arcviewmining rubric

NAME:

ASSIGNMENT: ARCVIEW MINING ACTIVITY

TOPIC LEVEL 1
(1 - 4) LEVEL 2
(5 - 6) LEVEL 3
(7 - 8) LEVEL 4
(9 - 10) WEIGHT TOTAL

Map:
Ontario Sites
Addresses the task -Considerable weakness evident in meeting the assigned task
-Legends, titles, and labels ineffective or missing -Some weakness evident in meeting the assigned task
-Legend, labels, and titles unclear or barely satisfactory -Meets the task effectively and clearly
-Good use of titles, legends, and labels -Meets the assigned task very effectively and with clarity
-Excellent use of titles, legends and labels x 1

Written Content -Analysis not well organized and does not address the assigned task completely or clearly
-Demonstrates a limited understanding of key concepts -Somewhat effectively addresses the assigned task; key elements missing or not complete; analysis has weaknesses
-Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the key concepts -Addresses the assigned task effectively; good organization; good analysis and interpretation
-Demonstrates a good understanding of the concepts -Addresses the assigned task in a very effective manner; very well organized, with clear, logical analysis; interpretation
-Demonstrates a very thorough understanding of concepts x1

Map:
Major Countries
Addresses the task -Considerable weakness evident in meeting the assigned task
-Legends, titles, and labels ineffective or missing -Some weakness evident in meeting the assigned task
-Legend, labels, and titles unclear or barely satisfactory -Meets the task effectively and clearly
-Good use of titles, legends, and labels -Meets the assigned task very effectively and with clarity
-Excellent use of titles, legends and labels x .5

Maps:
Cartographic Conventions -Many conventions missing or not well displayed
-Ineffective balance and layout -Some conventions missing or not very well displayed
-Map balance and layout satisfactory -A couple of minor errors or omissions to conventions
-Balance and layout good -Excellent use of cartographic conventions, all present and correct
-Map well designed and laid out x .5

TOTAL OUT OF 30:

NOTES:

1. Map: Ontario Sites

four (4) of them (sites)
clearly labeled

2. Maps: Cartographic Conventions

north arrow, border(s), title, your name, scale, use of colours, use of symbols etc.
balance, appearance

3. Map Content

reasons why
roads, rail, etc.

4. Map: Major Countries

countries, clearly labeled

TOPIC	LEVEL 1 (1 - 4)	LEVEL 2 (5 - 6)	LEVEL 3 (7 - 8)	LEVEL 4 (9 - 10)	WEIGHT	TOTAL
Map: Ontario Sites Addresses the task	-Considerable weakness evident in meeting the assigned task -Legends, titles, and labels ineffective or missing	-Some weakness evident in meeting the assigned task -Legend, labels, and titles unclear or barely satisfactory	-Meets the task effectively and clearly -Good use of titles, legends, and labels	-Meets the assigned task very effectively and with clarity -Excellent use of titles, legends and labels	x 1
Written Content	-Analysis not well organized and does not address the assigned task completely or clearly -Demonstrates a limited understanding of key concepts	-Somewhat effectively addresses the assigned task; key elements missing or not complete; analysis has weaknesses -Demonstrates a satisfactory understanding of the key concepts	-Addresses the assigned task effectively; good organization; good analysis and interpretation -Demonstrates a good understanding of the concepts	-Addresses the assigned task in a very effective manner; very well organized, with clear, logical analysis; interpretation -Demonstrates a very thorough understanding of concepts	x1
Map: Major Countries Addresses the task	-Considerable weakness evident in meeting the assigned task -Legends, titles, and labels ineffective or missing	-Some weakness evident in meeting the assigned task -Legend, labels, and titles unclear or barely satisfactory	-Meets the task effectively and clearly -Good use of titles, legends, and labels	-Meets the assigned task very effectively and with clarity -Excellent use of titles, legends and labels	x .5
Maps: Cartographic Conventions	-Many conventions missing or not well displayed -Ineffective balance and layout	-Some conventions missing or not very well displayed -Map balance and layout satisfactory	-A couple of minor errors or omissions to conventions -Balance and layout good	-Excellent use of cartographic conventions, all present and correct -Map well designed and laid out	x .5