an identifying morphological trait) of the insect Order is described. | 0 points An attempt to present a unique trait is made, but problems exist. | 0 points No correct unique trait of the insect Order is included. | Score of Unique Trait, / 1 |
References | 2 points Appropriate references exist for background information. | 1 point References exist but are not appropriate. | 0 points References do not exist for background information. | Score of References, / 2 |
| Peer-Reviewed Journal Article #1 | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Appropriate Source | 4 points This source is a peer-reviewed scientific article and citation information was correctly identified by student in dropbox submission of source article. | 2 points This source is not a peer-reviewed scientific article or source is absent. | 0 points Source article was not provided in dropbox. | Score of Appropriate Source, / 4 |
Evidence of Source Information | 4 points Evidence of source information is correctly provided. | 2 points An attempt to provide evidence of source information is made, but problems exist. | 0 points No attempt to provide source information exists. | Score of Evidence of Source Information, / 4 |
Prevalence | 4 points Wolbachia prevalence information from this source is included in the slide AND was correctly identified by student in dropbox submission of source article. | 2 points Wolbachia prevalence information was included in the slide BUT was not identified correctly OR the information was incorrectly marked in the source article. | 0 points Student did not present Wolbachia prevalence information from this source OR presented information that cannot be found in the source article OR the source is absent. | Score of Prevalence, / 4 |
| Peer-Reviewed Journal Article #2 | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Appropriate Source | 4 points This source is a peer-reviewed scientific article and citation information was correctly identified by student in dropbox submission of source article. | 2 points This source is not a peer-reviewed scientific article or source is absent. | 0 points Source article was not provided in dropbox. | Score of Appropriate Source, / 4 |
Prevalence | 4 points Wolbachia prevalence information from this source is included in the slide AND was correctly identified by student in dropbox submission of source article. | 2 points Wolbachia prevalence information was included in the slide BUT was not identified correctly OR the information was incorrectly marked in the source article. | 0 points Student did not present Wolbachia prevalence information from this source OR presented information that cannot be found in the source article OR the source is absent. | Score of Prevalence, / 4 |
Evidence of Source Information | 4 points Evidence of source information is correctly provided. | 2 points An attempt to provide evidence of source information is made, but problems exist. | 0 points No attempt to provide source information exists. | Score of Evidence of Source Information, / 4 |
| Locally-Collected Data | Acceptable | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|
Prevalence | 2 points Correct Wolbachia prevalence information from this source is included. | 0 points Student did not correctly present Wolbachia prevalence information from this source or source is absent. | Score of Prevalence, / 2 |
Reference | 1 point The locally-collected data is included in the references. | 0 points The locally-collected data is not included in the references. | Score of Reference, / 1 |
| Prediction | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Construction of Prediction | 6 points A properly-constructed prediction is presented. | 3 points An attempt at a prediction is presented, but problems exist. | 0 points No prediction exists. | Score of Construction of Prediction, / 6 |
Rationale for Prediction | 4 points The prevalence data is interpreted so that an appropriate rationale for the prediction exists. | 2 points The prevalence data is not interpreted appropriately, and the prediction does not align logically with the information presented from the peer-reviewed sources and the local data. | 0 points No rationale for the prediction exists. | Score of Rationale for Prediction, / 4 |
| References | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Style Guide Superscript Numbering System for Text Information | 4 points Presentation followed the instructions in the Postlab assignment (also in the Style Guide.) | 2 points Presentation included references for information in the text on the slides. An attempt to link information to references was made, but the proper format was not followed. | 0 points References are not included. | Score of Style Guide Superscript Numbering System for Text Information, / 4 |
Citation Style/Format | 2 points Citations are consistently and properly formatted. | 1 point An attempt is made to cite sources. | 0 points References are not included. | Score of Citation Style/Format, / 2 |
| Professional Presentation | Acceptable | Developing | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Slide Titles | 3 points All slides have appropriate, descriptive titles. | 2 points Some slide titles are missing, and/or slide titles are not descriptive. | 1 point Many slide titles are missing, and/or many slide titles are not descriptive. | 0 points No slide titles are present. | Score of Slide Titles, / 3 |
Information Flow | 3 points Slides are organized so that presentation tells a clear, concise story. | 2 points Slides were not well-organized, or some slides were missing. | 1 point Slides were not well-organized, or some slides were missing. | 0 points | Score of Information Flow, / 3 |
Paraphrasing | 3 points Information is appropriately presented in the student's own words. | 2 points Work exhibits at least one quotation, and/or information is paraphrased poorly, indicating a poor understanding of the material. | 1 point Work includes extensive quotations (more than two) indicating little to no understanding of the material. | 0 points | Score of Paraphrasing, / 3 |
Information in Bulleted Phrases | 3 points Information is appropriately presented in concise, bulleted phrases. | 2 points At least one sentence appears in the presentation. | 1 point Many sentences exist in the presentation. | 0 points | Score of Information in Bulleted Phrases, / 3 |
Font Size | 3 points Font size of text is appropriate. | 2 points Font size is too small on at least one slide. | 1 point Font size is too small some slides. | 0 points | Score of Font Size, / 3 |
Spelling and Grammar | 3 points No spelling or grammar errors exist. | 2 points Some spelling or grammar problems exist. | 1 point Many problems with spelling and/or grammar exist. | 0 points | Score of Spelling and Grammar, / 3 |
Scientific Names | 3 points Scientific names are written appropriately. | 2 points Some scientific names are not written appropriately. | 1 point Scientific names are not written appropriately. | 0 points Scientific names are not included. | Score of Scientific Names, / 3 |
| Images | Good | Acceptable | Developing | Absent | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Appropriate Images | 3 points Many additional, relevant images are included. | 2 points Some additional, relevant images are included. | 1 point Only a few relevant images are present. | 0 points No relevant images are present. | Score of Appropriate Images, / 3 |
Image Appearance | 0 points | 2 points All images appear without distortion and are appropriately presented. | 1 point Images are distorted or inappropriately cropped or presented. | 0 points No relevant images are present. | Score of Image Appearance, / 2 |
References for Images | 0 points | 4 points All images are referenced. | 2 points An attempt to cite images is made. | 0 points No references exist for images. | Score of References for Images, / 4 |
Image Reference Format | 0 points | 2 points All image references are formatted correctly. | 1 point Some image references are formatted correctly. | 0 points No image references are formatted correctly. | Score of Image Reference Format, / 2 |
| General Appearance | Good | Acceptable | Developing | Developing | Criterion Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
General Appearance | 4 points Presentation is very polished, and significant student effort is obvious. | 3 points Student has presented appropriate information in the appropriate manner. | 2 points Presentation appears in the 'draft' stage: more effort is needed to generate a professional presentation. | 1 point Presentation is missing slides and important information. | Score of General Appearance, / 4 |
Prior Instructor Feedback | 0 points | 2 points Student provided a reflective comment about feedback received from the instructor about the Ex. 2 Postlab PP slides assignment that is specific and thoughtful. Student learned and improved from reflecting upon this feedback. | 1 point Student provided a comment about feedback received from the instructor about the Ex. 2 Postlab PP slides assignment, but the comment is not specific enough to reflect any significant student learning. | 0 points Student did not provide a comment about feedback received from the instructor about the Ex. 2 Postlab PP slides assignment. | Score of Prior Instructor Feedback, / 2 |