Table of Contents
Item 7: Item and Scoring Guidelines .......................... 1
Item 7: Samples of Scored Student Responses ......... 4
Item 13: Item and Scoring Guidelines ...................... 18
Item 13: Samples of Scored Student Responses ..... 21
Item 25: Item and Scoring Guidelines ...................... 34
Item 25: Samples of Scored Student Responses ..... 58
Item 31: Item and Scoring Guidelines ...................... 59
Item 31: Samples of Scored Student Responses ..... 62
Item 37: Item and Scoring Guidelines ...................... 80
Item 37: Samples of Scored Student Responses ..... 83
Item 43: Item and Scoring Guidelines ...................... 96
Item 43: Samples of Scored Student Responses ... 101
Science
Item 7
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
1
Passage
Cataracts
In 2004, wildlife rescuers found a great horned owl nearly dead from starvation. The
owl’s eyes had formed cataracts, which cloud the natural lens and inhibit the eye’s
ability to focus and form clear images. Cataracts can be inherited or acquired as a
result of aging, disease and/or use of certain medications. Without clear vision, the
owl, named Minerva, had been unable to hunt.
Minerva was taken to the Veterinary School at the University of Wisconsin, Madison,
after a local veterinarian confirmed the presence of cataracts. A pair of lenses
specifically made for owls was implanted in Minerva’s eyes. After the surgery and a
recovery period, Minerva was moved to a large, enclosed area where small rodents
were released and her ability to hunt was to be evaluated. Scientists confirmed that, if
she showed a clear ability to hunt, she would be released back into her natural
habitat.
Item
7.
Provide two reasons why the researcher’s actions in rescuing and operating on
Minerva either were or were not ethical. Respond in the space provided in your
Answer Document.
Sample Response for Item 7 (Short Answer):
No, the researchers did not act ethically. (1 pt. each)
• If the owl’s cataracts are congenital and she produces offspring, the trait may be
passed on resulting in more owls that are “unfit”.
• Once released into her natural habitat, it will be difficult to closely monitor Minerva
for infection or complications that might result from the surgery. This could result
in increased suffering and eventually death.
• In saving Minerva, researchers interfered with the natural selection process. The
blindness prevented Minerva from competing for food with other owls in an
ecosystem where she normally would have been selected against by natural
selection.
• It’s not natural for animals to be kept in an enclosed area.
Yes, the researchers acted ethically. (1 pt. each)
• The researchers reduced the suffering of an animal that would have otherwise died
painfully had they not intervened.
• The owl may be able to be returned to the ecosystem and help to maintain the
natural balance.
2
•
•
•
The great horned owl is endangered/threatened in some areas due to habitat loss
and it is important to protect such species to prevent further disruption of the
natural balance in their ecosystems.
Further research.
Other acceptable responses.
Scoring Guidelines for Item 7:
Score Point
Description
2 points
The student response demonstrates a complete understanding of the
task by providing two reasons for why the researchers actions were
or were not ethical.
OR
The student provides one reason for why the researchers actions
were ethical and one reason for why the researchers actions were
not ethical.
1 point
The student response demonstrates a partial understanding of the
task by providing one reason for why the researchers actions were or
were not ethical.
0 points
The student response demonstrates no understanding of the task.
The response may provide incorrect information or be irrelevant to
the task.
3
Science
Item 7
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
4
Score Point: 0
This response shows no understanding of the underlying
concepts, simply repeating information provided in the
prompt. The response earns a score of “0.”
5
Score Point: 0
This response is very concise, showing no understanding of the
underlying concepts. It simply states, “yes (probably meaning
ethical) because its human nature to help something.” This is
inadequate, and the response receives a score of “0.”
6
Score Point: 0
This response does not address the task. Stating that,
“researcher’s actions in rescuing and operating on Minerva,”
was ethical because, “it makes more sence” fails to provide
a reason. The response receives a score of “0.”
7
Score Point: 0
This response shows no understanding of the underlying
concepts, providing two reasons that are inadequate. The
first, “the owl is a great horned owl so it is popular,” is neither
an ethical nor an unethical reason for saving it. The second,
“it was nearly dead from starvation,” is a copy of the prompt.
As a result, this response earns a score of “0.”
8
Score Point: 1
This response demonstrates partial understanding of the task,
providing one reason why it was unethical to rescue the owl,
that is, “even if the lenses do work…there is a chance that the
allele will be passed down to the owl’s offspring.” This is
adequate for the response to earn a score of “1.”
9
Score Point: 1
This response provides one reason why rescuing the owl was
ethical. The idea here is that if a species is endangered,
“scientists should do everything in their power to not let it
become extinct.” Since this is an acceptable reason, the
response earns a score of “1.”
10
Score Point: 1
This response demonstrates understanding of the underlying
concepts, providing one reason why rescuing the owl was
unethical. It was not ethical because there was “human
interference” with natural selection, since Minerva was
“naturally selected to have cataracts.” Without the
interference, she would have died as intended due to her
condition. This is a valid reason and the response receives a
score of “1.”
11
Score Point: 1
This response provides one reason why rescuing the owl was
ethical. The reason given, that if the researchers had not
rescued the owl that was “almost dead” and done the surgery,
it would have died, is adequate for the response to earn a
score of “1.”
12
Score Point: 2
This response is clear and concise, providing one ethical and
one unethical reason for the researcher’s actions. The
researchers were ethical because they rescued Minerva and
tried to “help her survive.” However, it was unethical because
by doing so they took “an animal out of its natural habitat,”
causing it to be dependent on humans. Since both reasons
are valid, this response receives a score of “2.”
13
-
Score Point: 2
This response is clear and concise, providing two reasons why
the researcher’s actions were ethical. One, “they saved the
life of an owl,” two, they have “given the possibility for more
owls to be made,” (reproduce). Both of thee are valid
reasons and the response receives a score of “2.”
14
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates complete understanding of the
task, providing two reasons why rescuing the owl was ethical.
First, they helped the owl to see by implanting lenses, giving
he a “second chance at surviving.” Second, this act helped
humans by allowing them to learn more about the eye
functions, cataracts and how to “improve the current
technology.” Since this response is clear and complete, it
receives a score of “2.”
15
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates complete understanding of the
task, providing two reasons why rescuing the owl was ethical.
First, they helped the owl to see by implanting lenses, giving
he a “second chance at surviving.” Second, this act helped
humans by allowing them to learn more about the eye
functions, cataracts and how to “improve the current
technology.” Since this response is clear and complete, it
receives a score of “2.”
16
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates complete understanding of the
underlying concepts, providing several reasons why rescuing
the owl was unethical. First, “they (researchers) defeated the
survival of the fittest concept,” and intruded on the natural
habitat. They also “potentially disrupted the food chain.” In
addition, they placed the owl in ”an unfamiliar, or not natural
setting.” The response provides several reasons for unethical
behavior and receives a score of “2.”
17
Science
Item 13
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
18
Passage
Water Temperature Experiment
Students studied the effect of ice on the temperature of a sample of water. First,
they put 500 mL of cold water (at 10°C) into each of four beakers. Next, they
measured and recorded the initial temperature of the water in each beaker.
Then, they added various amounts of ice as shown in the table below. They
continued to measure the temperature over a period of 30 minutes. Their results
are shown in the graph below. The temperature of the room during the
experiment was 22°C.
Data Table
Amount of Ice
(in scoops)
0
1
2
3
Beaker
A
B
C
D
Volume of Water
(in milliliters)
500
500
500
500
Results of Experiment
Temperature ( C)
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
KEY
Beaker A
Beaker B
Beaker C
10
8
6
Beaker D
4
2
0
0
5
10
15
Time (minutes)
20
19
25
30
Item
13.
After reviewing these results, Archie suggested, “The more ice you add to a
drink, the colder the drink will become.” Using data collected in the experiment, write
an explanation to Archie for why his conclusion is incorrect and what effect
additional ice will have on the temperature of his drink. Respond in the space
provided in your Answer Document.
Sample Response for Item 13 (Short Answer):
•
•
Regardless of the amount of ice added, the minimum temperature is about 0
degrees C (as shown with Beakers B, C, and D).
Adding additional ice can PROLONG the amount of time that a drink takes to
increase temperature (e.g., from 5 to 15 minutes, as shown by comparing Beakers
B, C, and D).
Scoring Guidelines for Item 13
Score point
Description
2 points
The student response uses the data to explain why the conclusion is
incorrect and provides an explanation of the results of adding
additional ice to a drink.
1 point
The student uses the data to explain why the conclusion is incorrect.
OR
The student explains what effect additional ice will have on the
temperature of a drink.
0 points
The student response demonstrates no understanding of the task or
concept. The response may provide an incorrect solution and
supporting information may be totally irrelevant to the task.
Scoring note: Archie's conclusion cannot be supported by the data.
The scale on the graph is not significant for scoring purposes.
20
Science
Item 13
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
21
Score Point: 0
This response does not address the effect of adding more ice
to the temperature of the drink. The conclusion provided, “the
ice will only keep the drink cooler for a short amount of time,”
is correct because ice will eventually melt, but it does not
discuss how this is affected by the amount of ice. As a result,
the response can only get a score of “0.”
22
Score Point: 0
This response incorrectly states that, “if you add more ice the
water will be colder.” This same concept is then elaborated
and no further information provided. As a result, this response
gets a score of “0” for showing no understanding.
23
Score Point: 0
This response demonstrates no understanding of the task,
stating incorrectly that, “the more ice you add…the colder it
will get.” In addition, it is stated that, “the less ice add the
longer it will take the drink to get cold.” Neither of these
statements is correct and the response receives a score of “0.”
24
Score Point: 0
This response provides a correct statement about thermal
energy, but does not address any part of the question, i.e. the
effect of adding more ice to the drink. As a result, the response
get a score of “0” for showing no understanding.
25
Score Point: 1
This response show some understanding stating that “more ice
may…keep it colder longer.” No explanation is provided for the
effect of adding more ice initially and supporting data is not
provided, so this response receives a score of “1.”
26
Score Point: 1
This response shows partial understanding, explaining the
effect of ice over time, “might just take longer for more ice
to melt.” No explanation is provided for the effect of
adding more ice to the initial temperature so the response
receives a score of “1.”
27
Score Point: 1
This response correctly addresses the question, stating that,
“when you increase the amount of ice, the drink stays the
same temperature, and doesn’t get any cooler.” This response
fails to provide data from the experiment as evidence. It
receives a score of “1” for partially completing the task.
28
Score Point: 1
This response demonstrates partial understanding of the task,
answering only the first part of the item correctly. It is stated
that, “ice ... will make the water colder, but if you keep putting
more in it will not go any cooler than the temperature of the
ice.” This is a correct statement, but provides no data from the
experiment as evidence. The response receives a score of “1.”
29
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates complete understanding of the
task, using information form the table accurately. The first
conclusion, “when 1, 2 and 3 scoops of ice were added, the
water all still became 0°,” is correct and a further
clarification is added that more ice will not reduce the
temperature below 0. In addition, the effect of the amount
of ice on how long it takes for the drink to get warmer is
given, “water w/more ice gets warmer slower than those
w/less ice.” Since all parts of the item have been answered
correctly, this response gets a score of “2.”
30
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates understanding of the task, stating
that, “at first the drink will get cold, and after a few minutes it
begins to heat up.” This is further clarified with the idea that
more ice will mean it takes longer to heat up and the lowest
temperature of the drink will be 0° C. Since all results have
been correctly explained, this response gets a score of “2.”
31
Score Point: 2
This response clearly explains why Archie’s conclusion is
incorrect, “additional ice will not make this drink colder,
because it will not go below freezing.” The effect of putting
additional ice is also explained, “will only make the drink
colder for a longer amount of time.” Since the response
demonstrates complete understanding, it receives a score of
“2.”
32
Score Point: 2
This response demonstrates complete understanding of the task,
using the information provided to conclude that, “adding more
ice only slightly affects the lowest temperature.” A correct
explanation is also given for the effect of adding more ice, “will
make the drink stay colder longer.” Since all elements of the
task have been answered correctly, this response gets a score
of “2.”
33
Science
Item 25
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
34
Passage
Telemedicine is defined as the practice of medicine from a distance. It allows doctors
to communicate with patients and other health care workers from a remote area.
Early ways of transmitting medical information included the postal service and
telegraph. Identify two advances in technology that have improved the speed and
accuracy of modern telemedicine.
Item
25.
Explain how each improves the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
Respond in the space provided in your Answer Document. (4 points)
Sample Response for Item 25 (Extended Response):
Advance in Technology (1 point
each)
Telephone systems
Explanation of Improvement
(1point each)
• Faster telephone
communication between
doctors and patients
allows treatment to begin
much more quickly
• Treatment can begin at the
remote location before
and during transport to a
hospital or medical center
• Complex diagnosis and
treatment may be
permitted by
teleconferences between
multiple doctors at various
locations
• More than one doctor can
consult with other experts
to help make informed
diagnosis or treatment
35
Closed-circuit television systems
or video conferencing
•
•
Fax machines
Or
Computer technologies / email /
Internet
•
•
•
•
Robotic remote surgery
•
Satellite communications
•
Remote Monitoring Technologies
•
Complex diagnosis and
treatments may be
prepared by more than
one doctor that can
consult with other experts
Allows a doctor in one
location to diagnose and
recommend treatment to a
doctor and patient in a
different location via twoway TV
Allows sharing/use of
higher quality and greater
quantity of information to
help make a more
accurate diagnosis or
more effective treatment
Allow doctors and patients
to transmit information,
files and/or prescriptions
Permits transfer of
photographs of injuries or
other physically affected
areas
Computer conference with
specialists in other
locations
Allows doctors to perform
some types of operations
from a distance
Allows doctors to
communicate with each
other and with hospitals
and patients from all over
the world to inform
treatment or diagnosis
Allows quick response
when a condition is
deemed serious/life
threatening through
communication of
36
Other acceptable responses
•
patients’ medical vital
signs via remote sensing
imagery systems.
Other acceptable
responses
Scoring Guidelines for Item 25:
Score point
Description
4 points
The response identifies two technological advancements and
explains how each improves the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
3 points
The response identifies two technological advancements and
explains how one of these advancements improves the ability of
doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
Or
The response identifies one technological advancement and
explains two different ways that this advancement improves the
ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
Or
The response identifies one technological advancement and
explains one way that this advancement improves the ability of
doctors to treat or diagnose patients. The response also explains
another way telemedicine improves the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
2 points
The response identifies two technological advancements but the
explanations are unclear or absent.
OR
The response identifies one technological advancement and
explains how it improves the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose
patients.
OR
The response explains two different ways telemedicine improves the
ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients. The response does
not identify the two corresponding technological advancements.
1 point
The response identifies only one technological advancement.
OR
37
The response explains one way telemedicine improves the ability of
doctors to treat or diagnose patients. The response does not identify
the corresponding technological advancement.
0 points
The response indicates inadequate or no understanding of the task.
The response may provide incorrect or irrelevant information.
38
Science
Item 25
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
39
Score Point: 0
This response identifies several types of transportation (planes,
ambulance, helicopter) but does not discuss communication
during the transport of the patient, and therefore does not
receive credit.
40
Score Point: 0
Although this response begins with the idea that people can be
diagnosed a lot faster, it fails to explain how that diagnosis
occurs, e.g., faster communication, or conferencing between
multiple experts. The remainder of the response discusses
stronger prescriptions and is irrelevant to the task.
41
Score Point: 0
This response names two advances (more accurate testing devices,
heart and other body replacements), but the advances are not in
telemedicine and are irrelevant to the task.
42
Score Point: 0
This response names two advances (chemotherapy and bone
marrow transplants). Although these are advances in
medicine, they are not advances in telemedicine and are
therefore irrelevant to the task.
43
Score Point: 1
This response names two advances (army transportation,
telephone), but only the telephone is considered a
technological advancement for telemedicine. The response
does not attempt to explain how either advancement improves
the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
44
Score Point: 1
This response identifies one technological advancement, the
computer, that improves the speed and accuracy of telemedicine.
There is no attempt to explain how the advancement improves the
ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
45
Score Point: 1
This response indicates that sending mail via a computer or the
internet is a technological advancement, but it does not
explain how it improves the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
46
Score Point: 1
This response correctly identifies one technological
advancement (the Internet) but does not explain how it
improves the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients.
The attempt at identifying a second advance in telemedicine
(advances in the postal service) does not receive any credit, as
it is not considered telemedicine and was given in the prompt.
47
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies two technological
advancements, computers and fax machine, but does not
explain how they improve the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
48
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies two technological
advancements, the Internet and phones and cell phones, but
the explanations do not offer information not already given in
the prompt, and therefore do not receive credit.
49
Score Point: 2
This response explains two different ways telemedicine
improves the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose patients,
but does not identify the corresponding technological
advancements.
50
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies one advance, the Internet, in
telemedicine and explains the benefit, “a way to send
messages back and forth all across the world, and this can
give doctors a huge edge to see what to do or how to
diagnose the patient.” The radio is not considered
telemedicine and does not receive any credit.
51
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies on advance (computer)
and explains one way it has improved the ability of doctors
to treat or diagnose patients, search symptoms online. Easy
access of computerized medical charts does not receive
credit because it doesn’t refer to telemedicine but file
storage in the doctor’s office. The x-ray machine is not
considered an advance in telemedicine and does not
receive any credit.
52
Score Point: 3
This response correctly identifies two technological
advancements, computers and fax machines, but only explains
how computers improve the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
53
Score Point: 3
This response identifies two technological advancements,
telephone and the Internet. The explanation of the telephone
improving doctors’ ability to treat or diagnose patients by
allowing them to give directions in case of emergency is
acceptable. Setting up appointments and getting medicine is
not a valid explanation of telemedicine. The explanation of the
Internet, specifically email, is general and does not discuss an
improved ability to treat or diagnose patients and does not
receive credit.
54
Score Point: 4
This response names three technological advancements, the
Internet, web cam, and telephone, which receive two points. The
explanation of “allows them to comunate face to face and send
pictures” is sufficient to explain how the Internet has improved
doctors’ abilities to treat or diagnose patients. The explanation of
the telephone as an advance is not exclusive to
treating/diagnosing patients and does not receive credit.
55
Score Point: 4
This response correctly identifies two technological
advancements, computer and phone, and describes how each
one improves the ability of doctors to diagnose or treat
patients.
56
Score Point: 4
This response correctly identifies two technological
advancements, email and telephone, and explains how each
one has improved the ability of doctors to treat or diagnose
patients by providing a quick exchange of information.
57
Score Point: 4
This response correctly identifies three technological
advancements, telephone, high speed Internet and video
camera. This receives two points. The explanations of these
advances are “the doctor can communicate in real time” and
the video camera provides a venue to “see what is going on…”
for a more effective diagnosis.
58
Score Point: 4
This response identifies tow services of telecommunications,
prescription refill numbers and Advice nurse, and explains how
each one has improved the ability of doctors to treat or
diagnose patients.
59
Science
Item 31
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
60
Item
31.
Identify two savings that result from recycling aluminum cans and explain one
ecological benefit of each. Respond in the space provided in your Answer
Document.
Sample Response for Item 31 (Extended Response):
•
•
•
Energy required to mine raw materials (such as aluminum ore) would be saved. OR
Energy required to transport raw materials would be saved. OR
Energy required to process raw materials would be saved.
¾ The ecological benefit to saving energy is that nonrenewable fossil fuels are
conserved.
•
•
Nonrenewable raw materials and/or natural resources would be conserved. OR
Materials could be reused to make new products.
¾ The ecological benefit is less mining, which may disturb ecosystems and cause
localized environmental degradation.
•
Water used in processing would be saved.
¾ The ecological benefit to saving water is that ground water aquifers are
maintained and that less reservoir space is needed for water to support
industrial processes.
•
Energy and associated costs of litter collection of discarded cans would be saved
(e.g., aesthetics and safety issues).
Landfill space and fuel for landfill maintenance would be saved.
¾ The ecological benefit to reduced landfill is less impact on the local
environment for landfill space and reduced concentrations of metals and other
chemicals leaching into ground and surface water.
(NOTE: Reduction in pollution alone does not receive credit)
•
•
Other acceptable responses.
Scoring Guidelines for Item 31:
Score Point
Description
4 points
The student response identifies two savings that result from recycling
aluminum cans and explains an ecological benefit of each.
61
3 points
The student response identifies two savings that result from recycling
aluminum cans and explains an ecological benefit of one.
2 points
The student response identifies two savings that result from recycling
aluminum cans but the explanations are either absent or unclear
(e.g., “If you recycled aluminum cans, you wouldn’t need as much
aluminum for new cans because you could use the recycled
aluminum. Also, all those recycled cans would not be going in the
trash, so that is good for the environment.”).
OR
The student response identifies one savings that results from
recycling aluminum cans and explains an ecological benefit.
1 point
The student response identifies one savings that results from
recycling aluminum cans but the explanation is either absent or
unclear.
OR
The student response explains one ecological benefit.
0 points
The student response indicates inadequate or no understanding of
the task. The response may provide incorrect or irrelevant
information.
62
Science
Item 31
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
63
Score Point: 0
This response fails to identify a savings for recycling aluminum
cans. It also fails to explain any ecological benefits.
64
-
Score Point: 0
The response “saving the environment” does not receive credit
as an identified savings. The response “helping you community”
does not earn credit as an explanation of the ecological benefit.
65
Score Point: 1
This response does not receive credit for identifying a savings
associated with recycling aluminum cans because “being held
responsible for greater use” is vague and irrelevant. The
statement, “you help them by them having more material” earns
a point for saving.
66
Score Point: 1
This response identifies an ecological benefit, “will help the
animals because they won’t get hurt or cut,” and receives
credit.
67
Score Point: 1
This response names a savings, “we have less items in making
them so we save on the items used in making the cans,” but does
not explain the ecological benefit. The remainder of the
response is too general to receive any credit.
68
Score Point: 1
This response identifies a savings, “can be used to make more
and more,” but the attempt to explain an ecological benefit,
“none of a pop can cannot go to waste” Is too general to
receive credit.
69
Score Point: 1
This response fails to identify a savings. This response
receives credit for an acceptable ecological benefit,
“you aren’t polluting the earth” with an acceptable
explanation, “you can use them over and over.”
70
Score Point: 1
This response identifies a savings that results from recycling,
“saves people money because the aluminum doesn’t cost as
much.” The benefit identified, “not hurting the ozone layer,” is
not relevant in responding to the task.
71
Score Point: 2
This response indicates that energy and the associated costs of litter
collection of discarded cans would be saved resulting in the
ecological benefit of improving aesthetics, “lakes, rivers and oceans
can be more clean…more fresh looking” and receives two points.
72
Score Point: 2
This response identifies two savings resulting from recycling,
“space in waste holts and it saves money.” There is no
attempt to discuss the ecological benefits.
73
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies a savings, “making aluminum
cheaper,” and it also provides an ecological benefit, “you won’t
have to drill and blow up our earth,” and therefore receives two
points.
74
Score Point: 3
This response correctly identifies two savings, natural resources
and electricity. One ecological benefit is given, “landfills aren’t
too large that we need more,” and the response receives three
points.
75
Score Point: 3
This response correctly identifies two savings, “space in
landfills” and “the need for new aluminum, “ and explains an
ecological benefit of landfills, “less waste is being put in the
ground so this helps out the ecosystem surrounding it.” This
response receives three points.
76
Score Point: 3
This response correctly identifies two savings, “the amount of
aluminum the earth has” and “space in dumps/landfills.” It
explains one ecological benefit, less pollution, with great detail.
77
Score Point: 4
This response names two savings from recycling, “reduce the
use of unreplaceable materials” and “reduces the mining.” It
explains the ecological benefits of each, “don’t use
everything up on earth” and “don’t destroy land around
mines.”
78
Score Point: 4
This response identifies two savings from recycling aluminum,
“less new material needed” and “space in landfills.” It
explains the ecological benefits of each, “reduced need for
destructive mining” and “reduced amount of garbage.”
79
Score Point: 4
This response correctly identifies two savings from recycling,
“natural resources are preserved” and “won’t have as much
stuff in landfills.” It explains and ecological benefit of each,
“ground pollution is reduced” and “less soil erosion.”
80
Science
Item 37
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
81
Passage
A group of students designs an experiment to test how an herbicide affects pepper
plants and weeds. Eight plots are tested, each of which holds 25 pepper plants and a
variety of weeds. Plots 1 and 2 are not treated; plots 3 – 8 are treated with varying
amounts of weed-killing herbicide. The weeds are counted in each plot during week
one. The herbicide is applied during week two, and the weeds are counted again in
week three. The data are shown in the table below.
Effects of Herbicide on Plant Growth
Plot
Herbicide Dose
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
No herbicide application
No herbicide application
50% of recommended dose
50% of recommended dose
100% of recommended dose
100% of recommended dose
150% of recommended dose
150% of recommended dose
Number of
Pepper Plants
That Die Before
Producing Fruit
3
5
3
3
4
6
12
15
82
Week 1
Number of
Weeds
Week 3
Number
of Weeds
30
35
42
43
47
42
43
45
33
40
24
14
7
3
2
5
Item
37.
Based on the results of this experiment, a farmer has decided to use a 150%
application of the herbicide to kill weeds in his fields. Describe one advantage
and one disadvantage of using the 150% dose of herbicide. Respond in the
space provided in your Answer Document. (2 points)
Sample Response for item 37 (Short Answer):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Advantage: A large number of weeds are killed with a 150% application. (NOTE:
The number of weeds killed must be quantified. “Kills weeds” or “less weeds” does
not work as a comparison. All dosages kill weeds.)
Advantage: There will be reduced competition between crop plants and weeds.
Disadvantage: Surviving weeds will reproduce and repopulate the field with highly
resistant offspring.
Disadvantage: More pepper plants were killed.
Disadvantage: Cost.
Disadvantage: Potential to kill other plants and animals.
Other Acceptable Responses
Scoring Guidelines for Item 37:
Score Point Description
2 points
The student response describes one advantage and one disadvantage of
using the 150% application of herbicide.
1 point
The student response describes one advantage OR one disadvantage of
using the 150% application of herbicide.
0 points
The student response demonstrates no understanding of the task. The
response may provide incorrect information or be irrelevant to the task.
83
Science
Item 37
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
84
Score Point: 0
This response does not describe an advantage and/or
disadvantage of using a 150% application of herbicide. It
receives no credit.
85
Score Point: 0
This response (grow healthier…can die) is not a specific
description of an advantage or disadvantage. It does not
receive credit.
86
Score Point: 0
This response provides an advantage, killing weeds, which occurs in
all herbicide-treated plots and therefore is not specific enough to
receive credit.
87
Score Point: 0
This response is vague, “kill a lot more” and “kill something”
and is not specific enough to receive credit for either an
advantage and/or disadvantage.
88
Score Point: 0
The response states “the number of pepper plants would
increase” and is incorrect. The indication that the number of
weeds would decrease is not specific enough to receive credit.
89
Score Point: 0
The response identifies one advantage, “there will be no weeds,
that is incorrect. After application, the chart indicates varying
quantities of weeds remain in all the plots. The stated
disadvantage (herbicide is a chemical which could be very
dangerous) is not specific enough to receive credit. It fails to
describe the danger.
90
Score Point: 0
This response describes one advantage, “the number of weeds
will decrease,” which is not specific enough to receive credit.
The stated disadvantage, “the crops might die,” is incorrect
and does not receive credit.
91
Score Point: 1
This response identifies an acceptable disadvantage, “using
more than recommended may harm the environment by killing
animals and getting into the water.” The stated advantage, “he
would not have any weeds,” is incorrect since varying quantities
of weeds remain in all treated plots.
92
Score Points: 2
This response correctly identifies one advantage (more weeds
will die) and one disadvantage (more pepper plants will die)
in using the 150% application of herbicide.
93
Score Point: 2
This response correctly indicates on advantage, “there will be
a significant decrease of weeds” and correctly identifies one
disadvantage, “it will kill a large amount of his crops off.”
94
Score Point: 2
This response correctly identifies on advantage, “it kills the
most weeds” and one disadvantage, “more pepper plants will
die.”
95
Score Point: 2
This response correctly describes an advantage in using 150%
of the recommended dose of herbicide’ “number of weeds
was drastically reduced.” The response also correctly
identifies on disadvantage, “many pepper plants were killed
by that much herbicide." The response correctly uses the
chart to compare the effect on pepper plants in plots treated
with different amounts of the herbicide.
96
Science
Item 43
Spring 2006
Item and Scoring Guidelines
97
Passage
Snowboarding Science
A snowboarder begins his run from rest (point 1) on top of a hill. He moves
straight down the slope until he reaches the bottom of the hill (point 4) and the
ground levels off. The snowboarder continues to move horizontally across the
level ground and eventually comes to a stop (point 5).
98
Item
43.
Using the same board, the snowboarder decides to make
another run down the hill to see if he can increase his speed.
Describe one thing the snowboarder could do to increase his
speed on the slope. Explain why this would cause his speed to
increase. Respond in the space provided in your Answer
Document.
Sample Response for Item 43 (Short Answer):
Descriptions
• Crouch lower on the board.
Explanations
• This would result in reducing
wind friction against him
(make him more
aerodynamic) and thereby,
for example, result in a larger
net force to accelerate him.*
•
Wax the bottom of the board
(or use “race paste”).
•
This would result in reducing
the friction between the board
and the snow and thereby, for
example, result in a larger net
force to accelerate him.*
•
Push off the snow (push
backward against snow).
•
This would result in a larger
initial acceleration allowing
him to start off at a higher
speed.
•
Other acceptable responses.
•
Note: Responses which focus on explaining “this reduces friction”
may also, but are not required to additionally focus on explaining
that “this results in a larger net force or acceleration.”
Scoring Guidelines for Item 43:
Score Point
Description
2 points
The student response demonstrates a complete
understanding of the task by describing one thing
the snowboarder could do to increase his speed on
99
the slope and explains why this would increase his
speed.
1 point
The student response demonstrates a partial
understanding of the task by describing one thing
the snowboarder could do to increase his speed on
the slope.
OR
The response explains that this action reduces
friction but does not describe the action that
(reducing friction) increases speed.
OR
The student explains that the snowboarder needs to
increase the net force or acceleration by reducing
friction during the ride but fails to indicate how.
0 points
The student response demonstrates no
understanding of the task. The response may
provide incorrect information or be irrelevant to the
task.
100
Additional Scoring Notes:
“Describe one thing...to do to increase speed...”
• Credit is not awarded for descriptions that merely/only
reshape/reconfigure the hill (e.g. make the hill steeper, start
higher up on the hill). The shape/height is a constant.
“Explain why this would cause...speed to increase”
• Credit is not awarded for explanations that merely/only
describe that the initial kinetic energy or momentum is
greater without adding that this means that the kinetic
energy, momentum or speed is greater through the system
(e.g. from the top to the bottom of the slope).
Additional Sample Response:
Description
• Get a running start
Explanation #1
• This would overcome static friction (e.g. break the board
loose, from sticking on the snow or ice) that acts to hold the
board back from being pulled down the hill by gravity.
Explanation #2
• Starting with a greater speed at the top of the hill will lead
to this speed being added to or increased more because
going down a slope causes the speed to constantly
increase all the way to the bottom.
101
Science
Item 43
Spring 2006
Samples of Scored Student Responses
102
Score Point: 0
This response describes that “staying in balance and going
off a steeper hill,” will increase speed. Staying in balance is
necessary to be on the snowboard and suggesting the
shape of the hill can be changed is not responsive to the
task. This response gets a score of “0.”
103
Score Point: 0
This response does not demonstrate understanding of the task.
The suggestion to “wear more clothing” so the pull of gravity
would be greater thereby increasing speed is incorrect. The
response gets a score of “0.”
104
Score Point: 0
This response describes that the snowboarder “go to higher
than 10m” which is not feasible since the hill shown in the
problem is flat at that point. Suggesting going higher would
increase speed does not correctly respond to the tasks. This
response gets a score of “0.”
105
Score Point: 0
This response describes that the snowboarder “start flat by point
one,” and explains that “he would then get more acceleration.”
This shows lack of understanding how acceleration will
increase. The response receives a score of “0.”
106
Score Point: 1
This response describes a way to increase speed, “go down
the same path, because it is smoothed out.” The response
does not explain why going down the smoothed out path
would increase the snowboarder’s speed on the slope. The
response gets a score of “1.”
107
Score Point: 1
This response describes a way for increasing speed, “crouch
on the board.” It provides an incorrect explanation, “lowers
his center of gravity, thus increasing his gravitational potential
energy.” The response receives a score of “1.”
108
Score Point: 1
This response describes how the snowboarder could increase
his speed, “rub wax or soap o the bottom of his board.” The
explanation for why speed will increase is incorrect,
“decrease the kinetic energy and increase the gravity
potential energy.” The response gets a score of “1.”
109
Score Point: 1
This response describes one way the snowboarder could
increase his speed on the slope, “bend down.” The
explanation for why speed would increase, “all his weight
would be at the bottom of the board,” does not show
understanding of why this action would increase speed on the
slope. The response receives a score of “1.”
110
Score Point: 2
This response correctly describes a way for the snowboard to
increase speed on the slope, “have someone push him.” A
correct explanation is provided that by being pushed, “kinetic
energy would be greater and he would go farther than point
5.” Therefore, this response receives a score of “2.”
111
Score Point: 2
This response describes a good way to increase speed, “the
snowboarder could run faster and get more momentum before
he hits point 1.” A correct explanation is also given that
having “faster momentum when he starts” and as he went
down the hill his speed “increases more.” This is adequate for
the response to get a score of “2.”
112
Score Point: 2
This response correctly describes how “wax or some kind of
lubricant” can be used on the base of the snowboard to
increase speed. A correct explanation is provided as to why
this would increase speed, “reduces friction between the
snowboard and the snow,” getting the response a score of “2.”
113
Score Point: 2
This response correctly describes a way for the snowboarder to
increase his speed, “bend his knees and hunch over.” A
correct explanation is given as to why this would increase his
speed, “less surface area means less air resistance,” and “air
resistance slows you down.” Therefore this response receives a
score of “2.”
114