Name:_________________________________  Section #: ____________  Date: _____________

 

Geology 101, Fall 2007

Washington State University

 

My photo journal identifies and describes (need both to be complete) approximately (check one):

 

__ 15 different features/processes

__ 25 different features/processes __ 35 different features/processes

1. Print out a copy of the rubric. For each of the four criteria below, assess your own photo journal by:

a) looking at the whole journal

b) circling some specific phrases which describe the work, and writing comments. (This is holistic evaluation; not all items will be present in any one journal.)

c) writing questions or comments in the appropriate boxes

2. Submit your photo journal with this completed rubric assessing your own work.   Your photo journal will be graded using the rubric you provide.  Note that points will be deducted under criteria 4.

 

                                                                           Student Reviewer:_________________________

1.      Identifies geological features / processes (GF/P).  (complete) 

 

 

Low         INCOMPLETE         High

 

Low          ACCEPTABLE         High

 

Low   Bonus points awarded   High

Score

 

 

o         Does not present two or more geological topic areas.

 

o         Identifies significantly fewer than 25 GF/P.  

 

o         Includes two or more topic areas.

 

o         Identifies approximately 25 different GF/P.  

 

 

o         Clearly focuses on two or more geological topic areas.

o         Identifies approx. 35  different GF/P.

o         Identifies approx. >35  different GF/P.   

 

Comments:

 

2.      Presents, interprets and analyzes appropriate supporting data/evidence.  (accurate)

 

 

Low         INCOMPLETE         High

 

Low          ACCEPTABLE         High

 

Low        EXCELLENT        High

Score

 

o         Misidentifies many features or rock types, or fails to identify important features or locations.

o         Misinterprets key processes or does not explain key processes.

o         Does not acknowledge unusual features or processes.

o         Identifies most features, rock types, and locations, though a few may be missing or inaccurate

o         Explains most key processes accurately, though some details are glossed over.

o         Acknowledges unusual features or processes.

o         Fully and accurately identifies and labels key features, rock types, and locations.

o         Accurately explains processes which formed those features, with details.

o         Discusses unusual features or processes, present or absent.

 

o         Observations not adequately supported by photos; lacks close-up images for essential details.

o         Photos or information sources are simplistic, inappropriate, or not relevant.

o         Observations generally supported by photos, though may lack close-up images for additional details.

o         Provides appropriate photos and information, although exploration appears to have been routine.

o         Observations supported well by photos, including appropriate close-up images for necessary details.

o         Photos, information and interpretation meet and at times exceed assignment, for deep exploration.

o         Obtained little or no information from credible sources; sources not credible or not cited.

o         Some information from credible sources may add to understanding of features or processes; may be incomplete or lack citation.

o         Information obtained from credible sources to provide fuller understanding of features or processes.  Citations included.

Comments:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Develops, presents, and communicates OWN hypothesis or position and relevant other perspectives. (interpretation, understanding, degree of complexity)

 

 

Low         INCOMPLETE         High

 

Low          ACCEPTABLE         High

 

Low        EXCELLENT        High

Score

 

o         Little evidence of more than cursory observation.   May repeat readily available information without interpretation.

 

o         Makes little or no connection between geological principles and own observations.

 

o         Processes identified are simplistic; details missing or glossed over.

o         Recognizes chosen features and processes, using some observation; may include some errors or limited interpretation.

o         Attempts to connect geological principles with own observations.

o         Addressed intermediate processes accurately; attempts to address some complex processes, perhaps with some inaccuracy

o         Recognizes and interprets chosen features and processes based on careful observation.

 

o         Accurately connects geological principles with own observations.

 

o         Addresses complex processes accurately and completely.

 

o         Presents only one theory regarding a feature or process, when others are probable. 

o         Attempts to address different theories regarding particular features or processes, though limited.

o         Includes different probable theories regarding particular features or processes.

Comments:

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.  Communicates effectively and fulfills assignment.

 

UNACCEPTABLE

(minus 1 for each)

ACCEPTABLE

 (no points added or deducted)

EXCELLENT

(up to 5 bonus points possible)

 

Score

o         Geologic vocabulary absent or often inaccurate.

 

o         In many places, language obscures meaning.

 

o         Little evidence of proofreading.

o         Uses some vocabulary of geology accurately.

o         In general, language communicates clearly and effectively; few errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling.

o         Uses vocabulary of geology with high accuracy and fluidity in own writing.

 

o         Language use is eloquent and/or nuanced.

 

 

 

o         Photo journal is unfocused or poorly organized / constructed.

 

o         Format is inconsistent or distracting; text not always legible.  

 

o         Organization is clear, and construction adequate.

o         Format is appropriate and clear in most places.

o         Text is legible.

o         Creative approach to photos or project design.

o         Exceptional organization or presentation.

o         Exceptionally engaging format.   

o         Other

o         Photo journal lacks picture of you.

o         Photos taken in Pullman or Pullman-Moscow corridor.

o         Photos of poor quality.

o         Internet photo used other than location maps. (3 point deducted for each photo.)

o         Photo journal includes at least one photo with you in it.

o         Most/all photos taken beyond Pullman or the Pullman-Moscow corridor.

o         All photos of acceptable or better quality. 

o         Most/all photos original work (not from internet).

Comments:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Student’s comments or questions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Overall Rating of Photo Journal

 

 

Criteria

Score

1.  Identifies issues or questions (topics, features and processes) (complete count).

 

2.  Presents, interprets and analyzes evidence in photos (accuracy). 

 

3.  Develops own position or hypothesis; integrates other perspectives. (understanding, interpretation, degree of complexity)

 

 

Total

 

4. Communicate effectively and fulfills assignment   

                                                         (points maybe be subtracted or added)

 

 

Total

 

Instructor Comments: