The assessment must be done by yourself and include the following:
a) an explanation of how your timeline was submitted (email, picture message, a url, etc.) and partner names, so I can make certain you receive credit. (30 pts)
b) your copy of the moon lab, through pp. 8 (20 pts)
c) an essay, drawing, song, uploaded youtube video, Prezi, or other creation that tells me your critical thinking about astronomy (50 pts)
- how science, astronomy, astrology and religion have been connected and disconnected over the past two thousand years
- three influential astronomers that collected evidence of heliocentric patterns and their specific contributions (hint: your powerpoint is helpful here)
- the purpose of astronomy
Holistic Critical Thinking Scoring Rubric
4
Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
- Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, presented in class.
- Identifies the arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con on science, religion and pseudoscience.
- Draws warranted,logical conclusions.
- Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons.
- Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
3
Does most or many of the following:
Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, presented in class.
Identifies relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con on some science.
Offers analyses and evaluations of obvious alternative points of view.
Draws warranted, logical conclusions.
Justifies some results or procedures, explains reasons.
Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead.
2
Does most or many of the following:
Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
Fails to identify strong, relevant counter-arguments.
Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions.
Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons.
Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on
self-interest or preconceptions.
1
Consistently does all or almost all of the following:
Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions,
information, or the points of view of others.
Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counter-arguments.
Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view.
Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons, and unwarranted claims.
Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons.
Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on
self-interest or preconceptions.
Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason.
(c) 1994, Peter A. Facione, Noreen C. Facione, and The California Academic Press. 217 La Cruz
Ave., Millbrae, CA 94030.
Permission is hereby granted to students, faculty, staff, or administrators
