Over the long weekend, I know many of you will want to relax and also catch up with homework (I'm in the same shoes as you, plus child-rearing duties).
All I'm asking is that you watch the full documentary of Food Inc on Youtube - there are a few full clips by different channels. Just choose one.
The one I watched is this by Eyes Wide open initiative.
After watching it, do a simple 1 A4 page reflection, double spacing and font size 12 on the following discussion questions. This will be Tutorial 3. Total grade is 12 marks.
Questions:
- What factors do you think made the emergence of transnational powerful food companies possible?
- To what extent do you think these food companies also control the geographies of food in Asia? You may need to check the presence of some companies like Nestle in Asia, See the image below for ideas.
Rubrics for Tutorial 3 (1 page reflection based on the 2 questions)
CATEGORY
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
Critical Thinking
|
Student presented major points, taking into context the complexity of
the phenomena and partially supports them with convincing arguments, ideas
and data.
|
Student fails to present major points but had presented sufficient disorganized
factual information to reflect some understanding of the complexity of the
phenomena involved.
|
Student present major factual points, but fail to convey convincing arguments,
ideas and data to demonstrate complexity of thought or examination of the
phenomena.
|
Students oversimplify topic with major unsubstantiated claims or fail
to present major factual points.
|
Sentences and expression
|
Sentences and paragraphs are complete,
well-constructed and of varied structure.
|
All sentences are complete and well-constructed
(no fragments, no run-ons). Paragraphing is generally done well.
|
Most sentences are complete and well-constructed.
Paragraphing needs some work.
|
Many sentence fragments or run-on sentences OR
paragraphing needs lots of work.
|
Ideas
|
Ideas were expressed in a clear and organized
fashion according to guiding questions given. It was easy to figure out your
opinions and ideas.
|
Ideas were expressed in a clear manner, but did
not address all guiding questions given. The organization could have been
better.
|
Ideas were somewhat organized, but were not very
clear. It took more than one reading to figure out you were saying. Addressed
only half the guiding questions.
|
The entry seemed to be a collection of unrelated
sentences. Lack effort. It was very
difficult to figure out your ideas. Barely addressed the guiding questions.
|
DEADLINE (FOR ALL) for submission to pigeonhole (86) directly - 14 August 2015, 5pm.
