113 Socratic Seminar Rubric

Socratic Seminar RubricExemplaryProficientPartiallyProficientDevelopingCommentsAnalysisandReasoning• Clearly referencestext to supportreasoning.• Demonstratesthoughtfulconsideration of thetopic.• Provides relevantand insightfulcomments, makesnew connections.• Demonstratesexceptionally logicaland organizedthinking.• Moves the discussionto a deeper level.• Occasionallyreferencestext to supportreasoning.• Demonstratesconsideration ofthe topic.• Providesrelevantcomments.• Thinking isclear andorganized.• Rarelyreferences text,may referencetext incorrectly.• Demonstratesawareness ofthe topic butlittle reflectionon it.• Comments aremostly relevant.• Thinking ismostly clearand organized.• Does notreference text.• Demonstrateslittle or noconsideration ofthe topic.• Commentsare off-topic orirrelevant.• Thinking isconfused,disorganized, orstays at a verysuperficial level.DiscussionSkills• Speaks loudly andclearly.• Stays on topic andbrings discussionback on topic ifnecessary.• Talks directly to otherstudents (rather thanthe teacher).• Stays focused on thediscussion.• Invites other peopleinto the discussion.• Shares ‘air time’equally with others.• References theremarks of others.• Speaks at anappropriatelevel to beheard.• Stays on topicand focused onthe discussion.• Aware ofsharing ‘airtime’ withothers andmay invitethem into theconversation.• Mayoccasionallydirectcomments toteacher.• Mostlyspeaks at anappropriatelevel but mayneed to becoached.• Sometimesstrays fromtopic.• Occasionallydominates theconversation.• Cannot be heard,or may dominatethe conversation.• Demonstratesinappropriatediscussion skills.Civility• Listens to othersrespectfully bymaking eye contactwith the speaker andwaiting their turn tospeak.• Remarks are politeand demonstrate ahigh level of concernfor the feelings ofothers.• Addresses others in acivil manner, using acollegial and friendlytone.• Listensto othersrespectfully.• Usesappropriatelanguage andtone.• Remarksdemonstratea concern forthe feelings ofothers.• Listensto othersrespectfully,but may notalways look atthe speaker ormay sometimesinterrupt.• Remarksdemonstratean awarenessof feelings ofothers.• May bedistracted or notfocused on theconversation.• Interruptsfrequently.• Remarksdemonstratelittle awarenessor sensitivity tothe feelings ofothers.• Uses anaggressive,threatening,or otherwiseinappropriatetone.113

Rubric for Evaluating Classroom DiscussionsExemplary Proficient Partially Proficient Developing• Beyond recognition andunderstanding, studentis able to empathize withothers’ perspectives.• Student’s own thinkingbecomes more complexand thorough withadded perspectives.• Studentdemonstratesrecognition andunderstandingof multipleperspectivesthrough reflectionand paraphrasing.• Student recognizesand understands somealternate perspectivesthrough reflectionand paraphrasing.• Student strugglesto reflect andparaphrasealternateperspectivesaccurately.• Beyond meetingdiscussion guidelines,student is a discussionleader, soliciting others’viewpoints and enforcingdiscussion guidelines ina respectful manner.• Meets all discussionguidelines.• Meets some discussionguidelines, butsome areas needdevelopment.• Several areasof discussionguidelines needdevelopment.• Student states ideaswith relevant supportingevidence from severalof the following: contentpresented in class,experience, legitimatesources.• Student statesideas with relevantsupporting evidencefrom contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sources.• Student sometimesstates ideas usingrelevant supportingevidence from contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sources.• Student rarely ornever states ideasusing relevantsupporting evidencefrom contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sources.• Student consistentlyuses ample contentvocabulary appropriately.• Scientific statements arefactual and thorough.• Student is able to applyscientific conceptsthrough examples andintegration, even toareas outside the originalcontent.• Student usescontent vocabularyappropriately.• Scientific statementsare factual.• Student appliesscientific conceptsaccurately throughexamples andintegration ofdifferent concepts.• Student is at timesable to use vocabularyappropriately.• Some facts areincorrect.• Student showslimited ability to applyscientific conceptsthrough examples andintegration.• Student rarelyuses vocabularyappropriately. Factsare often incorrect.• Student strugglesto apply scientificconcepts throughexamples andintegration.• Student is able tocorrectly relate one’sown and others’perspectives to schoolsof ethical thought andframeworks or reasoningtools used to arrive atthe various perspectives.• Student demonstratesclear understanding ofstakeholders, values,and issues, as well asthe alternate decisionsthat may be madeaccording to thevarious parties.• Studentdemonstrates use ofethical frameworksand reasoningtools in arriving atperspective.• Student correctlyidentifiesperspective toschools of ethicalthought.• Studentdemonstrates clearunderstandingof stakeholders,values, and issues.• Student demonstratessome use of ethicalframeworks andreasoning tools inarriving at perspective.• Student makes limitedconnections betweenpersonal perspectiveand schools of ethicalthought.• Student demonstrateslimited understandingof stakeholders, values,and issues.• Student arrivesat a perspectivewithout the use ofany framework orreasoning tool.• Student is unableto relate personalperspective to theschools of ethicalthought.• Student is oftenunable to identifystakeholders,values, or issues.114

Rubric for Evaluating Classroom DiscussionsStudent’s tone of voice and body posture implies discourse and discussion rather than a debate or competition.Student acknowledges and respects different viewpoints.Student tries to resolve conflicts that arise in a manner that retains everyone’s dignity.Student advocates for own voice, as well as treats others’ voices with equal importance.Student does not interrupt others.Student does not dominate the conversation.Student critiques ideas rather than people.Student is attentive.Student contributes to enforcing above rules when appropriate.Developed by Rosetta Lee, Seattle Girls School, Seattle, Washington,in collaboration with ‘Ethics in the Science Classroom’ teachers115

Student HandoutNAME___________________________________________________________ Date_________ Period_______Sample Policy Recommendation Letter Assignment“On August 9, 2001, at 9:00 p.m. EDT, the President announced his decision to allowFederal funds to be used for research on existing human embryonic stem cell lines aslong as prior to his announcement (1) the derivation process (which commences withthe removal of the inner cell mass from the blastocyst) had already been initiatedand (2) the embryo from which the stem cell line was derived no longer had thepossibility of development as a human being.”-National Institutes of HealthUnfortunately, these stem cell lines have several limitations. Initially this policy coveredsixty stem cell lines. Only 22 of these lines are now available for research using federalfunding but recent studies have shown they cannot be used in human treatments. Ateam of researchers from the University of California has found that the approved linesare contaminated by mouse feeder cells that were used to grow them. This would leadthe human immune system to attack the cells, making them unusable in any futuretreatments. Researchers cannot use federal funds to derive new uncontaminated linesdue to the August 2001 policy.Your assignment is to write a letter, addressed to the President, with yourrecommendations toward the current policies that restrict federal funding forembryonic stem cell research. In your letter, clearly state whether you support thecurrent policy or you believe there need to be changes to it (and what those changesshould be). Support your reasoning and cite any sources used.TASK: Write a policy recommendation letter containing the following:Pre-write: Use the decision-making model to organize your ideas.1. Describe the ethical dilemma surrounding stem cell research.2. Clearly explain your recommendation(s) concerning funding and regulationsto address the ethical dilemma.3. Provide two supporting ethical arguments.4. Provide two supporting scientific arguments.5. Cite your sources.6. Conclude your letter by thanking the recipient for their time.Length: The paper should not be longer than 3 pages, 12pt font, 1.5 linespacing.Use the evaluation rubric for additional guidelines for meeting criteria.Recommendation Letter Due Date:116

Student HandoutNAME___________________________________________________________ Date_________ Period_______Policy Recommendation Letter EvaluationExemplary Proficient PartiallyProficientDevelopingCommentsRecognizes andUnderstandsMultiplePerspectivesStudent’s ownthinking becomesmore complexand thoroughwith addedperspectives.Studentdemonstratesrecognition andunderstandingof multipleperspectives.Student recognizesand understandssome alternateperspectives.Student strugglesto reflect andparaphrasealternateperspectivesaccurately.CommunicatesIdeas UsingSupportingEvidence2 Ethicalarguments areprovided. Studentstates ideas withrelevant supportingevidence fromseveral of thefollowing: contentpresented inclass, experience,legitimate sourcesthat are cited in thebody of the letterand works cited (atleast 2 sources).2 Ethicalarguments areprovided. Studentstates ideaswith supportingevidencefrom contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sourcescited in the bodyof the letter andworks cited (atleast 2 sources).Fewer than 2ethical arguments.Student sometimesstates ideas usingrelevant supportingevidencefrom contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sources.Fewer than 2ethical arguments.Student rarelyor never statesideas usingrelevant supportingevidencefrom contentpresented in class,experience, orlegitimate sources.DemonstratesUnderstandingand Applicationof ScienceContent2 Scienceargumentsprovided. Studentconsistently usesample contentvocabularyappropriately.Scientificstatements arefactual andthorough. Studentis able to applyscientific conceptsthrough examplesand integration,even to areasoutside the originalcontent.2 Scienceargumentsprovided. Studentuses contentvocabularyappropriately.Scientificstatements arefactual. Studentapplies scientificconceptsaccurately throughexamples andintegration ofdifferent concepts.Fewer than 2Science argumentsprovided. Studentis at times able touse vocabularyappropriately.Some facts areincorrect. Studentshows limitedability to applyscientific conceptsthrough examplesand integration.Fewer than 2Science argumentsprovided.Student rarelyuses vocabularyappropriately.Facts are oftenincorrect. Studentstruggles to applyscientific conceptsthrough examplesand integration.117

Student HandoutExemplary Proficient PartiallyProficientDevelopingCommentsIdentifies andAddressesEthical DilemmaStudent correctlyidentifies dilemmaand clearly explainsmajor viewpointssurrounding debate.Recommendationsfor policy showthoughful reasoningincorporatingboth scientific andethical ideas.Student correctlyidentifiesdilemma and canexpress someunderstandingof viewpoints.Recommendationsfor policy showthoughtfulreasoning,incorporatingboth scientific andethical theories.Studentshows limitedunderstandingof dilemmaand viewpointssurroundingdebate.Recommendationsfor policy arepoorly connectedto scientific andethical ideas.Student incorrectlyidentifies dilemmaand has not shownunderstandingof viewpointssurroundingdebate.Recommendationsare not clearlyconnected toscientific andethical arguments.Timeliness andThoroughness/ Grammar andSpellingStudent metall deadlines.Work meets allguidelines. In-classtime is alwaysused efficientlyand thoughtfully.Evidence alsodemonstrates muchtime spent outsideof class in writingand improving. Nomistakes are madewith sentencestructure, grammar,and spelling.Student metall deadlines.Work meets allguidelines. Inclasstime is oftenused efficientlyand thoughtfully.It is clear thatadditional timeoutside of classwas spent. Fewgrammar andspelling errors.Student metsome deadlines.Work meetssome guidelines.In-class time issometimes usedefficiently andthoughtfully. Workreflects some timespent outside ofclass. Few to manygrammar andspelling mistakes.Student didnot meet eitherdeadlines. Workmeets only a fewof the guidelines.In-class timeis rarely usedefficiently andthoughtfully.Work reflectslittle time spentoutside of class.Many spelling andgrammar mistakes.Assignment and rubric contributed by Jamie Cooke, Mercer Island High School, Mercer Island, WA118

Student HandoutNAME___________________________________________________________ Date_________ Period_______BackgroundLetter to the Editor Writing GuideA Letter to the Editor is a short essay that expresses a writer’s views on a topic and tries to persuade others toaccept or understand that view based on logical arguments. It is an effective way of participating in the dialoguesurrounding an issue in the media.Your Letter to the Editor will provide you a chance to demonstrate your understanding of the issues surroundingthe use of animals in research and allow you to present your opinions in a well-reasoned and thoughtful way. YourLetter should build upon the conclusions you come to as a result of completing the Ethical Decision-Making Model.You will not be graded on your opinion, but rather on how well you support your points and present your case.Your message will be influenced by the vocabulary that you use and by the way your letter is presented, so thesewill also contribute to your score. Be sure to check your final draft against the checklist for the Letter to theEditor requirements.Writing the Letter1 Write a single sentence that sums up your position (sometimes called your thesis statement).This sentence will often contain the words should or should not. Make the statement as specific aspossible. Explain what should be done, who should do it, and any other particulars that will clarify yourposition. If possible, your statement should suggest a particular course of action to address the issue.2. Identify the basic BIOETHICAL PRINCIPLES involved and describe HOW they relate to your position.3. Using the information from your Ethical Decision-Making Model, develop reasons that will support yourposition. How convincing your position is depends largely on the reasons you choose to support it.a. Your Letter to the Editor should have at least THREE reasons, each with its own paragraph.b. Each reason should be clearly DIFFERENT from the other.c. Each reason should RELATE directly to the position statement.d. Each reason should also have some EXAMPLES or EVIDENCE (facts, statistics) behind it.e. Do your reasons:Help support a good general rule for people to follow in similar situations?Help support or develop the character traits we value most as individuals?Respond to the individual needs of those involved and consider relationships among individuals?Respect the rights and dignity of all involved?Produce the most good and do the least harm?4 Pick what you believe to be your opponent’s strongest arguments and be sure to address each ofthose opposing reasons with evidence. Counter them in either a separate paragraph or as part of apreceding paragraph.5. Conclude the letter in a way that ties things together. You may want to end your letter with a suggestion ofsome kind of action that the reader should take.6. Consider the Following:a. Put your full name, address, phone number, and email at the top of the letter so that the newspapercan contact you.b. Identify by headline and date of publication any reference to a letter or article publishedpreviously.c. Address your opponents’ arguments instead of attacking your opponents personally.d. Incorporate personal experience to your letter only if it is relevant.119

Student HandoutNAME___________________________________________________________ Date_________ Period_______Letter to the Editor ChecklistIDEAS and REASONING❏ Clearly states position.❏ Clearly defines Bioethical principle(s) involved.❏ Describes relationship of bioethical principle(s) to position.❏ Clearly states a minimum of 3 reasons.❏ Clearly differentiates each reason from the other.❏ Directly relates each reason to the position statement. Each reason is relevant.❏ Provides credible examples and evidence for each reason.❏ Analyzes and evaluates opponent’s position.❏ Provides effective closing statement.LOGIC and ORGANIZATION❏ Overall format is similar to the following:Position statement and description of bioethical principles involved.Reason 1 – Evidence/ExamplesReason 2 – Evidence/ExamplesReason 3 – Evidence/Examples(Opponents’ position addressed, either as separate paragraph or part of a preceding one)Closing and/or Call to Action❏ Sequence of the writing builds to a high point (has momentum)❏ Smooth transitionsWRITING❏ Voice: personal voice, aware of audience❏ Vocabulary: strong, natural, and avoids repetition and clichés❏ Sentence fluency: writing flows, sentence lengths are varied❏ Conventions: accurate spelling, grammar, and evidence of proofreadingPRESENTATION❏ Appropriate letter format: name and contact information, date, and signature❏ Appropriate use of fonts (10 or 12 point, Arial, Helvetica, Times, or similar)❏ Standard 1 inch margins❏ Presentation enhances the writer’s message.120

SCORING GUIDE LETTER TO THE EDITORIdeas and ReasoningClearly states position.Clearly defines Bioethicalprinciple(s) involved.Clearly states a minimum of3 reasons. Provides credibleexamples and evidence for eachreason.Analyzes and evaluatesopponent’s position.Directly relates each reason tothe position statement. Eachreason is relevant.Provides effective closingstatement.5STRONGShows controland skill inthis trait; manystrengthspresent.4COMPETENTStrengthsoutweigh theweaknesses; asmall amountof revision isneeded.3DEVELOPINGStrengths andneed for revisionare about equal.2EMERGINGNeed for revisionoutweighsstrengths.1NOT YETA barebeginning; writernot yet showingany control.SCORE____X 1 =____X5 =____X 5 =____X 1 =____X 5 =121

SCORING GUIDE LETTER TO THE EDITORLogic and OrganizationFollows overall suggestion fororganization.Effective and logical sequence,good pacing, and smoothtransitions.Builds to a high point, hasmomentum.Sense of resolution.Sentence Fluency, WordChoice, VoiceNatural sentences with a varietyof lengths and structures.No run-ons.Strong vocabulary used. Wordchoice is natural, not forced.Minimal use of repetition,clichés, or abstract language.Awareness of audienceCommitment, involvement, andconviction conveyed. Text islively, personal, and individual.Conventions and PresentationAccurate spelling, punctuation,capitals, paragraphs, grammar.Readable to a wide audience.Evidence of proofreading. Theform and presentation enhancethe writer’s message. Thepresentation is consistent with aletter format.Appropriate use of fonts andfont sizes, margins, spacing.TOTAL SCOREModified with permission from the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Portland, Oregon: 6+1 Traits of Analytic Writing____X 1 =____X 1 =____X 1 =/100122