Based on the excerpt, explain why it took many years for hamburgers to become popular in the United States. Support your answer with important and specific information from the excerpt.
(The excerpt was handed out on Monday: "The Pioneers" by Eric Schlosser and Charles Wilson.)
Think about what we have discussed in class, and utilize the rubric below to help evaluate the student's response. You must state whether the student should receive a 1, 2, 3, or 4 and explain why. Your evaluation must be at least 5 sentences long. You may respond to another classmate's post and tell whether or not you agree with their scoring and why or why not.
Your post is due no later than Friday at 5 pm.
The Student's Response
Scoring Guide and Sample
| Score | Description |
|---|---|
| (4) | The response is a clear, complete, and accurate explanation of why it took many years for hamburgers to become popular in the United States. The response includes important and specific information from the excerpt |
| (3) | The response is a mostly clear, complete, and accurate explanation of why it took many years for hamburgers to become popular in the United States. The response includes important but often general information from the excerpt. |
| (2) | The response is a partial explanation of why it took many years for hamburgers to become popular in the United States. The response includes limited information from the excerpt and may include misinterpretations. |
| (1) |
The response is a
minimal explanation of why it took many years for hamburgers to become
popular in the United States. The response includes little or no
information from the excerpt and may include misinterpretations.
OR
The response relates minimally to the task. |
| (0) | The response is totally incorrect or irrelevant, or contains insufficient evidence to demonstrate comprehension. |
I would give him a three because he showed supporting details. He gave me reasons why the people didn’t like hamburgers. For example, how people tried and did poison people with the hamburger meat. Also, he talked about how people assumed that the meat was dirty. Lastly,people thought that hamburgers were for poor people. He only used the evidence from the text once and didn’t give us information telling us how the hamburger got popular .
ReplyDeleteI think this person deserves a 2. I think so because he gave details of why burgers weren't popular. Although it was hard to understand. For example "It took many years for hamburgers to become popular is because people put poison in their burgers." That sentence seems like either he wrote it wrong or forgot a word. Finally I he/she misinterpreted the poison in burgers part. "People put poison in their burgers." Only twice did that happen and it was by murders.
ReplyDeleteI would give this persons open response a 2.5. the reason I would give them this is because I do not think that they gave enough supporting details. They did give three details but they were not very clear and I think they could have written more. In addition to that, their sentences where not clear for example"It took so many years for hamburgers to become popular is that people put poison in there burgers"that doesnt make much sense to me. Those were some reasons why this person deserves a 2.5.
ReplyDeleteI think that the person that wrote this response deserves at 2 or 3 because they used a quote from the story and tells where that person had found the quote. But they had a poor conclusion sentance and a poor opening sentance. In this students response he/she states “ The hamburgers reputation wasn’t helped when murderers started using ground beef for killing people” the student did not put the paragraph number in which they had found their quote. This student also used many supporting details through out their response. I don’t think that the person deserved a 1 but I also don’t think that they deserved a 4 either. I dont think that this student deserved a 1 because they used supporting details but the person doesn’t deserve a 4 because they didn’t use a well thought out conclusion or opening sentance. That is why I chose to give this student a 2 or 3 on their response.
ReplyDeleteThis open response deserves a 2 beacause there were spelling errors and the supporting details were not the explanitory. Also, their sentences did not make sense at all. If they had written a little more sentences to support his/her theory and proof read his/her responce they would have probably gotton at least a 3 or maybe a 4. Therefore, this person only deserves a 2.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher I would give them a 3 because they gave some detail but didn't tell how long it took to become popular. Maybe because people poisoned the burgers and that was the new way of murder so people were probably too scared to try it. The also said the meat was dirty and had chemicals but they had no evidence to describe how they knew that they were dirty. That is why I would give them a 3
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher I would give this person a 2 because,they had three details but they weren't very clear and they did not have a very clear thesis and it was a very straight foreword answer so I think they could get a 2.5 but they deserve a 2.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher grading this report, I would give them a 3. For the most part they were clear on their thesis, but had some issues really getting the point out to make this as clear as possible, but overall he/she did very well.
ReplyDeleteIf I were this student's teacher I would give her/him a 2. The reason I chose to give them a 2 is because he/she did not have an opening or closing sentence. The student also did not have a thesis so it was sort of hard to follow what they were saying. Another reason why I gave them a 2 is because they did not proofread so there was allot of spelling errors. But after all those errors there were supporting details even though there was only one quote to back up what they were saying. All in all, I think this student deserves a 2.
ReplyDeleteI would give this person a 3. The reason is because they did a pretty good job stating the reasons of why it took so long to be popular. Although they didn't really make it to clear. They also had a not so great opening sentence and no conclusion. So I think he deserves a 3.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher I would probably give the person a 2. One reason I think they deserve a 2 is there handwriting is slopy and hard to read. Also, there were a lot of spelling errors so I could tell they didn't proofread. Another reason I think they should get a 2 is they didn't really explain the quote they used. One more thing is that I think the person should have supported their details more. The responce wasn't very clear therefore, I think the deserve a 2.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher,I would give the writer a 2.He/she had some supporting details.They could have added more to each detail and could have also had more reasons why hamburgers werent popular for awhile.The person also had a few mistakes.The prompt didn't make as much sense,and there were a few spelling errors. The author/writer wasn't able to explain their details or also their quote.That is why I think this person deserves a 2.
ReplyDeleteI think he/she deserves a 2 or 2.5 because I founded not very clear.
ReplyDeleteFor example when he spelled thought wrong it trough me off. I believe that he/she was not intierly clear about the information from the paragraph, this person stated that murders used ground beef to kill people, but i think he/she should have used murders
poisoned peoples beef to kill them or something of that manner.
If I were a teacher I would give this a 2. I think that his/her's response was somewhat unclear it told me about the bad things that had happened to get rid of the hamburgers bad reputation but did not tell me about how the hamburger is now considered wholesome not deadly. Also I think that this response was not proof read because there was a couple spelling errors throughout the response. Therefore,I believe this response deserves a 2 because of spelling errors and how it was unclear.
ReplyDeleteI think the person deserves a 2 because he was not clear. For example the person had no conclusion to end it. This person ended it with his final detail. Furthermore, he/she doesn't have a clear thesis. His/her thesis and first detail are in one sentence. Next, he didn't proofread his writing. For instance, in his final sentence he misspelled thought by saying though and didn't put a coomma in where it is needed. However, even though he had all of these errors he had some positives too. For example he had his 3 supporting details. Clearly, the person wasn't completely clear so I believe he deserves a 2.
ReplyDeletef i were a teacher I would probably give this person a 2. I would give this person a 2 because, they don’t have a very good thesis and they don’t have a good conclusion sentence. Also, I would give this person a 2 because in their first sentence it was kind of confusing but then it got a little better. Another reason why I would give this person a 2 is because they didn’t proof read. I found a couple of misspelled words in their paragraph. By the way the paragraph looked, it seemed they were just trying to get this done.
ReplyDeleteI think it deserves a 2. This is because it is confusing and doesn’t have the title of the book. Also, it doesn’t have any commas after transition words. Plus I feel like they could've explained their details more. Clearly they deserved a 2 and nothing else.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a teacher I would give this person a 2 becuase they werent very clear on the thesis.Also,they had three details but they didn't back them up very well and it was also confusing.They didn't have the title and they could've just been a lot more clear about almost everything.So I think they deserve a 2.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a tescher I would give this paraghraph a 2. I would give this a 2 cause its not very clear. It doesent have a title. And they didn't back there detail up with enough information. Also, this paragraph did not have a very good thesis. It was not clear and hard to find.
ReplyDelete