Criteria for time management Part 2 Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (60%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. Shows critical thinking about scheduling and time management. Analyzes schedule and includes appropriate suggestions to improve. Includes appropriate details, examples, details, and evidence. Responds to the assigned topic. Answers could include more critical thinking or analysis of scheduling in general or own schedule in particular. The responses could include more details, examples, or evidence. Doesn't answer all parts of the question. Does not respond to assigned topic. No details or evidence. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. Organization (10%) Follows numbering given in the instructions. Skips a question or answers them in a different order. Doesn't type questions Doesn't follow numbering. Confusing as to which question is being answered. Grammar (30%) virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.
2. Why does Allen incorporate each of these other programs (Farm-City Link, youth programs, "market basket" through the Neighborhood House, youth offender programs, composting with worms, and fish) into his business? 3. How do relationships contribute his success? A Little Hope, A Lot of Will p. 130 1. Allen discusses his collaboration with Alison Meares Cohen of Heifer International and Hope Finkelstein who helped with organization and grant writing. Jerry Kaufman was also a valuable sounding board. What can the reader get out of these encounters and partnerships? 2. Discuss what Allen means that "the local agricultural system was dismembered piece by piece in the twentieth century" ( 142-43). How does that connect with his goals? 3. Why discuss Karen's background in more depth? Homecomings p. 152 1. What do you think about Larry and Sharon Adams' view that communities can be changed by creating gardens? 2. What do the stories of Lulu and DeShawn, meeting Robert Pierce, and collaborating with Erika add to the book? Part 3 - The Revolution
criteria for paper 1 Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (40%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. Shows critical thinking. Focuses on educational experiences Includes appropriate details and evidence. Evidence from GFR is cited correctly. Responds to the assigned topic. Argument could include more critical thinking or analysis of how it contributed to the community. The answer could include more details or evidence. Evidence could connect to point better or cite more correctly. Does not respond to assigned topic. No argument. No details or evidence. Very little on customs. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. Organization (30%) Topic sentence is in the beginning. Evidence is in the middle. Transition words connect ideas. Ends with author's ideas. Conclusion wraps up the topic and predicts or expands. Topic sentence is in the beginning. Topic sentence could be stronger. Reasons could connect to topic sentence better. Could include more examples, evidence, or development. Not SEE or MEAL format No topic sentence or topic sentence is not in the beginning. No transition words. No concluding sentence. Organization is not clear. Hard to follow. Grammar (30%) virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.
Criteria for paper 2 on GFR and articles Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (40%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. Shows critical thinking. Has a strong, logical argument. Includes appropriate details, examples, details, and evidence. Evidence from GFR and articles is cited correctly. Responds to the assigned topic. Has an argument. Argument could include more critical thinking or analysis. The argument could include more details, examples, or evidence or less summary. Evidence could connect to point better or cite more correctly. Too many quotes Does not respond to assigned topic. No argument. No details or evidence. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. Organization (30%) Thesis is in the first paragraph. Introduction has appropriate background and hooks the reader. Each paragraph has one idea. Evidence is in the middle. Transition words connect ideas. Conclusion wraps up the topic and predicts or expands. Thesis is in the first paragraph. Intro could have more background. Thesis could be stronger. Topic sentence(s) could be stronger reasons or connect to thesis. Does not use SEE format. Body paragraphs could be on different points, include more examples, evidence, or development. No thesis or thesis is not in the introduction. No transition words. No conclusion. Paragraphing is not clear. Hard to follow. Grammar (30%) virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.
criteria for paper 3 RE/TR Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (40%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. The response has a point. Shows critical thinking. Includes appropriate details, examples, details, and evidence. Evidence is cited correctly. Two sources. Responds to the assigned topic. Has a point. Response could include more critical thinking or analysis. The response could include more details, examples, or evidence or less summary. Evidence could connect to point better or cite more correctly. Does not respond to assigned topic. No argument. No details or evidence. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. Only one source. All summary. Organization (30%) Thesis is in the first paragraph. Introduction has appropriate background and hooks the reader. Each paragraph has one idea. Evidence is in the middle. Transition words connect ideas. Conclusion wraps up the topic and predicts or expands. Thesis is in the first paragraph. Intro could have more background. Thesis could be stronger. Topic sentence(s) could be stronger reasons or connect to thesis. Body paragraphs could be on different points, include more examples, evidence, or development. Not SEE format. No thesis or thesis is not in the introduction. No transition words. No conclusion. Paragraphing is not clear. Hard to follow. Grammar (30%) Virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.
Criteria for paper 4 Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (40%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. Shows critical thinking. Has a strong, logical argument. Includes appropriate details, examples, details, and evidence. Evidence from RE and articles is cited correctly. Responds to the assigned topic. Has an argument. Argument could include more critical thinking or analysis. The argument could include more details, examples, or evidence or less summary. Evidence could connect to point better or cite more correctly. Does not respond to assigned topic. No argument. No details or evidence. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. Does not use all required sources. Organization (30%) Thesis is in the first paragraph. Introduction has appropriate background and hooks the reader. Each paragraph has one idea. Evidence is in the middle. Transition words connect ideas. Conclusion wraps up the topic and predicts or expands. Thesis is in the first paragraph. Intro could have more background. Thesis could be stronger. Topic sentence(s) could be stronger reasons or connect to thesis. Does not use SEE format. Body paragraphs could be on different points, include more examples, evidence, or development. No thesis or thesis is not in the introduction. No transition words. No conclusion. Paragraphing is not clear. Hard to follow. Grammar (30%) virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.
2. How completely does the writer understand and argue about responsibilities and connect the sources? What more information would help you to understand how the ideas are connected? 3. How critically does the writer analyze the readings? What more would you like to see? 4. How completely does the writer include his or her opinion? 5. How well does the conclusion sum up the essay? 6. What suggestions do you have to improve this paper? 7. What do you like best about this paper? Conference sheet on THIRD DRAFT on paper 5 on RE, GFR, and articles Bring this conference sheet filled out with your third draft and letter to the professor. 1. What comments did you receive on your first and second drafts?
Criteria for paper 5 on RE, GFR, and articles Keep it up! (Met expectations) Opportunities (Inconsistently met expectations) Want to talk? (Didn't meet expectations) Content (40%) Responds to assigned topic. Is insightful and interesting. Shows critical thinking. Has a strong, logical argument. Includes appropriate details, examples, details, and evidence from both books and 2 articles. Evidence is cited correctly. Responds to the assigned topic. Has an argument. Argument could include more critical thinking or analysis. The argument could include more details, examples, or evidence. Evidence could connect to point better or cite more correctly. Does not respond to assigned topic. No argument. No details or evidence. Examples may not fit the topic. Repetitive or confusing content. It is a book review. Too many quotes. Too much summary. Organization (30%) Thesis is in the first paragraph. Introduction has appropriate background and hooks the reader. Each paragraph has one idea. Evidence is in the middle. Transition words connect ideas. Conclusion wraps up the topic and predicts or expands. Thesis is in the first paragraph. Intro could have more background. Thesis could be stronger. Topic sentence(s) could be stronger reasons or connect to thesis. Body paragraphs could be on different points, include more examples, evidence, or development. Not SEE or MEAL format No thesis or thesis is not in the introduction. No transition words. No conclusion. Paragraphing is not clear. Hard to follow. One source per paragraph. Grammar (30%) virtually free of sentence errors: awk sentences, punctuation errors or sp errors. Has sentence variety and appropriate vocabulary. Noticeable errors in awk sentences, punct, sp, frag, run-ons, verbs, vocab, pronouns, sentence variety. Many distracting errors in awk sentences, punctuation, sp, frags, run-ons, or verbs.