Short Answer Question • Do you think Jaime Teevan in “2009 Young Innovators…” and Barry Bingham in “Digital Dad vs. the Dinosaurs…” have something in common? Explain and give evidence from the articles. • Jaime Teevan invents Bing for Microsoft; Barry Bingham predicts the end of print newspapers and the birth of electronic media.
Insufficient AnswerScore: 0 • Teevan and Bingham both invented a new kind of technology. Teevan made a search engine called Research which makes the user’s past searches to determine which items are more relevant to them. Bingham made an electronic newspaper that would arrive, via cable, satellite or telephone lines.
Why the score is “0.” • This student did not read the articles well to have a command of the facts. • The frame is nonexistent in that the thesis and conclusion are not done well at all. • There are no quotes to supply evidence. • Vocabulary is not academic. • There is no depth of details; writer stays stuck in generalities.
Partially SufficientScore: 1 • Both stories are very similar in many ways such as they both are searching, and or found ways to advance technology, but are still searching for more ways to help everyone for their own personal uses. The college student, Jaime, has already helped others find what they have search for but she knows not the same results work for everybody. Therefore, she continues to search for more advanced ways to help.
Why the score is “1.” • The writer at least knows the articles are about technology, but the thesis rambles with three conjunctions. • There is no mention of the Bing search engine or electronic newspapers; both major topics in these articles. • There are no quotes given as evidence. • Mentions only one article and not the other. • No conclusion leaves frame incomplete.
SufficientScore: 2 • They both are trying to evolve and make their companies better. Jaime developed a “new search engine” for Microsoft called Bing. Barry’s dad knew that everything would change and “most of what we will read will be transmitted into our home or offices electronically.”
Why the score is “2.” • The writer has a good thesis. • Quotes support thesis and both articles are addressed. • There is no conclusion; therefore, frame is incomplete. • Vocabulary is not academic; no sentence variety is evident in response.
SufficientScore: 2 • Both demonstrate commitment on what they do. Jaime “single-handedly created” Bing. Barry also showed this attribute because his “grandfather bought the courier during World War I, and ran the newspaper from 1971 to 1986.”
Why the score is “2.” • The writer has a good thesis. • Quotes support thesis and both articles are addressed. • There is no conclusion; therefore, frame is incomplete. • Vocabulary is not very academic; no sentence variety is evident in response.
ExemplaryScore: 3 • Both share a passion for modernizing technology so more people can access information quicker. When Emily writes about Barry, she explains, "information was his passion, and his goal was to offer as much of it to as many people as possible.” Jaime Teevan “studies the ways people navigate the flood of information available in the digital age and builds tools to help them handle it.” Both writers worked for information distribution systems, and they both were constantly exploring new modern ways to distribute information.
Why the score is “3.” • The writer has a good thesis and a good conclusion; thus a complete frame. • Quotes support thesis and both articles are addressed. • Rich Academic Vocabulary ( modernizing, access, distribution systems) to support thesis and conclusion. • Good use of compound and complex sentences to add variety & style to piece.
ExemplaryScore: 3 • Jaime Teevan and Barry Bingham were both bright people that had technology in common. Teevan “came up with some ideas for judging link quality… and wrote the code to implement the changes.” [In a similar manner]Bingham believed in being modern so “he began replacing typewriters with word processors.” They both made technological changes that have contributed to the advancement of technology.
Why the score is “3.” • The writer has a good thesis and a good conclusion; thus a complete frame. • Quotes support thesis and both articles are addressed. • Rich Academic Vocabulary ( technology, link quality, implement, word processors ) to support thesis and conclusion. • Good use of active verbs (judging, implement, replacing, contributed) and phrasing ( that had technology, that have contributed) to add variety and style.