Presentation on theme: "Answering Constructed Response Items on the OGT. Helpful Hints Short Answers – you can earn 2 points Extended Response – you can earn 4 points Always."— Presentation transcript:
Answering Constructed Response Items on the OGT
Helpful Hints Short Answers – you can earn 2 points Extended Response – you can earn 4 points Always circle the verbs (what you do) and underline the details (the “what” part) – Identify two negative environmental consequences of rainforest destruction. Explain the negative impact of each consequence You only EARN points. You do not lose points for wrong information. You do not need to write in sentences or paragraphs. Lists are fine if that is easier for you
Question #1 Thousands of acres of tropical rainforests are cut down each year, primarily for farming and wood products. Identify two negative environmental consequences of rainforest destruction. Explain the negative impact of each consequence. Respond in the space provided in your Answer Document. (4 points)
Scoring Guidelines for Item 1 Score Point Description 4 points identify 2 environmental consequences of rainforest destruction and explains the results of each. 3 points Two consequences and one is explained. 2 points Two environmental consequences of rainforest destruction. OR One environmental consequence and explains the result. 1 point One environmental consequence of rainforest destruction. 0 points The student response does not meet the criteria to earn one point. The response indicates inadequate or no understanding of the task. It may only repeat information from the passage or prompt or provide incorrect or irrelevant information. The student may have written on a different topic or written “I don’t know.”
Score Point: 2 The student response demonstrates a partial understanding of the task by identifying two negative environmental consequences of rainforest destruction without explaining the environmental impact of either consequence (“killing animals and destroying erbal remidies”).
Score Point: 3 The student response demonstrates an understanding of the task by identifying two negative environmental consequences of rainforest destruction but explains the environmental impact of only one consequence. One consequence is the loss of trees which “give off the oxygen people need to survive” with the explanation that without trees, “the oxygen level would decrease and the population could die.” Another consequence is the loss of habitat “for all of the animals that can only survive in that type of environment.” However, no explanation for the consequence is provided.
Score Point: 0 The student response demonstrates no understanding of the task. The response does not identify any negative environmental consequences of rainforest destruction and provides no explanation for any environmental impact. The response that “People use the wood for paper, landscaping, & lots more” and that “there are already enough farming and crops out there” is irrelevant to the question being asked.
Score point 4 : two consequences and two explanations
Question #2 Use the information below to answer question 2. 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 1. The herbicide is applied during week 2, and the weeds are counted again in week 3. The data are shown in the table below.
In a follow-up study, a student allows weeds to grow in a previously cleared plot for several weeks. The student counts the number of weeds and then treats the plot with the recommended dose of herbicide. The student observes that several weeds survive and their offspring soon replace the weeds that were killed by the initial application of the herbicide. Propose a hypothesis to explain why several of the weeds survived the herbicide application. Explain how this hypothesis could be tested. Respond in the space provided in your Answer Document. (2 points)
Scoring Guidelines for Item 2 Score Point Description 2 points logical hypothesis that could explain the survival of the weeds and explains how this hypothesis could be tested scientifically. 1 point Logical hypothesis but, irrelevant explanation. 0 points no understanding of the task. incorrect information or be irrelevant to the task. The student may repeat information from the passage or prompt or may have written “I don’t know.”
Score Point: 2 Logical hypothesis(“those weeds that survived probably had a resistence gene that the ones that died didnt have”) and a full explanation of how the hypothesis could be tested (“taking the plants in for genetic test”).
Score Point: 0 The student response demonstrates no understanding of the task. Neither hypothesis is logical (“because bugs hadn’t got to them yet or they were’nt fully grown”) and neither explains why several of the weeds survived herbicide application.
Score Point: 2 The student response demonstrates a complete understanding of the task by providing both a logical hypothesis that could explain why several of the weeds survived the herbicide application (“Some of the weeds survived because there was an uneven distribution of the herbicide”) and a full explanation of how the hypothesis could be tested (“measuring the level of the chemicals in random plants”).
Question #3 Individuals suffering from debilitating and sometimes terminal diseases often advocate a more rapid development cycle for approving new drug treatments. If the development cycle is accelerated, describe one potential benefit and one potential hazard of treating a disease. Respond in the space provided in your Answer Document. (2 points)
Benefits: If new drug treatments are made available quickly: more lives might be saved. their effectiveness (or lack of effectiveness) can be more quickly evaluated and if necessary, research into alternative treatments will ensue more promptly. Other acceptable responses. Hazards: If new drug treatments are pushed through quickly and not adequately tested: side effects may be overlooked, which could result in complications or death to the users. interactions with other medications may not be properly assessed, resulting in complications. Long-term effects on many individuals may not be identified because of rapid development. Other acceptable responses.
Scoring 2 points – one benefit and one risk 1 point – one benefit OR one risk 0 points – no demonstration of understanding of the task
Score Point: 2 The student response demonstrates a complete understanding of the task by providing a description of a benefit (“more lives could be saved because more people would be affected”) and a hazard (“drug treatment might not be tested enough + so patients might be subjected to side effects”) of speeding up the development cycle for new drugs.
The response describes a benefit (“the disease might not kill them and it could go away”) of a faster acting drug not a faster development process. The response describes a hazard (“the body might not be used to the drug and it might not work”) that is too vague to receive credit. Both responses fail to describe a benefit or a hazard ofspeeding up the drug development cycle. O points
Score Point: 1 The student response demonstrates a partial understanding of the task by describing one benefit (“the disease will get treated faster that it already was”) of speeding up the development cycle for new drugs. A description of a hazard of speeding up the development cycle for new drugs was not provided.
Question #4 A university student wants to perform an experiment using mice as test subjects. The procedure would require the mice to be injected with a specific bacterial infection and then treated with an antibiotic. Their response to the treatment would be observed and recorded. Provide two questions that an ethics review board would raise regarding the proposed work. For each question, explain why it is important that the question be answered prior to granting permission for the experiment. Respond in the space provided in your Answer Document. (4 points)
Answer (Extended Response): (1 pt. for each question) (1 pt. for each explanation) What is the potential for the bacteria being used to cause harm to the mice or result in death? It is important that the mice not suffer needlessly. Will the mice be quarantined? To prevent spread of the infection to other laboratory animals not involved in the experiment. What are the potential side-effects of the antibiotic being used? (or are the potential side-effects of the antibiotic known?) The side effects could be worse than the infection or cause needless suffering. How will the mice be treated throughout the experiment? To verify proper care and feeding of the mice. What will happen to the mice after the experiment is completed? To establish that the mice are treated humanely and not disposed of carelessly or are disposed of humanely. How many mice will be required for the experiment? To make sure that the student did not use too few mice to accurately determine the effects of the treatment or so many as to cause unnecessary exposure and suffering. What is the hypothesis for this experiment? To determine a valid purpose for the experiment. Other acceptable responses.
Score Point: 1 This response provides some understanding of the task by providing two relevant questions that both relate to side effects.
Score Point: 2 This response provides three questions which are likely to be raised by the ethics committee. However, only two may receive credit. This response fails to provide an explanation.