AP Environmental Science
POPULATION CONTROL PAPER
Not Present 0% |
Attempted 60% |
Average 75% |
Above Average 85% |
Exemplary 100% |
| The bleak future is not brought up for fear it may ruin the celebration of MLK Day. | The bleak future of our planet is mentioned without supporting details. | The bleak future of our planet is discussed with few details. | The bleak future of our planet is discussed with some details. | The bleak future of our planet without population control is clearly discussed with details. |
| No consequences are described just because this author just cannot get real. | 1 or 2 of the critical consequences of not curbing population are clearly described. | 3 of the critical consequences of not curbing population are clearly described. | 4 of the critical consequences of not curbing population are clearyly described. | 5 of the critical consequences of not curbing population are clearly described. |
| Section A leaves the reader wondering what will be for lunch and if they remembered to wash their navel this morning. | Section A leaves the reader not sure at all about the importance of population control. | Section A leaves the reader wondering if population should be controlled? | Section A of this paper leaves the reader thinking maybe population should be controlled. | Section A of this paper leaves the reader with a sense of urgency about population control. |
| This person fails to mention any "points of view" about family planning for fear someone may be offended and glare at them. | 1 or 2 human "points of view" about family planning are described in with little detail. | 3 or 4 human "points of view" about family planning are described in with some detail. | 4 or 5 human "points of view" about family planning are described in with some detail. | 5 or more human "points of view" about family planning are described in appropriate detail. |
| This author wasn't aware that points of view affect any process of human interaction or that different people have different religious ideas. | 1 or 2 out of 5 points of view are related to how they help or hurt the process of solving the population crisis. | 3 out of 5 points of view are related to how they help or hurt the process of solving the population crisis. | 4 out of 5 points of view are related to how they help or hurt the process of solving the population crisis. | Each of the above points of view are related to how they help or hurt the process of solving the population crisis. |
| Section B leaves the reader trying to remember what they had for breakfast. | Section B leaves this reader unmoved by the size of human hurdles place in front of population control. | Section B leaves this paper aware that hurdles might exist. | Section B of this paper leaves the reader thinking population control has some hurdles. | Section B of this paper leaves the reader with a sense of how difficult population control is going to be. |
| Options? For what? Why would I need options? | 1 to 5 different options for curbing human population are clearly described. | 6 or 7 different options for curbing human population are clearly described. | 8 or 9 different options for curbing human population are clearly described. | 10 different options for curbing human population are clearly described . |
| Section C leaves the reader thinking "I wonder if I locked my car this morning?" | Section C leaves the reader believing there truly are viable options but only knowing them by name without understanding them. | Section C leaves the reader believing there are options but not completely clear on understanding what they include. | Section C leaves the reader believing there truly are options and somewhat understanding what they include. | Section C leaves the reader believing there truly are viable options and understanding what they include. |
| The author's plan was so good that their Chocolate Lab (Fido) ate it. | The author attempts to articulated a plan but its coherency is weak. | The author articulates a plan. | The author articulates a fairly coherent plant. | The author clearly articulates a coherent plan which you want to fax directly to the Obama administration. |
| The author has no opinion and articulates that with absolute clarity. | The author weakly expresses personal beliefs concerning why they chose the options for the plan. | The author sort of expresses personal beliefs concerning why they chose the options for the plan. | The author expresses their personal beliefs concerning why they chose the options for the plan. | The author clearly expresses their personal beliefs concerning why they chose the options for the plan. |
| Section D leaves the reader wondering if the author had an alcoholic blackout over the weekend. | Section D leaves the reader thinking the author could have put some effort into this but obviously didn't put much. | Section D leaves the reader thinking they were glad the author at least tried to do this. | Section D leaves the reader thinking the author is one to be respected for their attempts. | Section D leaves the reader proud to know the author and wanting an autograph. |
| Minus 100% | Minus 40% | Minus 25% | Minus 15% | Minus 0% |
| Paper was only thought about, but not written. | Paper is written with many spelling and grammatical errors. | Paper is written with some spelling and grammatical errors. | Paper is written with few spelling and grammatical errors. | Paper is written without spelling and grammatical errors. |
| Paper did not trip the author because it was lost on a computer that malfunctioned and sent it to Thailand before crashing and setting the house on fire killing Fido who ate their only hard copy. | Reader is bruised, cut, and exhausted from being tripped by poor word choice and poor sentence structure. | Paper is organized in a way that trips the reader enough to be annoying. | Paper is organized so it reads fairly smoothly and only mildly trips the reader. | Paper is organized so it reads smoothly and does not trip the reader. Word choice and sentence structure were excellent. |