Introduction

Tasks

Process

Resources

Evaluation

Conclusion

Teacher's Corner

PARTICIPATION BRAINSTORMING AND T-CHARTDEBATE

PARTICIPATION  (NOTE:  THE NEGATIVE ACTIONS OF ONE OR MORE GROUP MEMBERS CAN ADVERSELY AFFECT THE GROUP'S OVERALL GRADE.  WORK TOGETHER!)
4 - HOT STUFF!!	GROUP WAS ABLE TO WORK CO-OPERATIVELY TOGETHER AND DID NOT ENCOUNTER ANY DIFFERENCE OF OPINION THAT THEY COULD NOT RESOLVE.  ALL GROUP MEMBERS WERE WILLING TO LISTEN TO ONE ANOTHER.  MEMBERS WILLING TO COMPROMISE IF ANOTHER MEMBER MAKES A SUGGESTION REGARDING THE GROUP'S WORK.  ALL MEMBERS  ABLE TO USE LANGUAGE TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS, INTERACT, AND COLLABORATE.  POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS ARE MADE BY EVERYONE.  A HIGH LEVEL OF POSITIVE COMMUNICATION IS DISPLAYED.
3 - WARM AND TOASTY.	GROUP ABLE TO WORK CO-OPERATIVELY MOST OF THE TIME.  VERY FEW CONFLICTS GO UNRESOLVED.  MOST OF THE GROUP MEMBERS ARE WILLING TO LISTEN TO EACH OTHER AND CAN COMPROMISE MOST OF THE TIME.  THE MAJORITY OF MEMBERS ARE ABLE TO USE THEIR LANGUAGE TO INTERACT AND VOICE THEIR OPINIONS.  POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS ARE MADE BY A MAJORITY OF THE GROUP AND THE LEVEL OF COMMUNICATION IS GENERALLY POSITIVE.
2 - LUKE-WARM.	SOME GROUP MEMBERS ARE UNABLE TO WORK CO-OPERATIVELY.  IN MANY CASES, THE GROUP IS UNABLE TO REACH A CONSENSUS ON AN ISSUE OR COME TO SOME TYPE OF COMPROMISE.  NOT ALL MEMBERS ARE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR MAKE POSITIVE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE GROUP.  COMMUNICATION IS OFTEN NEGATIVE IN NATURE.
1 - COOLING DOWN.	GROUP IS UNABLE TO WORK CO-OPERATIVELY AND IS RARELY ABLE TO REACH A CONSENSUS ON ANY ISSUE.  ALL MEMBERS WORK AS INDIVIDUALS RATHER THAN AS ONE TEAM AND VERY RARELY LISTEN TO OTHER MEMBERS OR CONSIDERED OTHER SUGGESTIONS.  NO SIGNS OF BEING ABLE TO COMPROMISE.  VERY LITTLE COMMUNICATION TAKES PLACE.  MOST MEMBERS MAKE NO OR LITTLE POSITIVE CONTRIBUTION TO THE GROUP.

top of page
start of rubric on participation
start of  rubric on debate
 
 

BRAINSTORMING AND T-CHART
4 - HOT STUFF!!	BRAINSTORMING MAP HAS GENERATED 20 OR MORE RELEVANT IDEAS ABOUT PRESCRIBED FIRES, MANY OF WHICH ARE LINKED. CLEAR AND DESCRIPTIVE CAUSES, REASONS, EXPLANATIONS, AND EVIDENCE OF  UNDERSTANDING  IS SHOWN BETWEEN LINKED IDEAS. A T-CHART REPRESENTING THE "PROS" AND "CONS" OF PRESCRIBED BURNS UTILIZES ITEMS FROM THE BRAINSTORM MAP AND ANY ADDITIONAL IDEAS.  T-CHART CONSISTS OF 6 OR MORE "PROS" AND 6 OR MORE "CONS".  EXPLANATIONS OF WHY AN ITEM IS A "PRO" OR A "CON" IS ALSO GIVEN.  SHOWS A HIGH LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING.  WORK SHOWS PRIDE AND SATISFACTION.
3 - WARM AND TOASTY.	BRAINSTORMING MAP HAS GENERATED 15 OR MORE RELEVANT IDEAS ABOUT PRESCRIBED FIRES AND SHOWS STARTING INDICATIONS OF LINKED IDEAS.  STARTING ATTEMPTS HAVE ALSO BEEN MADE IN AREA OF EXPLAINING THE LINKS OF THE IDEAS.  A T-CHART REPRESENTING THE "PROS" AND "CONS" OF PRESCRIBED BURNS INCORPORATES IDEAS PRIMARILY FROM THE BRAINSTORMING MAP.  T-CHART CONSISTS OF 3-5 "PROS" AND 3-5 "CONS" WITH INDICATIONS OF BEGINNING EXPLANATION OF "PROS" AND "CONS". SHOWS A MODERATE LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING.
2 - LUKE-WARM.	BRAINSTORMING MAP HAS GENERATED 8 OR MORE IDEAS WITH VERY LIMITED LINKING.  THERE IS LITTLE OR NO EXPLANATION PROVIDED BETWEEN LINKED IDEAS.  T-CHART ONLY HAS A COUPLE OF "PROS" AND "CONS" ON EACH SIDE OF CHART WITH LITTLE OR NO EXPLANATION.  SHOWS A BASIC LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING.
1 - COOLING DOWN.	BRAINSTORMING MAP HAS VERY FEW IDEAS AND NO LINKING IS EVIDENT.  IDEA LINKS ARE NOT GIVEN EXPLANATIONS.  T-CHART ONLY HAS ONE OR TWO "PROS" AND "CONS" ON EACH SIDE WITH NO EXPLANATIONS.  SHOWS A LOW LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING.

top of page
start of rubric on brainstorming and t-chart
start of rubric on participation
 
 
 

DEBATE
4 - HOT STUFF!!	ALL MEMBERS ARE WELL PREPARED.  ARGUMENTS ARE SUPPORTIVE TO THE GROUP'S POSITION ON THE DEBATE.  MEMBERS ARE ABLE TO CONSISTENTLY DEFEND THEIR THEIR VIEWS, MAKE COUNTER ARGUMENTS, AND QUESTION THE FINDINGS OF THE OPPOSING SIDE.  DURING THE DEBATE, THE GROUP SHOWS A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUES AND OPINIONS SURROUNDING THE DEBATE.  THE GROUP IS ALSO ABLE TO DRAW REASONABLE CONCLUSIONS FROM THEIR RESEARCH.  GROUP WAS ABLE TO INTERACT WITH OPPOSITION IN A POSITIVE FASHION AND AVOIDED ANY NAME CALLING OR PUT-DOWNS.  ALL MEMBERS OF THE GROUP CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEBATE.
3 - WARM AND TOASTY.	THE MAJORITY OF GROUP MEMBERS ARE WELL PREPARED AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE DEBATE.  FOR THE MOST PART, THE GROUP IS ABLE TO DEFEND THEIR POSITION, MAKE SOME VALID ARGUMENTS, QUESTION THE OTHER GROUP, AND MAKE COUNTER ARGUMENTS.  IN GENERAL, THE GROUP SHOWS A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUES THAT SURROUND THE DEBATE AND MAKES SOME BASIC CONCLUSIONS.  INTERACTION WITH OPPOSITION IS GENERALLY POSITIVE.
2 - LUKE-WARM.	GROUP MEMBERS ARE MODERATELY PREPARED FOR DEBATE.  NOT ALL MEMBERS MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS.  GROUP SHOWS SIGNS OF NOT FULLY UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUES SURROUNDING THE DEBATE AND ARE NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO DEFEND THEIR POSITION OR MAKE COUNTER ARGUMENTS.  THERE IS LITTLE OR NO QUESTIONING OF THE OTHER GROUP.  GROUP SHOWS STARTING SIGNS OF MAKING SIGNIFICANT CONCLUSIONS FROM THEIR RESEARCH.  INTERACTION WITH OPPOSITION IS NEGATIVE AT TIMES.
1 - COOLING DOWN.	GROUP MEMBERS ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT WELL PREPARED.  RATHER THAN MAKING ANY SIGNIFICANT ARGUMENT OR GIVING A POINT OF VIEW, GROUP SIMPLY GIVES FACTS.  GROUP MAKES LITTLE OR NO ATTEMPT TO DEFEND POSITION, MAKE COUNTER ARGUMENTS, OR QUESTION THE OPPOSING GROUP.  GROUP SHOWS A POOR UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUE AND DOES NOT DRAW ANY REASONABLE CONCLUSION FROM THEIR RESEARCH.  RATHER THAN CONTRIBUTE TO A CIVILIZED DEBATE, GROUP RESORTS TO NAME CALLING OR VERBALLY "FIGHTS" WITH OTHER GROUP.  ONLY ONE GROUP MEMBER CONTRIBUTES TO THE DEBATE.

top of page
start of  rubric on debate
start of rubric on participation
start of rubric on brainstorming and t-chart