| Public Release Item Scoring Information |
Return |
Goal 2 Geometry, Measurement, And Reasoning |
Expectation 2.3 The student will apply concepts of measurement using tools and technology when appropriate. |
Indicator 2.3.2 The student will use techniques of measurement and will estimate, calculate, and/or compare perimeter, circumference, area, volume, and/or surface area of two-and three-dimensional figures and their parts. |
Assessment Limits:
- Two-dimensional shapes include polygons, circles, and composite figures.
- Three-dimensional shapes include cubes, prisms, pyramids, cylinders, cones, spheres, and composite figures.
- Formulas will be provided.
- No oblique solids will be used.
- Items may involve applications of geometric properties and relationships.
- Students may be required to make comparisons which do not require calculations.
|
Extended Constructed Response (ECR) Item - Released in 2004 |
A cylindrical tank is shown below. The tank is refilled when the water level reaches
the refill line.
Complete the following on a piece of paper and/or in the answer box below:
- How much water can the entire tank hold? Use mathematics to explain how you
determined your answer. Use words, symbols, or both in your explanation.
- At the beginning of the day the tank is full. How much water can be removed
from the tank before it is necessary to refill the tank? Use mathematics to
explain how you determined your answer. Use words, symbols, or both in your
explanation.
|
The following 4 Sample Student Responses represent a range of score points.
|
| Sample Student Response #1 |
Score for Sample Student Response #1:
Rubric Score 3
Annotation: This response demonstrates a clear understanding and analysis of the problem. The student gives a correct answer (125.6 cubic feet) and a full explanation of a reasonable strategy to calculate volume. For the second part of the problem, a correct answer (113.04 cubic feet), but without any explanation of the strategy, is provided.
|
| Sample Student Response #2 |
Score for Sample Student Response #2:
Rubric Score 2
Annotation: This response demonstrates a conceptual understanding and analysis of the problem. A correct answer (126 ft³) and full explanation of the strategy to determine volume are given. However, no attempt is made to answer the second part of the problem. Compare to Anchor Paper #4.
|
| Sample Student Response #3 |
Score for Sample Student Response #3:
Rubric Score 4
Annotation: This response demonstrates a complete understanding and analysis of the problem. The student provides a correct answer (125.6 ft³) and full explanation of a reasonable strategy to calculate volume. A correct answer (113 ft³) and explanation of a reasonable strategy to calculate the amount of water that can be removed are also given. Compare to Anchor Paper #3.
|
| Sample Student Response #4 |
Score for Sample Student Response #4:
Rubric Score 1
Annotation: This response demonstrates a minimal understanding and analysis of the problem. The student gives an incorrect value (40) with an incorrect unit of measure (square feet), rather than cubic feet. The explanation reveals that an inappropriate strategy of area, rather than volume, was used. While the incorrect value (36) is provided, this answer is relevant because this value correctly represents 9/10ths of what the student states the tank holds. No explanation is provided for the second part of the problem.
|
Extended Constructed Response (ECR) Rubric |
| Print: Scoring Rubric (pdf)
|
Score 4
The response indicates application of a reasonable strategy that leads to a correct solution in the context of the problem. The representations are correct. The explanation and/or justification is logically sound, clearly presented, fully developed, supports the solution, and does not contain significant mathematical errors. The response demonstrates a complete understanding and analysis of the problem. |
Score 3
The response indicates application of a reasonable strategy that may or may not lead to a correct solution. The representations are essentially correct. The explanation and/or justification is generally well developed, feasible, and supports the solution. The response demonstrates a clear understanding and analysis of the problem. |
Score 2
The response indicates an incomplete application of a reasonable strategy that may or may not lead to a correct solution. The representations are fundamentally correct. The explanation and/or justification supports the solution and is plausible, although it may not be well developed or complete. The response demonstrates a conceptual understanding and analysis of the problem. |
Score 1
The response indicates little or no application of a reasonable strategy. It may or may not have the correct answer. The representations are incomplete or missing. The explanation and/or justification reveals serious flaws in reasoning. The explanation and/or justification may be incomplete or missing. The response demonstrates a minimal understanding and analysis of the problem. |
Score 0
The response is completely incorrect or irrelevant. There may be no response, or the response may state, “I don't know.” |
Explanation refers to the student using the language of mathematics to communicate how the student arrived at the solution.
Justification refers to the student using mathematical principles to support the reasoning used to solve the problem or to demonstrate that the solution is correct. This could include the appropriate definitions, postulates and theorems.
Essentially correct representations may contain a few minor errors such as missing labels, reversed axes, or scales that are not uniform.
Fundamentally correct representations may contain several minor errors such as missing labels, reversed axes, or scales that are not uniform.
Last Revised 8/16/00 |
|
/share/clg/xml/public_release/mathematics/2004_232_geo12.xml
