Below is the rubric for this assignment- Your job is to go through the ALREADY COMPLETED ATTACHED paper and make grammer, spelling changes as needed as well as add more detail in order to fulfill the RUBRIC EXCELLENT REQUIREMENTS.
You must make all your changes in RED.
Case Study: Identification of Factors Causing Ecological Damage (Part B)
Part B: Continue researching your topic (Aral Sea, Lake Chad, or Lake Qinghai) with reliable resources. Then write up your case study, answering the following questions:
1. What human activities led to the degradation of the body of water?
2. Which ecological principles did we ignore as part of our degradation of this ecosystem?
3. Did any natural changes exacerbate the degradation? If so, identify them.
4. Was there a tipping point to the ecosystem degradation? Explain your answer.
5. What was the management plan for restoring the ecosystem, if there was one?
6. What suggestions do you have for a management plan, and how does your plan relate to scientific principles of sustainability? Are there more data you need to collect before proceeding with recommendations? If so, what data do you need?
The grading rubric used for this portion of your first case study is as follows:
|
Criteria for Case Study Report |
Best |
Moderate |
Weak |
Poor |
|
Writing style and layout (30 points possible) |
Clear, concise, and complete case study report with introduction and conclusion (24–30 points)
|
Somewhat clear, concise, and complete case study report with introduction and conclusion (16–23 points) |
Unclear, not concise, and incomplete case study report with introduction and conclusion (8–15 points) |
Unclear, not concise, and incomplete case study report and omitted introduction and/or conclusion (0–7 points) |
|
Content (30 points possible) |
Content answers all of the above questions (24–30 points) |
Content answers most of the above questions (16–23 points) |
Content answers half the above questions (8–15 points) |
Content answers less than one-quarter of the above questions (0–7 points) |
|
Coherently written and supporting evidence discussed (30 points possible) |
Report based on evidence, scientific principles, and environmental management practices (24–30 points) |
Report only partly based on evidence, scientific principles, and environmental management practices (16–23 points) |
Report weakly based on evidence, scientific principles, and environmental management practices (8–15 points) |
Report not consistently based on evidence, scientific principles, and environmental management practices (0–7 points) |
Part B is also worth 100 points. The points will be directly converted to percentage.
