School Improvement in Maryland
Public Release Item Scoring Information Return

Goal 1 Skills And Processes

Expectation 1.2 The student will pose scientific questions and suggest investigative approaches to provide answers to questions.

Indicator 1.2.3 The student will formulate a working hypothesis.

Brief Constructed Response (BCR) Item - Released in 2004

Use the technical passage Elephants Don't Need Email to answer the following.

The researchers found that the elephants could communicate with each other using infrasound over a distance of two and one half miles. The sounds that elephants hear may travel even farther.

Design an experiment that would determine the maximum distance from which elephants can hear infrasound.

Be sure to include

  • a hypothesis
     
  • a materials list
     
  • the specific steps to follow in the experiment
     
  • the method of collecting data
     

The following 7 Anchor Papers represent a range of score points and are used in conjunction with the rubric to assess student responses.

Anchor Paper #1

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #1: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response contains evidence of some understanding of the question. The student provides minimal supporting details. A brief materials list (two elephants; something that could pick up sound vibration) is given, and although the student attempts a hypothesis (hear each other from two and one half miles away), that distance has already been proven, and the wording is repeated almost directly from the question.


Anchor Paper #2

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response contains evidence of some understanding of the question. The student sets up an experiment that includes materials (car; speakers; microphones; elephants), a general procedure, and some quantification (starting at 3 miles; get farther and farther away; than at 5 miles). No hypothesis is stated, and the discussion of data collection is insufficient. The supporting details are minimally effective.


Anchor Paper #3

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response contains evidence of a basic understanding of the question. A hypothesis is provided (an elephant can hear up to or past 3 miles of distance) and a materials list is given (5 elephants, length of 4 miles and 5 video recorders). The student describes an appropriate procedure and proposes to collect data at half-mile increments. The use of a different elephant at each distance compromises the accuracy of the data. The student includes some methods of data collection (gather up videos; label them; watch to see what happens; record information). These supporting details are adequate.


Anchor Paper #4

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response contains evidence of a basic understanding of the question. The supporting details are adequate. The student sets up an experiment with controlled variables (play at same volume; create environment that resembles African Svanna) and a method for data collection (recording until he no longer reacts).l A hypothesis is provided (I think the elephant will no longer react when he is between 4 and 3½ miles away). While some quantification is included (placing the elephant 3 miles away), the use of only one elephant, rather than an experimental group, is problematic.


Anchor Paper #5

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response contains evidence of a good understanding of the question. Although no hypothesis is given, generally complete supporting details are used to describe the set-up of the experiment. The student specifies the number of elephants to be used in the experiment (2-3), identifies the distance at which data is recorded (moved farther out in ½ mile increments), and describes the kind of data that needs to be record on the data chart. Some synthesis of information is evident as the student qualifies the criteria for determining data validity. (If the elephants reacted, at least two to be sure, then I would continue to move further out).


Anchor Paper #6

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response contains evidence of a good understanding of the question. The student provides a hypothesis (I believe they can hear up to at least 4 miles) and a materials list (a group of wild elephants; a recording of the elephants rumbles), Other than identifying a 5-mile starting point no other quantification of data collection is given. Some synthesis of information is evidence in the discussion of repeat trials (every day write down distance). Specific observations (whether the elephants reacted to it or not) and a conclusion (should give me the result I want to find the maximum length) are also provided. The supporting details are generally complete.


Anchor Paper #7

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response contains evidence of a full and complete understanding of the question. An integration of ideas is provided within the design of the experiment. All aspects of the question are address with pertinent and complete supporting details. The student tests the hypothesis, quantifies distances (2.5, 3, 3.5, etc.), controls a variable (large area where there is little or no chance of other elephant groups' signals interfering, performs multiple trials, and lays out the data collection very clearly in the data table.


Brief Constructed Response (BCR) Rubric
Print: Scoring Rubric (pdf)
Score 4

There is evidence in this response that the student has a full and complete understanding of the question or problem.

  • Pertinent and complete supporting details demonstrate an integration of ideas.
  • The use of accurate scientific terminology enhances the response.
  • An effective application of the concept to a practical problem or real-world situation reveals an insight into scientific principles.*
  • The response reflects a complete synthesis of information.
Score 3

There is evidence in this response that the student has a good understanding of the question or problem.

  • The supporting details are generally complete.
  • The use of accurate scientific terminology strengthens the response.
  • The concept has been applied to a practical problem or real-world situation.*
  • The response reflects some synthesis of information.
Score 2

There is evidence in this response that the student has a basic understanding of the question or problem.

  • The supporting details are adequate.
  • The use of accurate scientific terminology may be present in the response.
  • The application of the concept to a practical problem or real-world situation is inadequate.*
  • The response provides little or no synthesis of information.
Score 1

There is evidence in this response that the student has some understanding of the question or problem.

  • The supporting details are only minimally effective.
  • The use of accurate scientific terminology is not present in the response.
  • The application, if attempted, is irrelevant.*
  • The response addresses the question.
Score 0

There is evidence that the student has no understanding of the question or problem.

  • The response is completely incorrect or irrelevant or there is no response.

* On the High School Assessment, the application of a concept to a practical problem or real-world situation will be scored when it is required in the response and requested in the item stem.

Updated 2002
/share/clg/xml/public_release/science/2004_123_bio13.xml