Rubric: Water argumentation problem

There is no evidence

Although there is evidence, it has nothing to do with water purity

It provides some evidence that justifies the reason the water is not pure from a scientific point of view

Provides enough and appropriate evidence to defend that the water is not pure from a scientific point of view (which has gas, calcium and sodium)

There is no justification

There is a justification, but it does not link the evidence with the conclusions or does so without chemical knowledge

There is a justification that links the evidence with the conclusion/s but it is not enough to argue that the water is not pure from a scientific point of view and/or lacks chemical knowledge

Provides a justification that links the conclusion with the evidence. There are sufficient correct scientific ideas with implicit chemical knowledge, but the terms are not used accurately or are done so tentatively

Provides a justification that links the conclusion to the evidence. There are sufficient correct scientific ideas with implicit chemical knowledge. Terms are used accurately without showing any doubt

There is/are no conclusions (Unknown or it says it cannot be known)

Reaches an erroneous conclusion by thinking that the water is chemically pure

Despite it being the right answer, it has not been well defended scientifically and/or it mixes the colloquial meaning of “pure” with its chemical meaning

The conclusion is correct and well-defended scientifically but uses tentative terms (I think, in my opinion...)

The conclusion is correct and well-defended scientifically without showing any doubt