Content
q
Content
effectively answers the following questions
about the experience of observing nature: What
are you observing?
Have you noted any differences in either the
physical surroundings or your own mood since your last observation? What are your reactions to your “spot”?
q
Significance
of answers to questions is clearly evident to the reader.
q
Focused
observation and reflection employs only the essential elements.
q
Choice of
details demonstrates awareness and acuteness of senses on the part of the
writer.
q
Insight
into the process of observing nature is clearly evident to the reader.
q
The
reflection leaves a lasting impression on the reader about what the writer is
observing and reflecting about nature.
q
The
typed, double-spaced entry is at least one page in length
Structure
q
An
engaging opening sentence draws the reader into the observation and reflection.
q
Strategies
chosen clearly reflect consideration of purpose and audience.
q
First
person point of view is used consistently and effectively.
q
The most
effective sequencing is used to answer the questions.
q
Consistently
used transitions create unity within and between the paragraphs.
q
Closure
is reached through direct commentary about the significance of the process of
observing and reflecting about nature.
Style
q
Well-chosen
diction engages the reader in the observation and reflection.
q
Vivid
sensory details “paint pictures with words”.
q
A variety
of sentence structures are effectively employed to develop the observation and
reflection.
q
Sentence
structure is polished. The text flows
smoothly as a result.
q
A strong,
individual, yet informal writer’s voice is consistently evident throughout the
reflection and demonstrates lively engagement with the content.
Conventions
q
Each
journal entry is numbered and dated.
q
Each
journal entry is typed.
q
Standard
English is consistently used.
q
Subject-verb
agreement and the appropriate tenses are consistently employed.
q
Point of
view is consistently used correctly.
q
Mechanical
and typographical errors are rare.
Content
q
Content
clearly answers the following questions
about the experience of observing nature: What
are you observing? Have you noted any differences in either the
physical surroundings or your own mood since your last observation? What are your reactions to your “spot”?
q
Significance
of answers to questions is frequently evident to the reader.
q
Focused
observation and reflection usually employs only the essential elements.
q
Choice of
details somewhat demonstrates awareness and acuteness of senses on the part of
the writer.
q
Insight
into the process of observing nature is usually evident to the reader.
q
The reflection
leaves a strong impression on the reader about what the writer is observing and
reflecting about nature.
q
The
typed, double-spaced entry is one page in length.
Structure
q
An
interesting opening sentence draws the reader into the observation and
reflection.
q
Strategies
chosen frequently reflect consideration of purpose and audience.
q
First
person point of view is used consistently and effectively.
q
Clear
sequencing is used to answer the questions.
q
Frequently
used transitions create unity within and between the paragraphs.
q
Closure
is reached through direct commentary about the significance of the process of
observing and reflecting about nature.
Style
q
Appropriate
diction engages the reader in the observation and reflection.
q
Effective
sensory details “paint pictures with words”.
q
A variety
of sentence structures are frequently employed to develop the observation and
reflection.
q
Sentence
structure is usually polished. The text
flows smoothly as a result.
q
An
individual, yet informal writer’s voice is consistently evident throughout the
reflection and demonstrates lively engagement with the content.
Conventions
q
Each
journal entry is numbered and dated.
q
Each
journal entry is typed.
q
Standard
English is customarily used.
q
Subject-verb
agreement and the appropriate tenses are usually employed.
q
Point of
view is generally used correctly.
q
Mechanical
and typographical errors are few.
Content
q
Content
somewhat answers the following questions
about the experience of observing nature: What
are you observing? Have you noted any differences in either the
physical surroundings or your own mood since your last observation? What are your reactions to your “spot”?
q
Significance
of answers to questions is somewhat evident to the reader.
q
Observation and reflection sometimes loses
focus because nonessential elements are present.
q
Choice of
details occasionally demonstrates awareness and acuteness of senses on the part
of the writer.
q
Insight
into the process of observing nature is somewhat evident to the reader.
q
The
reflection leaves an impression on the reader about what the writer is
observing and reflecting about nature.
q
The
typed, double-spaced entry is almost a page in length.
Structure
q
An
opening sentence draws the reader into the observation and reflection.
q
Strategies
chosen occasionally reflect consideration of purpose and audience.
q
First
person point of view is used somewhat effectively.
q
Effective
sequencing is sometimes used to answer the questions.
q
Transitions
are sometimes used to create unity within and between the paragraphs.
q
Commentary
about the process of observing and reflecting about nature is present, but the
significance is not clear.
Style
q
Adequate
diction is used in the observation and reflection.
q
Some
sensory details are present.
q
Sentence
structure is problematic. The flow of
text is sometimes disrupted as a result.
q
Sentence
structure somewhat lacks the variety to develop the observation and reflection.
q
An
individual, yet informal writer’s voice is consistently evident throughout the
reflection and demonstrates lively engagement with the content.
Conventions
q
Each
journal entry is numbered and dated.
q
Each
journal entry is typed and double-spaced.
q
Standard
English is customarily used.
q
Subject-verb
agreement and the appropriate tenses are usually employed.
q
Point of
view is generally used correctly.
q
Mechanical
and typographical errors are few.
Content
q
Content
rarely answers the following questions
about the experience of observing nature: What
are you observing? Have you noted any
differences in either the physical surroundings or your own mood since your
last observation? What are your
reactions to your “spot”?
q
Significance
of answers to questions is unclear or absent.
q
Observation
and reflection is unfocused because nonessential elements are present.
q
Choice of
details occasionally demonstrates little, if any, awareness and acuteness of
senses on the part of the writer.
q
Insight
into the process of observing nature is not evident to the reader.
q
The
reflection leaves no impression on the reader about what the writer is
observing and reflecting about nature.
q
The
typed, double-spaced entry is at least
three-quarters of a page in length.
Structure
q
An
opening sentence does not draw the reader into the observation and reflection.
q
Strategies
chosen rarely reflect consideration of purpose and audience.
q
First
person point of view is used inconsistently and ineffectively.
q
Sequencing
used to answer the questions is ineffective or absent.
q
Transitions
within and between the paragraphs are absent.
q
Commentary
about the process of observing and reflecting about nature is absent.
Style
q
Diction used
in the observation and reflection is inadequate.
q
Sensory
details are lacking.
q
Sentence
structure is problematic. The flow of
text is disrupted as a result.
q
Sentence
structure lacks the variety to develop the observation and reflection.
q
The
writer’s voice is not evident throughout the reflection and demonstrates little
engagement with the process of observing nature.
Conventions
q
Some
journal entries are numbered and dated.
q
Each
journal entry is typed and double-spaced.
q
Standard
English is used.
q
Subject-verb
agreement and the appropriate tenses are rarely employed.
q
Point of
view is shifts constantly.
q
Mechanical
and typographical errors are frequent and intrusive. No evidence of editing is present.
The minimal standards for content, structure, style, and conventions
have not been met.