Cuesta College, San Luis Obispo, CA
[20 points.] Explain whether Ptolemy or Copernicus (or both, or neither) could be considered scientists (basing explanations on observations and evidence, instead of first principles), by discussing their accomplishments and their theories.
Solution and grading rubric:
- p = 20/20:
Correct. Although Ptolemy and Copernicus both developed theories that explained observations of retrograde motion of planets, both based their theories on first principles (perfect circles) rather than strictly on observations, wich resulted in a lack of accuracy in predicting planetary motion. Discusses at least Ptolemy's or Copernicus' first principles in detail. - r = 16/20:
Nearly correct (explanation weak, unclear or only nearly complete); includes extraneous/tangential information; or has minor errors. Discusses Ptolemy and Copernicus as scientists because of the theories they developed to explain observations of planetary motion, even though both their theories were also based on first principles. - t = 12/20:
Contains right ideas, but discussion is unclear/incomplete or contains major errors. At least discusses the theories of Ptolemy and Copernicus. - v = 8/20:
Limited relevant discussion of supporting evidence of at least some merit, but in an inconsistent or unclear manner. Does not offer specific details on contributions of Ptolemy or Copernicus. - x = 4/20:
Implementation/application of ideas, but credit given for effort rather than merit. - y = 2/20:
Irrelevant discussion/effectively blank. - z = 0/20:
Blank.
Section 70160
p: 11 students
r: 9 students
t: 3 students
v: 9 students
x: 0 students
y: 2 students
z: 0 students
Section 70158
p: 18 students
r: 16 students
t: 20 students
v: 22 students
x: 0 students
y: 2 students
z: 0 students
A sample "p" response (from student 4652):
A shot-in-the-dark "v" response (from student 8484):
No comments:
Post a Comment