What other title would show the main idea of this article? Explain how your title would show the main idea. In your response, use information from the article that supports your explanation.

Annotation: The student identifies an appropriate title "Proplem solvers" which indicates understanding of the main idea. The student states that "ravens solve hundreds of problems" but does not provide any details from the article to support this. There are several examples evident in the text that could have been used to support the title suggested by the student. For example, "if they can't find one kind of favorite food, they learn to eat something else."

Annotation: The student identifies a reasonable title, "Smart birds," but the word "smart" is merely a synonym for the word "brainy." This title could have been generated without reading the article. The student attempts to use information from the article, "copy sounds and even human speech," to support the title; however, this is a misreading of the article. A careful reader would discover that the article actually contradicts this statement by saying, "Copying sounds may not be a sign of smarts…." The article does contain many points of information which when developed could add support to the response. For example, the article points out that "Ravens play more than most other birds," "have excellent memories," and "have a large brain." Any of these points, when developed by the student, would show a greater understanding of the main idea of the article.

Annotation: The student suggests a title for the article, "A Raven's Brain." This title looks like a good title at first; however, it does not relate to a main idea of the entire article which is more about aspects of ravens' behavior than about the characteristics of a raven's brain. In an effort to support the title, the student selects details from the article that relate specifically to the brain: "how heavy it's brain is" and that the "…ravens brain is 1/5 larger than a chickens brain." The student also includes some additional information from the article perhaps to lengthen the response, but this information is irrelevant.