PERFORMANCE TASK
GRASPS:
G: (Goal) Students will write a letter to the school board stating your argument for or against the support of the proposal to require Kamehameha Schools Maui students to speak Hawaiian or an additional language besides English.
R: (role) student
A: (audience) KSM school board (mock situation)
S: (situation) This week representatives from Kamehameha Schools Maui are meeting to discuss the question: Should all Kamehameha Maui students be required to speak Hawaiian or at least one language besides English? Our school board is meeting this week to discuss the proposal.
P: (product): Letter (argumentative essay)
ANNOTATION
Utilizes multiple, reliable, and relevant sources to support a learning goal.
Effectively cited or references direct quotes used as evidence of research in each body paragraph
Multiple sources are referenced and parenthetically cited within the essay.
- Samantha Roberts, from Scholastic Kids Magazine
- Daniel Everett, professor of sociology at Bentley University, and article from Aeon.
- Jay Matthews, columnist for the Washington Post.
To be considered advanced, the student could have used more diverse text. Student research was limited to informational texts.
Demonstrates a general understanding of the information provided to support a learning goal.
Student able to accurately identify conclusion of counterargument #1 and explain why she disagrees with it. Considering the first counterclaim identified by Everett, student accurately offers a valid error of logic in her rebuttal.
Student makes an accurate, simple conclusion that “basically…both require memorization, human languages require more than that”—thus making a logical conclusion that computer codes and foreign languages are not equivalent.
- This rebuttal falls short of “insightful” because it doesnʻt fully address Everettʻs point about how language is different because of “culture.”
Makes connections between content and thinking to support original ideas.
The conclusion demonstrates that
- Thought about the research provided
- Concluded that KSM students should learn another language.
- Student makes an accurate, simple conclusion that “basically…both require memorization, human languages require more than that”—thus making a logical conclusion that computer codes and foreign languages are not equivalent. But, this rebuttal falls short of fully “insightful” because it doesnʻt fully address Everettʻs point about how language is different because of “culture.” “Feeling, expression and much more” is scratching the surface of “culture.”
- There is rational new general connection made between cognitive flexibility (“smarter”) and E Ola! growth mindset–the belief that one can persevere to achieve (e.g. get smarter w/language)— but not “insightful” because Everettʻs position relates to brain flexibility–the ability to shift thinking–which is different from growth mindset. Perhaps a more fitting E Ola! value (that would exemplify “insightful” would be problem solving.
Comprehension and Synthesis
Comprehension and synthesis: On both traits, this rebuttal makes the paper an ADVANCED. First, she makes the accurate insightful analysis that the logic was fallacious—an exaggeration (“we import them”–which could also be fallacy of hasty generalization). Then, she rationally expands her connection through a thoughtful and relevant explanation.