SUMMATIVE PERFORMANCE TASK

How can maps contribute to our understanding of local water quality issues?

OUTLINE

*For more detailed instructions, see the full lesson plan. 

The students will write a map-centric data report about the water quality data they collected.

The instructions for this assignment can be found in this document. 

The students will write an essay based on the following prompts: 

  • Summarize the water quality data we collected. Be sure to include reference to the maps we created throughout this lesson. 
  • Give your analysis of the data we collected. Make arguments about what it means, and back those arguments up using map evidence. 
  • Using the correlation maps we created, describe the relationship between our data and at least one set of publicly available data (positive, negative, or no correlation). Then, explain the significance (or insignificance) of that relationship. 
  • Write about the data map you created (include a full-page copy of the map here). 
  • Defend the claim that your map is “reliable.” 
  • Defend the claim that your map is “readable.” 
  • Explain how and why you revised your map after the second round of data collection. 

The students must submit their data map and make references to it throughout their essay. Depending on how they choose to answer the prompts, they may also need to include the preliminary testing map they created as a class. 

Consider having your students hold onto the original version of their data map (before revisions). That way, you can ask them to turn in both versions of their map, allowing you to see what revisions they made after receiving feedback and participating in the second round data collection. 

Consider putting an interdisciplinary spin on this assessment by asking the students to analyze their data from a scientific perspective, as well. This would allow you to grade the data report according to both geographic and scientific standards.

 

ASSESSMENT

Grade the students’ data reports based on the following criteria

  • Did the student provide an accurate summary of the data the class collected, complete with helpful map references? 
  • Did the student’s map meet the following criteria?
    • Did the student enter their data into the map correctly?
    • Did the student choose an appropriate base map and scale?
    • Did the student create a clear and accurate key?
    • Did the student use symbols/icons and colors efficiently and effectively?
    • Is the student’s map eye-catching?
    • Is the student’s map easy to read (i.e. not too busy or crowded)?
    • Does the student’s map include interactive elements, and do they work properly?
    • Does the student’s map feature any indicators of reliability? (e.g. replicated data, an explanation of how the data was collected, etc.)
  • Did the student adequately defend the claim that their map is “reliable”? 
  • Did the student adequately defend the claim that their map is “readable”? 
  • Was the student’s analysis of the data insightful and logical? Did the student make arguments about what the data means and back them up with map evidence? 
  • Did the student demonstrate an accurate understanding of the term “correlation,” including the fact that it is distinct from causation?
  • Did the student accurately explain the relationship between their own data and at least one set of publicly available data (positive, negative, or no correlation), as well as the significance of that relationship?
  • Did the student give a thorough explanation of how they revised their map after a second round of data collection?