|
Contributed by: Kentucky Department of Education (KDE)
SCORING GUIDE
KIRIS Performance Event, Grade 12
1992-93
Task: S2 - Boat Building
Group Activity for this event is not scored.
Individual Activity
Question 7
| SCORE |
DESCRIPTION |
| 4 |
(Does not apply.) |
| 3 |
All data is present in a chart, graph, or table and is displayed
in a clearly labeled, well-organized manner. |
| 2 |
Data is present but poorly organized or unclear. Labeling
may be incomplete. |
| 1 |
Data is incomplete and unlabeled. |
| 0 |
BLANK |
Question 8
| SCORE |
DESCRIPTION |
| 4 |
Response describes, in detail, some variables that would
influence how boat floats. Response does not contain flaws. |
| 3 |
Response describes some variables that would influence how
boat floats. Response may contain minor flaws or omissions,
or may lack specific detail. |
| 2 |
Response describes variables, but does not include details;
may contain major flaws in reasoning. |
| 1 |
Response merely lists variables, or descriptions are vague
and poor. |
| 0 |
BLANK |
Examples of possible variables:
- area of bottom
- type of solution
- shape of bottom (keel or bottom weight)
- strength of side walls
- volume of inside the boat
- design for holding steel balls in place
Question 9
| SCORE |
DESCRIPTION |
| 4 |
Student recognizes density differences in three solutions
and makes an analytical comparison of density differences (e.g.,
solution 3 held 60 balls, solution 1 held 20 balls, therefore
solution 3 is 3 times more dense than solution 1). |
| 3 |
Student recognizes and describes the density differences
among the solutions, and their effects on the boat's floating
ability. |
| 2 |
Student recognizes that the solutions are different but fails
to describe the density differences in a clear manner, or does
not identify density as the differences.
OR
Student attributes the difference in floating to a cause other
than the solution (e.g., the boat hit the water differently
when I put it in the water). |
| 1 |
The statement relates to the task but is clearly incorrect
(e.g., the boats were all different). |
| 0 |
BLANK |
Question 10
| SCORE |
DESCRIPTION |
| 4 |
Student designs a clay boat that increases the surface area
of the clay as much as possible (e.g., rolls clay very thin). |
| 3 |
Student designs a clay boat like the aluminum boat (e.g.,
flat bottom, low sides, etc.) |
| 2 |
Student shows understanding of boat design but not of surface
area/density relationship, or fails to apply it to the clay. |
| 1 |
Student creates poor design; design is very impractical or
would not work. |
| 0 |
BLANK |
Question 11
| SCORE |
DESCRIPTION |
| 4 |
Student acknowledges need to discuss the proper placement
of the marbles; may describe design using displacement formula
or Archimedes principle. Also uses information learned from
this activity to explain and design structural changes that
accommodate increased load size (e.g., ma use bulkheads). |
| 3 |
Student uses information learned from this activity to explain
and design structural changes that accommodate increased load
size.
OR
Student develops logical, reasonable rationale for retaining
structure without changes. |
| 2 |
Student does not use data to support rationale for change
or does not develop rationale regarding structural change. |
| 1 |
Student's design change is unsupported, sketchy, or illogical. |
| 0 |
BLANK |
|
|
