| Locate Water Sample on Map |
|
| |
- 5 points: The students
have correctly located the sites of the water samples on a map
of the neighborhood. They have identified trends in the data
and traced the trends back to a point of origin. They have not
invented a trend if none exists. The students write a two-paged
(one page typed; 12pt, double-spaced, 1" margins) explanation
of the identification process, complete with an analysis of the
trend in pollutants (or lack thereof).
- 4 points:
Most of the sites are located
properly on the map, but some missing or misplaced. Trend (or
lack of a trend) is correctly identified. Paper is complete.
- 3 points:
Most of the sites are located
properly on the map, but some missing or misplaced. Trend (or
lack of trend) is not correctly identified. Paper is complete.
- 2 points:
Most of the sites are located
properly on the map, but some missing or misplaced. Trend (or
lack of trend) is not correctly identified. Paper is short
and incomplete.
- 1 point:
Half or less of the sites are
located properly on the map, but some missing or misplaced. Trend
(or lack of trend) is not correctly identified. Paper
is short and incomplete.
- 0 points:
Serious lack of effort in all
respects.
|
| |
Top
of Page |
| Decide on Corrective Action |
|
| |
- 5 points: The students
determine which chemicals present in the sample are worthy of
further efforts. Contaminants in water samples are identified
and the concentrations are compared to levels that the Environmental
Protection Association (EPA) or the Department of Health have
designated as tolerable and/or toxic. Dangerous contaminants
are identified, whether they are at toxic levels or not.
- 4 points: The students
determine which chemicals present in the sample are worthy of
further efforts. Contaminants in water samples are partially
identified and the concentrations are compared to levels
that the Environmental Protection Association (EPA) or the Department
of Health have designated as tolerable and/or toxic. Some
dangerous contaminants are identified, whether they are at
toxic levels or not.
- 3 points: The students
determine which chemicals present in the sample are worthy of
further efforts. Contaminants in water samples are partially
identified, but the concentrations are not compared
to levels that the Environmental Protection Association (EPA)
or the Department of Health have designated as tolerable and/or
toxic. Some dangerous contaminants are identified, whether
they are at toxic levels or not.
- 2 points: The students
determine which chemicals present in the sample are worthy of
further efforts. Contaminants in water samples are partially
identified, but the concentrations are not compared
to levels that the Environmental Protection Association (EPA)
or the Department of Health have designated as tolerable and/or
toxic. Dangerous contaminants are partially identified,
whether they are at toxic levels or not.
- 1 point: The students
have little information to determine which chemicals present
in the sample are worthy of further efforts. Contaminants in
water samples are partially identified, but the concentrations
are not compared to levels that the Environmental Protection
Association (EPA) or the Department of Health have designated
as tolerable and/or toxic. Dangerous contaminants are not
identified, whether they are at toxic levels or not.
- 0 points:
Serious lack of effort in all
respects.
|
| |
Top of Page
|
| Consult
Authority |
|
| |
- 5 points:
The students identify an authority
in the field, and composes an email message to send to the expert.
The message asks for information to help determine the most effective
way to deal with the contaminating chemical. A copy of the email
is submitted to the teacher, and the email is sent to the authority.
A reply to the email is nice, but not necessary.
- 4 points:
The students identify an authority
in the field, and composes an email message to send to the expert.
The message purpose is unclear, not focused. A copy of
the email is submitted to the teacher, and the email is sent
to the authority. A reply to the email is nice, but not necessary.
- 3 points:
The students improperly identify
an authority in the field, and composes an email message to send
to the expert. The message purpose is unclear, not focused. A
copy of the email is submitted to the teacher, and the email
is sent to the authority. A reply to the email is nice, but not
necessary.
- 2 points: The students improperly identify an
authority in the field, and composes an email message to send
to the expert. The message purpose is unclear, not focused. A
copy of the email is not submitted to the teacher, but
the email is sent to the authority. A reply to the email
is nice, but not necessary.
- 1 point:The students improperly identify an authority
in the field, and composes an email message to send to the expert.
The message purpose is unclear, not focused. A copy of the email
is not submitted to the teacher, and the email is not
sent to the authority. A reply to the email is nice, but
not necessary.
- 0 points:
Serious lack of effort in all
respects.
|
| |
Top of Page
|
| Determine
Filtration |
|
| |
- 5 points:
The students research the effects
of a hazardous chemical present in the water samples and determines
the possible health effects of the chemical. The students also
research the common ways that the chemical is removed or kept
from entering the drinking water supply. The students
write a two-paged (one page typed; 12pt, double-spaced, 1"
margins) paper describing the above components.
- 4 points:
The students research the effects
of a non-hazardous chemical present in the water samples
and determines the possible health effects of the chemical. The
students also research the common ways that the chemical is removed
or kept from entering the drinking water supply. The students
write a two-paged (one page typed; 12pt, double-spaced, 1"
margins) paper describing the above components.
- 3 points:
The students research the effects
of a hazardous chemical present in the water samples, but
incorrectly determines the possible health effects of the
chemical. The students also research the common ways that the
chemical is removed or kept from entering the drinking water
supply. The students write a two-paged (one page typed;
12pt, double-spaced, 1" margins) paper describing the above
components.
- 2 points:
The students research the effects
of a hazardous chemical present in the water samples, but does
not determine the possible health effects of the chemical.
The students also research the common ways that the chemical
is removed or kept from entering the drinking water supply. The
students write a somewhat less than satisfactory paper.
- 1 point:
The students research the effects
of a hazardous chemical present in the water samples, but does
not determine the possible health effects of the chemical.
The students do not research the common ways that the
chemical is removed or kept from entering the drinking water
supply. The students write a somewhat less than satisfactory
paper.
- 0 points:
Serious lack of effort in all
respects.
|
| |
Top of Page
|
| Construct
and Test the Filter |
|
| |
- 5 points:
The students design and construct
a filter that successfully reduces the amount of the contaminating
chemical to acceptable levels. The construction steps of the
filter are properly documented so that the filter can be reproduced.
- 4 points:
The students design and construct
a filter that does not adequately reduce the amount
of the contaminating chemical to acceptable levels. The construction
steps of the filter are properly documented so that the filter
can be reproduced.
- 3 points:
The students design and construct
a filter that does not adequately reduce the amount of the contaminating
chemical to acceptable levels. The construction steps of the
filter are not properly documented so that the filter
is difficult to reproduce.
- 2 points:
The students design and construct
a filter that is ineffective in reducing the amount of
the contaminating chemical. The construction steps of the filter
are not properly documented so that the filter is difficult
to reproduce.
- 1 point:
The students design and construct
a filter that is ineffective in reducing the amount of the contaminating
chemical. The construction steps of the filter are not
documented so that the filter is impossible to
reproduce.
- 0 points:
Serious lack of effort in all
respects.
|
| |
Top of Page
|