Use these targets, vocabulary, rubrics, examples, and score sheet with the instructor's approved lesson and procedure. This is an assessment companion, not a complete lesson or safety authorization.
Student lessons, data, and public practice answers (not assessment keys): Unit 08 learning pathway.
The student demonstrates the following:
Five science criteria plus separately reported integration (Page 3).
A written report plus a graph or table that backs the claim.
The student defends the findings out loud and takes questions (Page 4).
Question, data, and conclusion kept distinct.
You are making a decision, not adding up points. For each criterion, decide whether the work is Developing, Proficient, or Mastery — the column language tells you which. A criterion counts as mastered only when the student can both back the claim with data and defend it out loud. Each student has three tokens per term; each token retries one rubric criterion. Approved accommodations, equipment failures, and approved absences are handled separately and do not consume these tokens.
Accept listed synonyms; use the distinction column to resolve near-matches.
| Canonical answer | Accepted synonyms | Common confusion / discriminator |
|---|---|---|
| The report | ||
| Written report | write-up / lab report | Question, method, data, conclusion — in an order a reader can follow |
| Claim | qualified conclusion | Matches the stated population and evidence; changes when counterevidence warrants revision. |
| Evidence | inspectable record with provenance | Include source, definitions, dates and denominators; not just persuasive wording. |
| Supporting visual | table or graph | The right type, labeled, with the pattern easy to see — not decoration |
| Defending it | ||
| Reasoning | warrant connecting evidence and claim | Distinguish a supported comparison from an unmeasured causal mechanism. |
| Oral defense | explaining it aloud | In their own words, not reading the report back word for word |
| Critique | a challenge / a question | A fair push-back to answer; tell a fair point from an unfair one |
| Concede & defend | give ground / hold ground | Grant a fair point honestly; defend a sound one with evidence |
| Criterion | Developing | Proficient | Mastery |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clear written report | Report is missing pieces — no question stated, or data and conclusion jumbled together. | Includes most parts, but the order is muddled or the method is too thin for a reader to follow. | Separates question, method, source, data, analysis and conclusion; labels supplied records and preserves revisions. |
| Visuals support the claim | Uses no table or graph, or picks one that does not fit the data. | Includes a graph but it is mislabeled, or it does not clearly connect to the point being made. | Uses a labeled visual with denominators and relevant groups; does not hide a reversed pattern through selection or pooling. |
| Oral defense | Cannot explain the work aloud, or just reads the report back word for word. | Explains the gist but stumbles when asked to go past what is written down. | Explains the investigation aloud in their own words and answers questions about any part of it. |
| Claim–evidence–reasoning | States a conclusion with no data behind it, or lists data with no claim. | Connects a claim to data but skips the reasoning that links the two. | Links each claim to specific evidence and justified reasoning, distinguishing observed patterns from untested mechanisms. |
| Responding to critique | Ignores a challenge, gets defensive, or swaps in whatever answer is suggested. | Hears the critique but cannot tell a fair point from an unfair one. | Addresses critique with evidence, retains counterevidence and revises an unsupported claim without inventing excuses or observations. |
| Integration (cross-domain) | Makes no supported connection between the source and the science. | Uses the source but needs help connecting evidence, writing, or limitations to the science. | Independently connects History, Reading, and Writing using a cited source, appropriate evidence, a limitation, and a scientific explanation. |
The split between Proficient and Mastery is claim, evidence, reason: a student who ties each claim to a number and a “because” has it. Ask “what’s your evidence, and why does it support the claim?”
Read these before you grade. They show what Mastery and Developing actually sound like, plus the edge cases where you should coach rather than decide on the spot.
Evidence record: Level ____ Case/data ____ Criterion ____ Source/date ____ Work/limits ____ Transfer ____ Educator review ____. Attach the first attempt. Actual practical observation is separate.
Student: ______________________________________ Date: _______________ Guide: _________________________
| # | Criterion | Decision | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Clear written report | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 2 | Visuals support the claim | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 3 | Oral defense | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 4 | Claim–evidence–reasoning | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 5 | Responding to critique | Dev / Prof / Mast | |
| 6 | Integration (cross-domain) | Dev / Prof / Mast |
☐ No ☐ Yes — for criterion: __________
Tokens left this term after this session (choose one): ☐ 3 ☐ 2 ☐ 1 ☐ None left
Dev = Developing · Prof = Proficient · Mast = Mastery · Unsure between two levels? Circle the lower one and note what a re-do would need.