Maggie Li

8W-8
Current Event Article Analysis Report Rubric
Completeness of
Prompts
(1-4)
Accuracy of
Summary (5)
Article/Curricular
/
Outside
Connections (6)

6
4
2
0
All prompts
3 of 4 prompts
1-2 prompts
All prompts are
completed
completed
completed
incomplete.
thoroughly.
thoroughly.
thoroughly.
All main ideas of
Some main ideas
Summary does not
Question 5 is not
article are
of article are
accurately address
answered.
addressed in the
addressed in the
main ideas of the
summary.
summary.
article.
Distinct connection isConnection given is Connection given is very
Question 6 is not
given. Connection is rich
somewhat shallow orshallow or no explanation
answered.
of
and well-explained. connection given is rich
connection is provided.
but
not adequately explained.

Chosen Area of
Investigation
Connection (7)

Distinct connection isConnection given is Connection given is very

Question 7 is not
given. Connection is rich
somewhat shallow orshallow or no
answered.
and well-explained. connection given is rich
explanation of
but
connection is
not adequately explained.
provided.

Questions Posed
(8)

2 questions posed
and explained.
Both question and
explanation are
relevant to deeper
understanding of
main ideas.

Application of
Skeptical
Thinking/Reliance
Upon Evidence
(specific evidence
must be
mentioned) (9)

Response exhibits
an awareness of
the validity of the
information and
specifically cites
evidence from the
article.

2 questions posed
but only one
explanation
provided.
Question and
explanation are
relevant to deeper
understanding of
main idea.
Response exhibits
an awareness of
the validity of the
information but
does not
specifically cite
evidence from the
article.

Only 1 question
and explanation
posed or 2
questions posed
without any
explanation.

Question 8 is not
answered.

Response does not

exhibit an
awareness of the
validity of the
information.

Question 9 is not
answered.

Notes:

Any article not of appropriate length or topic will result in a full deduction of rubric column points (2).

Submitted article analysis reports must be word-processed with prompts numbered to earn full credit. Any form
not doing so will result in a 2 point penalty.

Any article analysis report submitted up to 2 days late will result in a penalty of 2 points. Any article submitted
more than 2 days late but no more than 1 week late will result in a penalty of 4 points. Any article submitted more than 1 week
late but less than 2 weeks late will result in a penalty of 6 points. No article analysis report will be accepted beyond 2 weeks of
lateness.

Any article analysis report submitted without a hard-copy of the article itself will be considered late until the hardcopy is submitted and will be given the appropriate penalty for lateness described above.

Scientific Literacy Project: Current Events Article Analysis Prompts

1. Write your chosen area of investigation.

Pollution in general.
2. Write the title of the article.
Nuclear Plant Leak Threatens Drinking Water Wells in Florida
3. Write the date that the article was published.
March 22nd, 2016
4. Write the name of the publication or the web address from where the article was obtained.
The New York Times: http://nytimes.com
5. Write a brief summary of the content of the article. Focus on who, what, when, where,
and why.
40 years ago, in Florida, two nuclear reactors were built at Turkey Point, next to two
national parks, Biscayne Bay and the Everglades. Now, a study conducted by the Miami-Dade
County declared that the nuclear reactors, belonging to the company Florida Power & Light, are
polluting Biscayne Bay. A large saltwater plume had formed and in addition to harming
Biscayne, is moving towards water wells, which could potentially pollute the drinking water
supply of residents in Miami and Florida Keys. The organization, Tropical Audubon Society and
the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, filed a lawsuit against the company, since Florida Power
& Lights actions violated the federal Clean Water Act. On the other hand, a democratic member
of the Florida House, by the name of Jos Javier Rodrguez, doesnt think that the company is the
only one at fault. He called for the federal government to get involved, saying that state
regulators had failed to adequately enforce the law.
In response, Florida Power & Light argued that the salinity levels have decreased by 50%
after the company addressed the problem; the cause for algae buildup and high levels of salinity
was caused by the drought in 2013 through 2014, which increased the water temperature; in
addition, the company was going to address the nutrient, ammonia and tritium spikes, carefully
adding the fact that ammonia wasnt a byproduct of nuclear plants; and the tritium levels in the
water wasnt even close to dangerous. Florida Power & Light was irritated since the companys
plants werent even threatening the drinking water supply. In fact, the closest plume was four
miles away from the nearest well.
Judge Bram Canter declared on the case that the Biscayne Aquifer is important and also
is needed for irrigation. Then, after a rock mining company sued Florida Power & Light, Canter
made his ruling.
6. Connect this article to any previous learning or experiences you have had. Explain and -+
++defend your connections.
The most recent current event article I wrote on was about the water crisis in Flint,
Michigan. What happened in Flint was that after the water company there had switched their
water supply to the Flint river, which is contaminated and filthy. Then, the corrosiveness of the
Flint river supply caused harm to the pipes and corroded iron into the water, then eventually lead.
Its true that this is a different case--the cause of the potentially damaged water supply
was caused by a nuclear plant. Yet, at the same time, I feel as the two are connected because they

both have association with the water supply and contaminating it. I wonder, if the plume really
did end up getting into the water wells, if something similar would happen: people getting
sick/poisoned and distribution of bottled water to residents.
7. Connect this article to your chosen area of investigation. Explain how this article
advanced your understanding of your chosen area of investigation.
I didnt know that nuclear plants had any waste products besides nuclear waste, which I
thought was canned and stored in large caves or underground. In 7th grade science, we had a
debate on whether or not we should have a nuclear power plant near Chappaqua. One of the
arguments was that it didnt pollute, and all the waste was stored elsewhere.
This article, on the other hand, stated that nuclear plants could produce pollutants and
harm the ecosystem around it. In fact, I searched up nuclear power plants contaminating water
and quite a few articles popped up.
8. Identify two questions that this article leaves you with and explain your reasoning why
you believe these questions are important to ask and answer.
What pollutants do nuclear plants produce, other than nuclear waste and tritium?
The article only specified one byproduct of nuclear plants: tritium. However, none
else was given. If we could find out the other contaminants that nuclear power plants, we could
try to combat those, as well as tritium. Im also pretty sure there are methods out there to remove
tritium from water (based on a Google search), so why not other contaminants? This could help
the tritium problem in Miami-Dade County.
What caused the ammonia to be present in the water?
In the text, spokesperson Robert L. Gould for Florida Power & Light stated that
ammonia is not a byproduct of nuclear power plants. I believe that this question is important to
answer because if they could find the source of where the ammonia came from, the county or
state could stop the contaminant from appearing in the water.
9. Describe how confident you feel about the validity of the content of the article. Explain
your reasoning (remember, be a skeptic and seek evidence).
I feel like the validity of the article is justified because it mentions the names of various
organizations and relevant people. For example: Laura Reynolds, who works for the Tropical
Audubon Society and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy; Jos Javier Rodrguez, democratic
member of the Florida House; Dee Ann Miller, spokesperson for Florida Department of
Environmental Protection; another spokesperson by the name of Robert L. Gould, who works for
Florida Power & Light; and Bram Canter, who is the FL administrative judge.