Mod 2 Counterpoint Cooling Off Article Summary and Comprehension Paper

Module 02 English Compositiby Assessment
Deliverable 02 – English Composition
Competency
Demonstrate ability to comprehend and summarize in written material.
Instructions
Write a one page analysis of the document provided here following the steps
of the writing process, as well as showing the thesis of the article, the main
points that support that thesis, and your own response and reaction to the
author’s point of view and how it is presented. Do this in complete
paragraphs using correct formal English that has been revised, proofed, and
edited to show good form.
Grading Rubric
0
1
Category
Not
No pass
Submitted
Thesis
Identified
Not
Submitted
Student’s
paper did not
2
3
4
Competence
Proficiency
Mastery
Student’s
attempts to
The
introductory
Student
confidently cites
identify the
thesis of the
reading
passage
correctly, or
no attempt
was made.
Analysis
Organization
Sentence
Variety
identify the
thesis of the
reading
passage are
evident in this
exercise
paragraph
remains
unclear as to
the thesis of
the article.
the thesis of the
passage and
builds his/her
summary around
this information
Not
Submitted
Student
submission
includes too
few sentences
written to
show any
analysis of
the article.
Idea
development
is lacking.
Student’s
sentences tie
to main idea
of the
paragraph
assignment,
but do not
include any
in-depth detail
Student uses
examples to
show analysis
in his/her
summary, and
most of the
summary
shows indepth analysis
Student’s
sentences fully
discuss main
ideas of the
article, offer indepth original
ideas about the
article offering
an in-depth
analysis of the
reading.
Not
Submitted
Inadequate
organization
of the one
page analysis
of the article
as assigned,
or too little is
written to
evaluate.
Incomplete
analysis other
than
“surface”
summary
offered
Organization
of paper
shows
attempts to tie
in to the
major ideas of
the article;
however,
some crucial
ideas are
omitted or left
unexplained.
Organization
correctly
organizes
paragraphs of
paper;
however,
some
elements do
not support a
clear thesis
Student’s
organization
shows thoughtful
consideration of
possible
implications of
the article ideas.
Student uses
support relevant
to review entire
article
Not
Submitted
Student’s
writing and
sentence
choices are
not coherent.
Use of simple
and repetitive
or incorrect
sentences
interferes
with
Student
performs
mostly
cursory
repetition of
simple
sentences.
Some varied
sentence
structures
chosen and
Some varied
sentence
structures
chosen and
used
correctly,
some
sentence
choices do
not show
transitions to
Varied sentence
structure and
simple/complex
sentences
handled
correctly.
Demonstrates
competent use of
the steps of the
writing process.
competent
analysis of
the selection.
Mechanics
Not
Submitted
Paper
contains
incomplete
sentences,
word usage
errors,
sentences
with
mechanical
errors etc.
that distract
from the
meaning of
the student’s
paper.
used
correctly.
Limited use
of transitions
used.
Some
grammatical
and
mechanical
errors evident
in sentence
choices for
the summary
paragraph.
Most
sentences
convey
complete
thought;
however,
some are
confusing.
keep the
assignment
examination
moving from
A to B to C.
Grammatical
and
mechanical
errors are
minimum,
and do not
distract from
meaning of
the paper.
Effective use of
transitions noted.
All sentence
choices create
analysis
containing a
good topic
sentence,
through
discussion of the
main idea of that
topic. A variety
of simple and
complex
sentences with
no grammatical
and/or
mechanical
errors.
{“mode”:”full”,”isActive”:false}
This is the document provided
itle:
Counterpoint: Cooling Off. By: Witherbee, Amy, Points of
View: Global Warming, 6/30/2019
Database:
Points of View Reference Center
Counterpoi
nt: Cooling
Off
Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Science
of Global
Warming
3. Increasing
the Risk
4. Slowing
Climate
Change
5. Individual
Choice
6. Ponder This
7. Bibliography
Full Text
L
i
s
t
e
n
Thesis: While the
average citizen of an
African nation can do
little to lower
emissions, it turns out
that the American
citizen is producing
more greenhouse
gasses on average
than anyone else on
earth.
Summary: The
world’s scientists no
longer have any
doubt about the fact
that we are changing
the chemical
concentration of our
atmosphere.
According to the
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
(EPA), since the
Industrial Revolution
ushered in a new age
of fossil fuel
consumption in the
nineteenth century,
the percentages of
the three most
common heattrapping gasses in
the atmosphere have
increased
dramatically. Carbon
dioxide, methane,
and nitrous oxide
have always been
components of our
atmosphere, and are
part of what makes
our planet livable.
Without these
gasses, too much of
the heat we gain from
the sun would be
reflected back out of
the atmosphere,
making for a much
cooler earth. The
problem arises when
these gasses
become too dense,
retaining more and
more of the sun’s
heat and gradually
increasing the overall
temperature of the
earth and its
atmosphere. The
good news in this
story is that there are
worldwide efforts in
place to slow climate
change even as we
work to learn more
about it. The
dangerous increase
in greenhouse gas
emissions is largely
caused by
manufacturing
processes, the
burning of fossil fuels,
and increases in
agriculture.
Introduction
About twenty years
ago, strange stories
began trickling into
the popular press
about a discussion
scientists were
having on climate
change. We were
seeing elaborate
diagrams and graphs
which talked about
“the greenhouse
effect,” “greenhouse
gasses,” and “global
warming.” The
science quickly
unfolded into
dramatic predictions
about deserts
appearing in our
wetlands and
ferocious lightning
storms that
alternately reminded
us of biblical
prophecies and
mediocre science
fiction movies.
Unable to imagine
such things becoming
part of our familiar
modern world, most
of us were unable to
believe any of it, at
first. The problem
was that, unlike
predictions of a
judgment day on
January 1, 2000,
these theories didn’t
go away. Now, the
question is not
whether we are
helping to change the
earth’s climatic
temperatures, but
what risks we are
choosing to take with
our world.
The Science of
Global Warming
The world’s scientists
no longer have any
doubt about the fact
that we are changing
the chemical
concentration of our
atmosphere.
According to the
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
(EPA), since the
Industrial Revolution
ushered in a new age
of fossil fuel
consumption in the
nineteenth century,
the percentages of
the three most
common heattrapping gasses in
the atmosphere have
increased
dramatically. Carbon
dioxide has increased
30 percent, methane
has increased more
than 100 percent,
and nitrous oxide has
increased about 15
percent. Meanwhile,
the US National
Academy of Sciences
reports that the
surface temperature
of our planet has
risen about one
degree Fahrenheit in
the last 100 years,
and that much of that
increase has
occurred since the
1980s, when we first
started talking about
the problem. With
growing information
about how our
climate works,
scientists are now
more willing to say
that these two
observations are
linked.
Carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous
oxide have always
been components of
our atmosphere, and
are part of what
makes our planet
livable. Without these
gasses, too much of
the heat we gain from
the sun would be
reflected back out of
the atmosphere,
making for a much
cooler earth. The
greenhouse gasses
get their name for
their ability to retain
some of this solar
heat and re-disperse
it throughout the
earth’s atmosphere,
keeping the planet at
a comfortable 60
degrees Fahrenheit
or so.
The problem arises
when these gasses
become too dense,
retaining more and
more of the sun’s
heat and gradually
increasing the overall
temperature of the
earth and its
atmosphere.
Ironically, many
scientists believe that
we would have seen
a larger increase in
temperature over the
past few decades
except for our
production of another
pollutant, sulfate
aerosols, which tend
to reflect solar heat
away from the earth.
Because sulfate
aerosols also cause
smog, acid rain,
environmental
damage, and human
respiratory problems,
we are not
considering this as a
long-term solution.
Increasing the Risk
In a 2001 report, the
National Academy of
Sciences found “new
and stronger
evidence” that human
beings were
responsible for most
of the increase in
global temperatures.
The report also
estimated that,
unless we do
something about our
emissions now,
average global
temperatures will
increase anywhere
from 2.2 to 10
degrees Fahrenheit
by 2100. Even at the
lower end of this
estimate, scientists
agree that we would
likely see some
dramatic changes to
our world, with early
signs already
beginning to show.
The year 2001 saw
the highest global
temperatures in
recorded history, and
a measurable
diminishing of
glaciers and ice caps
is undoubtedly
related. Melting will
increase sea levels.
As the earth loses its
ability to disperse
solar heat, we may
also see increased
rates of water
evaporation, so that
many regions may
dry out. At the same
time, the increased
movement of water
vapors through the
atmosphere in the
wake of glacier
melting and largescale evaporation
may lead to spells of
violent, torrential rain.
Added to this is a
likelihood that
warmer ocean
temperatures will
create stronger,
longer lasting
hurricanes and
monsoons, and
contribute to the
dramatic shifts in
weather pattern
associated with El
Nino.
While our scientists
steadfastly refuse to
commit to any of
these predictions,
they do agree on one
thing: the more
concentrated we let
our greenhouse
gasses become, the
greater the risks we
take. It seems we
may have found
another way to make
our own planet
uninhabitable.
Slowing Climate
Change
The good news in
this story is that there
are worldwide efforts
in place to slow
climate change even
as we work to learn
more about it. The
dangerous increase
in greenhouse gas
emissions is largely
caused by
manufacturing
processes, the
burning of fossil fuels,
and increases in
agriculture.
The United Nations
Framework
Convention on
Climate Change was
open for ratification
by member countries
in 1992, and the
Kyoto Protocol was
adopted in 1997.
Under these
agreements,
signatory nations
commit to take steps
to lower the
emissions of
greenhouse gasses
to earlier levels in
order to contain the
threat of global
warming. In addition,
constant progress in
technologies, such as
improvements in
manufacturing,
alternative energy
sources, and cleaner
burning automobiles
all help to make
lowering our
greenhouse gasses a
realistic option for
any nation that
chooses to make it a
priority.
For those of us in the
United States, there
is more good news.
While the average
citizen of an African
nation can do little to
lower emissions, it
turns out that the
American citizen is
producing more
greenhouse gasses
on average than
anyone else on earth.
Individual Choice
We in the US emit
approximately 6.6
tons of greenhouse
gasses per person
per year, reflecting an
increase of about 3.4
percent between
1990 and 1997. The
experts tell us that
about 82 percent of
these emissions
come from burning
fossil fuels (mostly
oil) to create
electricity and power
our cars. If that figure
is not enough to
rouse us to action,
there’s this: the EPA
estimates that about
32 percent of the
gasses we’re emitting
in this country are a
matter of individual
choice.
In other words, even
if we made no effort
to further clean up
our manufacturing
processes, our
agricultural
techniques, or our
industries, we could
still cut up to a third
of our gas emissions
by making some
small changes to the
electricity we use in
our homes, the way
we get to work, and
the waste we choose
not to recycle. The
whole world would
thank us for it.
Ponder This
1. According to the
author, on which
aspects of climate
change do most
scientists agree?
• 2. On
which
aspects
of climate
change
are
scientists
less
certain?
• 3. Give
an
example
of an
action the
internatio
nal
communit
y has
taken to
address
global
warming.
• 4.
According
to the
author,
who has
the
greatest
opportunit
y to slow
the
emission
of
greenhou
se
gasses?
Why?
Bibliography
Periodicals
King, Ralph. “GM’s
Race to the Future.”
Business 4.9
(October 2003): 9p.
Online. EBSCO. 16
October 2003.
Knickerbocker, Brad.
“States take the lead
on global warming.”
Christian Science
Monitor 95.222 (10
October 2003): np.
Online. EBSCO. 16
October 2003.
Margolis, Mac, Eric
Pape, William
Underhill, Jimmy
Langman, and
Melissa Roberts.
“Vins d’Angleterre?”
Newsweek (Atlantic
Edition) 142.14 (6
October 2003): 4p.
Online. EBSCO. 16
October 2003.
Perkins, Sid. “On
Thinning Ice.”
Science News 164.14
(4 October 2003): 2p.
Online. EBSCO. 16
October 2003.
Strum, Matthew,
Donald K. Perovich,
and Mark C. Serreze.
“Meltdown in the
North.” Scientific
American 289.4
(October 2003): 8p.
Online. EBSCO. 16
October 2003.
Websites
Climate Change
Science: An Analysis
of Some Key
Questions. The
National Academies
Press. 16 October
2003. http://www.nap.
edu/catalog/10139.ht
ml.
The Convention and
Kyoto Protocol.
UNFCCC. 15
October
2003. http://unfccc.int
/resource/convkp.htm
l.
Global Warming.
Environmental
Protection Agency.
16 October
2003. http://yosemite.
epa.gov/oar/globalwa
rming.nsf/content/ind
ex.html.
Global Warming
Dispute. Online
NewsHour.Org. 16
October
2003. http://www.pbs.
org/newshour/bb/eur
ope/janjune01/bush%5F614.html.
• These
essays
and any
opinions,
informatio
n or
represent
ations
contained
therein
are the
creation
of the
particular
author
and do
not
necessari
ly reflect
the
opinion of
EBSCO
Informatio
n
Services.
~~~~~~~~
By Amy Witherbee
Copyright of Points of
View: Global
Warming is the
property of Great
Neck Publishing and
its content may not
be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv
without the copyright
holder’s express
written permission.
However, users may
print, download, or
email articles for
individual use.
Collapse Record Formats
Document Viewing Options:
• Detailed Record
• HTML Full Text
Collapse Article Tools
Tools
• Google Drive
• Print
• E-mail
• Save
• Cite
• Export
• Permalink