CRITERION Language use a. Application of Social Studies Content b.

Analysis is supported with textual evidence

EXEMPLARY - uses significant, focused content vocabulary to provide an in-depth analysis of the text - uses connected, thoughtful examples and detailed textual evidence to express opinion and new learning - asks questions that would likely encourage a response that is: pertinent comprehensive engaging - speaks loudly and clearly - stays focused, invites other people into discussion, references the remarks of others & moves the discussion to a deeper level

PROFICIENT - uses relevant content vocabulary to provide an analysis of the text

DEVELOPING - uses some content vocabulary to provide an analysis of the text

EMERGING - uses basic language with little to no content vocabulary that result in a retelling of information - uses irrelevant, unconnected examples that result in confusion and very little textual evidence - asks questions that would likely encourage a response that is: irrelevant sketchy minimally engaging - needs to improve volume and clarity - limits contributions to single statement/ question; mostly nonverbal responses (nodding head, smiling, shrugging)

- uses connected examples and textual evidence to express opinion and new learning - asks questions that would likely encourage a response that is: focused detailed interesting - speaks at an appropriate volume and mostly clearly - stays focused and invites others into the discussion

- uses a few examples and some textual evidence to express opinion and new learning - asks questions that would likely encourage a response that is: on-topic sufficient ordinary - can be heard mostly, but needs to improve enunciation - sometimes strays from topic or makes few remarks

Discussion skills a. Asking questions

b. c.

Voice Focus

Rubric for Taking Cornell Notes during the Discussion of a Factual (non-fiction) Text CRITERION Notes EXEMPLARY - key points, questions and arguments are selectively and accurately paraphrased PROFICIENT - key points, questions and arguments are paraphrased, although not completely accurate and clear - sections are properly and logically set up - most heading and titles are present and precise DEVELOPING - key points, questions and arguments are written word for word from the discussion resulting in unclear/incomplete notes - sections are set up properly; need to be set up logically - few headings and titles are present and precise EMERGING - key points and questions are written word for word; few/no arguments are noted; much of the content lacks meaning - sections need to be set up in Cornell format - headings and titles need to be incorporated and/or made more precise

Layout

- sections are properly and logically set up - all headings and titles are present and precise