Glacial- Question 2 (10 Points)
Using your prior background knowledge on the topic of glacial mass
balance, please explain in your own words why glaciers would
retreat. Why would global warming cause the retreat of alpine
glaciers?
Scoring Guide:
0 - Left blank
1 - Answer attempted, but makes only partial sense
2 - 8: Answer makes progressively more use of of concepts presented in lecture, the
readings, or both. Higher scores include more detail about glacial mass balance processes
and their link to global warming. Scores on the lower end will just present the bare
basics, where as scores on the higher end will show evidence of the student's
understanding of glacial mass balances.
9-10 - Requires that the writing be well crafted.
Key Guidance: This is
where students who did
not read or listen to
lecture get exposed. You
are welcome to modify
the score & feedback to
match the answer.
Great answer that explains
how warming would
translate to glacial
changes, through the
spectacles of glacial
processes. Very well
written.
Great answer that explains
how warming would
translate to glacial
changes, through the
spectacles of glacial
processes. Well written.
Great answer that explains
how warming would
translate to glacial
changes, through the
Score
Feedback
10
Your answer shows that you linked the specific readings in
this lab to processes of glacial mass balance analyzed in
the readings and lectures. Not only that, your answer was
well crafted.
9
Your answer shows that you linked the specific readings in
this lab to processes of glacial mass balance analyzed in
the readings and lectures. Not only that, your answer was
well crafted.
8
Your answer shows that you linked the specific readings in
this lab to processes of glacial mass balance analyzed in
the readings and lectures. However, higher scores are
reserved for answers that are well written.
spectacles of glacial
processes. Written
adequately
Great answer that explains
how warming would
translate to glacial
changes, through the
spectacles of glacial
processes. Written poorly.
Answer sort of explains
how warming would
translate to glacial
changes, through the
spectacles of glacial
processes. Written poorly.
6
4
Very minimal answer.
2
Nothing uploaded
0
Your answer shows that you linked the specific readings in
this lab to processes of glacial mass balance analyzed in
the readings and lectures. However, your writing needs to
be better crafted. It is critical that you proof-read your
writing. One way to do this is to read what you wrote out
loud.
Your answer dances around how global warming would
cause the retreat of mountain glaciers, however the scoring
guide indicated that you really needed to go into detail on
glacial processes and how the mass balance of the glacier
works. Also However, your writing needs to be better
crafted. It is critical that you proof-read your writing.
One way to do this is to read what you wrote out
loud.
This essay forms one-tenth of all of the points in the lab.
It sets up the entire activity by asking you to review
lecture and reading materials about how glaciers work.
You take that knowledge and analyze readings related to
the general issue of global warming. Your answer really
did not engage the question with any depth.
Your answer was left blank.
Glacial- Question 3 (4 Points)
After reading each article, please finish a scientific hypothesis for what Hecht and Pelto
would expect to find if they examined 150 years of historical records of maps and photos of
one glacial system in the Cascades of the Pacific Northwest USA. (4 points)
Scoring Guide for Each Hypothesis:
0 - not attempted or makes little sense
1- student presents a only a partially correct summary of the author's position
2 - student presents a clear and correct summary of the author's position
Hecht’s Hypothesis: A glacial system in the Cascades of the Pacific Northwest USA has been ...
Pelto’s Hypothesis: A glacial system in the Cascades of the Pacific Northwest USA has been ...
JUST SCORE THIS -- Almost all of the students will get full points.
If the student messes up, just use the scoring guide as the feedback
Glacial- Question 4 (4 Points)
Scoring guide:
0 - left blank or wording so unclear as to be not understood
+ 2 points for each hypothesis, where the hypothesis is well written and is reasonable
What is your hypothesis? Finish the two sentences (4 points). I hypothesize that, over the last
150 years, …
I also hypothesize that this has been caused by ….
JUST SCORE THIS -- Almost all of the students will get full points.
If the student messes up, it will be by leaving one of the hypotheses blank …
So the typical feedback would be
4 – Your hypotheses are reasonable.
2 – You missed completing one of the hypotheses
Glacial- Question 5 (15 Points)
The red values are given to the students. So there are 15 rows so 1 point
per row.
Note 1: accept any confidence ranking, but the column must be filled out
for full points in a row.
Note 2: The length of Nisqually is what is being graded.
yr
Your
Confidence
(
high-1,
medium-2,
low-3, very
low-4)
Length of Nisqually Glacier in
Kilometers
(subtract distance from bridge
from 8.8 kilometer distance from
summit of Mount Rainier)
1856
Any is ok, but
must be filled in
for full credit
Accept 7 to 11 km
1907
Any is ok, but
8.8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1917
Any is ok, but
must be filled in
for full credit
1924
Any is ok, but
Accept 7 to 8.8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1929
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1940
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
Accept 7 to 8.8 km
for full credit
1943
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1951
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1956
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1958
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1960
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1966
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1969
Any is ok, but
Accept 4 to 8 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1971
Any is ok, but
6.9 km
must be filled in
for full credit
1983
Any is ok, but
Accept 5.5 to 8
must be filled in
for full credit
1994
Any is ok, but
Accept 6 to 8
must be filled in
for full credit
1997
Any is ok, but
Accept 6 to 8
must be filled in
for full credit
2003
Any is ok, but
7.4 km
must be filled in
for full credit
Glacial- Question 6 (5 Points)
Explain your confidence ranking. The answer does not have to be
detailed, but your answer must be based on your observations of
looking at the maps and photos.
5 - The answer explains the student's thinking for all four of the scoring ranks, where the
reasoning is based on observations made. In other words, the student uses examples to
justify each of their rankings. Half point off for explaining the ranking, but not giving an
example.
4 - The answer explains the student's thinking for 3 of the scoring ranks, where the
reasoning is based on observations made. In other words, the student uses examples to
justify each of their rankings. Half point off for explaining the ranking, but not giving an
example.
3- The answer explains the student's thinking for 2 of the scoring ranks, where the
reasoning is based on observations made. In other words, the student uses examples to
justify each of their rankings. Half point off for explaining the ranking, but not giving an
example.
2- The answer explains the student's thinking for 1 of the scoring ranks, where the
reasoning is based on observations made. In other words, the student uses examples to
justify each of their rankings. Half point off for explaining the ranking, but not giving an
example.
1- Student presents a general explanation but does not go into specifics.
0 - The answer is left blank or it makes no sense.
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading.
Answer explains
confidence intervals.
Explains 3 ranks
Explains 2 ranks
Explains 1 rank
Score
Feedback
5
Nice job!
4
3
2
Answer is just very
general and vague.
Writing was very
confusing
1
You didn’t explain one of your rankings.
You didn’t explain two of your rankings
I wish you had explained all of the rankings. You just
explained one.
Your answer is too vague. The scoring guide indicates that
you need to explain all of your rankings
Your answer just could not be understood. Please read it
again yourself. I really could not figure out what you were
saying.
Left blank
0
0
Glacial- Question 7 (10 Points)
10 - plot includes all of the data points from the table correctly
place; plot connects the data points of only those ranked as medium
or high confidence (3 or 4 in the data table)
-5 points off for connecting all of the data points, regardless of their
confidence
-0.5 points off for either misplacing or missing a data point
-0.5 points off for incorrectly connecting a low or very low
confidence data in the line
The big screw-up that students make is by connecting ALL of the data points. They are
supposed to just plot the low confidence points (3&4) and connect the dots of the higher
confidence points (1&2).
So … the typical grading will be
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading. If you
take off half points, just
explain what you took off
and why in the feedback.
Everthing plotted okay
ALL of the points are
connected.
Score
Feedback
10
5
Nice job!
The instructions and the scoring guide indicate that you
should only connect the data points for data you yourself
ranked as a 1 or 2 (medium or high confidence).
Did not load up the plot
0
Glacial- Question 8 (5 Points)
Are there similarities and differences between the plot of "Glacier
X" glacier length and Global Temperature? Puget Sound
Temperature?
Scoring Guide:
0- left blank or answer written so poorly that we could not understand
1 - answer seems reasonable, but answer does not explicitly link the graph that the student prepared to the global
and Puget sound temperature curves
2 - answer is reasonable and explicitly links the graph that the student prepared to one of the temperature records
3 - answer is reasonable and explicitly links the graph that the student prepared to both of the temperature records
4 - answer is reasonable, explicitly links the graph that the student prepared to both of the temperature records,
and discusses similarities and differences in one of the temperature records
5 - answer is reasonable, explicitly links the graph that the student prepared to both of the temperature records, and
discusses similarities and differences in both of the temperature records
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading.
What’s important is that
they explain their
answer with an example
or two
The answer explicitly
links their plot to BOTH
temperature records and
discusses similarities and
differences between their
plot and BOTH
temperature records.
Answer links their plot to
both temperature records
and analyzes similarities
or differences in just the
Global or the Puget Sound
Temp Curve.
Answer links their plot to
both temperature records,
Score
Feedback
5
Nice job!
4
Your answer is good. However, a full point answer
requires that you discuss similarities AND differences
between your curve and BOTH of the temperature curves.
3
Your answer is good. However, a full point answer
requires that you discuss similarities AND differences
but doesn’t discuss
similarities or differences.
Answer links their plot to
one of the temperature
records
Answer is just very
general and vague.
between your curve and BOTH of the temperature curves.
2
1
Writing was very
confusing
0
Left blank
0
Your answer is good. However, a full point answer
requires that you discuss similarities AND differences
between your curve and BOTH of the temperature curves.
Your answer is too vague. The scoring guide indicates that
you need to discuss similarities AND differences between
your curve and BOTH of the temperature curves.
Your answer just could not be understood. Please read it
again yourself. I really could not figure out what you were
saying. Proofing by reading outloud is a great way to
prevent sending in confusing responses.
Glacial- Question 9 (3 Points)
What are the similarities and differences between your plot of
Nisqually glacier length and J. Oerleman’s calculation for the
Pacific Northwest?
0- left blank or answer written so poorly that we could not understand
1 - answer is reasonable and links student plot to Pacific Northwest curve
2 - answer is reasonable, links student plot to Pacific Northwest curve, and discusses similarities or differences
3 - answer is reasonable, links student plot to Pacific Northwest curve, and discusses similarities and differences
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading.
What’s important is that
they explain their
answer with an example
or two
The student discusses their
plot and Oerleman’s curve
– both similarities and
differences.
The student discusses their
plot and Oerleman’s curve
– but only similarities or
differences.
The student discusses their
plot and Oerleman’s
curve.
Score
Feedback
3
Nice job!
2
Your answer is reasonable, but full credit is given to those
answers that discuss BOTH similarities AND differences.
1
Your answer is reasonable, but to receive more points you
needed to present similarities and differences.
Writing was very
confusing
0
Your answer just could not be understood. Please read it
again yourself. I really could not figure out what you were
saying. Proofing by reading outloud is a great way to
prevent sending in confusing responses.
Left blank
0
Glacial- Question 10 (2 Extra Credit Points)
Extra Credit question: Do you think that the different
glacier/temperature records are consistent enough to reveal a signal of
global climatic change? If yes, why? If no, why not?
Scoring:
2 A reasonable argument is made based on observations of the
glacier/temperature curves.
1 - A reasonable argument is made, but the
argument does not refer to the specific curves -- but instead just makes a
general statement without using the graph as evidence.
0 - The answer
could not be understood, because the writing was so confusing.
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading.
What’s important is that
they explain their
answer with an example
or two
Reasonable argument
made with an example or
two.
Score
Feedback
2
Nice job.
Reasonable argument
made, but without an
example.
1
Your answer is reasonable. In the scoring guide, however,
2 extra credit points are given for answers that refer to a
specific example or two.
Left blank or writing was
very confusing
0
Glacial- Question 11 (4 Points)
Do you think that you would have a greater confidence in your
interpretations if you had a greater degree of confidence in all of the
raw data? If so, explain why. If not, explain why not. (4 points)
Scoring:
4- Full points are awarded to answers that go beyond a general response to the question. Full
points answers use specific examples from your response to question 6. Question 6 is where you
explained your confidence rankings. So if you go back to question 6 and pull on these examples,
you will have an easier time. And yes, you can go back and edit question 6 now that you’ve seen
this question. Also, the answer is proofread.
3 – The answer is explained well, but does not use examples from your response to question 6.
2 – The answer is reasonable, but it is not very detailed in explaining why or why not.
1- The answer is reasonable, but there is no explanation why or why not.
0 – Answer just not understandable or left blank.
Key Guidance: Be
lenient in grading.
What’s important is that
they explain their
answer with an example
or two
They explain their answer
with an example or two
Score
Feedback
4
Nice job.
They explain their answer,
but with only one
example.
3
They explain their answer
with an example or two,
but not well written.
Student explains, with
why or why not – but no
example,
3
You only gave one example. Full points are awarded to
answers that go beyond a general response to the question.
Full points answers use specific examples from your
response to question 6. Question 6 is where you explained
your confidence rankings.
To receive full points, your answer needed to have been
proofread well.
Student answers, but does
not explain why or why
1
2
Your answer is reasonable, but you did not use examples.
Full points are awarded to answers that go beyond a
general response to the question. Full points answers use
specific examples from your response to question 6.
Question 6 is where you explained your confidence
rankings.
Your response is reasonable, but you had to explain why
or why not. The scoring guide specifies that answers that
not.
Nothing uploaded
0
lack an explanation why or why not receive just 1 point.
Your answer was left blank.
Glacial- Question 12 (10 Points)
Scoring Guide:
+1 point for correctly filling in each empty box in the table for
maximum total of 10 points
Key Guidance: Simply
count up the points.
Everything looks fine
Score
Feedback
10
Neat selections of glacial landforms.
Less than perfect.
1-9
The scoring guide is pretty specific. Points are deducted
for an empty or incorrectly filled-out box.
When the feedback is
inserted, please edit the
feedback to provide
specific information for
why you deducted
points.
Nothing uploaded
0
Your answer was left blank.
Glacial- Question 13 (5 Points)
How does your detailed study of the Nisqually Glacier compare with
your observations of five randomly selected glaciers? (less than 40
words)
0- left blank or answer written so poorly that we could not
understand
1- Answers the question with a general sweeping statement
without specifics
2- Answers the question, but gives only specifics with
regard to 1 comparison
3 -Answers the question, but gives only specifics with
regard to 2 comparisons
4- Answer the question, but gives specifics with regard to 3
comparison
5- Answers the question and links the Nisqually to observations of all five
comparison glaciers
Key Guidance: Most
students who fill this out
will get full credit.
The full credit is reserved
for students who do
actually compare specific
glaciers to the Nisqually.
They don’t have to go
one-by-one. Few will.
They will go through one
or two and then generalize
the behavior of the rest –
just like you would – to
make it quick and also to
fit within 40 words.
Most students will make
sweeping generalizations
that the glaciers they
observed in question 12,
such as all of them
reducing in size during the
20th century. Technically,
they are linking all five …
but the specificity is
lacking.
Score
Feedback
5
Your answer is quite reasonable in making this
comparison.
4
The scoring guide indicates that you need to match the
Nisqually to all five comparison glaciers. Your answer
does not make that comparison, one-by-one. This is
tedious, but it is what science is about. Careful science
requires careful comparisons.
The generalizations were
really brief and general.
3
The scoring guide indicates that you need to match the
Nisqually to all five comparison glaciers. Your answer
does not make that comparison, one-by-one. This is
tedious, but it is what science is about. Careful science
Really confusing answer
1
Writing is just horrible
1
Nothing uploaded
0
requires careful comparisons.
Your answer was difficult to understand. It seemed to deal
with the topic in general, but I could not see how your
response answered the question.
Your writing was so unclear that I could not determine
whether not you answered the question. Proofing what you
wrote is always critical. Reading something outloud to
yourself, or going back even an hour later and editing are
great ways to fix writing.
Your answer was left blank.
Glacial- Question 14 (5 Points)
Start of the hypothesis
I hypothesize that the changes I observed in Activities 3 and 4 has been caused
by …
I hypothesize that the following changes will occur in the next 20 years. The
Nisqually Glacier will …
The _______ Glacier I analyzed in question 12 will …..
The _______ Glacier I analyzed in question 12 will …..
The _______ Glacier I analyzed in question 12 will …..
The _______ Glacier I analyzed in question 12 will …..
The _______ Glacier I analyzed in question 12 will …..
Key
Guidance:
Most
students
who fill this
out will get
full credit.
Everything
looks fine
A few
students just
leave
blanks.
2 blanks – 4
Score Feedback
5
1-4
Your hypotheses are reasonable. Here’s a completely different angle on
the future. During the Little Ice Age (LIA), glaciers across the western
USA and the world were much more extensive:
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/climate/little_ice_age.html
One of the coldest parts of the LIA was called the Maunder Minimum, a
period in which there were no observed sunspots. Right now, the sun has
no or very few sunspots! We should be moving into the next “solar
cycle” with more and more sunspots. However, right now, that next solar
cycle is not happening. Is the sun moving into another “minimum”
period and will that produce a colder Earth condition like in the LIA?
That is a wild hypothesis that might make these glaciers grow again – or
will more greenhouse gases produce a different effect with less solar
energy? There is no way to know.
Points were deducted where a hypothesis was not completed.
Fi
hy
pts
4 blanks – 3
pts
5 blanks – 2
pts
6 blanks – 1
pt
Nothing
uploaded
0
Your answer was left blank.
Glacial- Question 15 (20 Points)
Scoring Guide for Each Scavenger Hunt Example:
1 correct name of landform
1 correctly identifies if landform is erosional or depositional
1 has caption [very brief]
1 has latitude and longitude
-2: if glacial landform is from the United States. The idea is for you to look at the world's high
mountainous areas and find glacial alpine landforms.
-3: if you simply grabbed a glacial landform (e.g. from google images) from a ground shot. The
idea is for you to have to look at mountains from above and identify the landform.
Note: they are allowed 1 video clip that won’t have latitude and longitude, but they still need to
identify the landform, identify whether it is erosional or depositional and write a caption.
Key Guidance: Simply
count up the points.
Everything looks fine
Score
Feedback
20
Neat selections of glacial landforms.
Less than perfect.
??
depends
on what
you add
up
The scoring guide is pretty specific. Points are deducted
for an incorrect landform name, for incorrectly
identifying whether the landform is erosional or
depositional, for not having a caption, or for not
indicating latitude and longitude (unless you inserted a
link to a video clip). Points are also deducted if
landforms are in United States (-2 if from USA) or
ground views (-3 if ground shots, with the exception of 1
video clip).
Your answer was left blank.
When the feedback is
inserted, please edit the
feedback to provide
specific information for
point deductions.
Nothing uploaded
0