Datasets:

---

NahedAbdelgaber

/

evaluating-student-writing

like 1

People made a huge deal out of it.

The "Face on Mars" appeared in books, magazines, and radio talk shows.

Some people even say it appeared in haunted grocery store checkouts.

On April 5, 1998, NASA's MGS flew over Cydonia, the siting of the face, to snap more picture to reveal that the Face was just a natural landform and nothing more.

The majority of people accepted this statement, but there was a select few people who say that aliens made the Face.

The Face Theorists weren't satisfied with it being just a landform and tried to find evidence to prove NASA wrong.

The Face Theorists found out that the location and date of the April '98 photo was during a cloudy winter.

Skeptics said that the alien markings were hidden by the haze. Three years later, NASA proved our skeptical theorists wrong again. With advanced technology, the right location, and the right season, NASA got the clear picture of the Face they needed to show that it was just a landform.

NASA even suggests that it may be a butte or mesa.

Sorry Face Theorists, but NASA

has crushed your dreams multiple times.

The "Face on Mars" is just a landform.

Nothing more and nothing less.My parents have always told me, whenever I have a problem, to come to them for help. They say that they are always there for me. It is really nice to have people to go to whenever I need advice about something. I have lots of friends, too. But they all aren't the same person.

That being said, they're all going to have different opinions.

It is always good to go to different people about what to do in a situation, because some people may have dealt with the same sort of situation you have, it is always good to have different selections on how to handle things, and different people could teach you different things about how to react in different situations, even if you don't take their advice.

A lot of the time, people don't going around randomly sharing their past stories without any context. But if you ask them, they could open up to you and share. This really could help you with situations you're dealing with. You get to see the second hand experience of what could end up happening to you. This could potentially being very eye-opening and make you change what you originally thought about the situation.

It is always good to have choices. I know when I look on a restaurant menu and see only 2 options of food, I wouldn't be very happy. This is another reason why you should listen to other peoples opinions. They could give you different options on how to handle things. Like they say, the more, the merrier.

You could learn things when people are giving you advice, even if you don't take it. For example, some one could be giving you advice on the sport you play. They could be telling you on how to handle different plays. You may think that the way they say to play the game doesn't really fit for you, but now you have more knowledge about the sport you play, which could benefit your skills in the game. This can apply for other situations, too.

So in the end, it's always good to have an open mind and listen to other peoples advice. You could learn more about someone, get different options, and even learn things. No matter how the situation ends up playing out, you ended making tighter bonds with the people who gave you advice, and that's what's important in the end.Dear Principal,

I think that students should be able to use their cell phones during lunch periods and other free times, as long as they are turned off during class. Most students already do this so it should just be allowed at these certain times. Students would most likely like to have this time on their phones.

If you gave students this time on their phones then the students wouldn't use them in class or hide the fact they are using them during their free time without teachers being around them. Just think about how many students do this and would like to have time instead of not paying attention in class or hiding that they are using their phones. It is only lunch and free time, which there is no class time going on. If the thing to worry about is the ringers and sound, the phones should be put on vibrate or silent during these times. I think that students can follow this rule.

Teachers at the school probably also use their phones during class and in their free time. If the teachers are using their phones during class then students should at least be able to use their phones during lunch and free time. This is not as bad as most teachers using them at school, during classes. If the students don't follow the rules with the ringers or they get caught having their phone out during class then it can just get taken for that day.

You can make rules with them like I said before, the ringers shouldn't be on, no music can be played, and don't use them during class time only in free time. those are good rules and easy to follow, but there can be consequences if you don't follow these rules. Some consequences can be phone taken away if you hear the ringer, detention if used during class time instead of the time you were allowed and there can be many other possibilities for consequences.

I really hope that you consider the idea of letting students use there phones during free time and lunch periods. The students would love this idea and the rules are easy to follow and everyone would follow them just because you gave them time to use phones. If not they will know what the consequences are, it's that simple. Thank you for having the time to read my opinion on phone use during school.

Thank You,

STUDENT_NAMEHave you ever ever been required to do a summer project that your not intreasted in? Certain schools in America require students to complete summer projects to ensure they are still learning over break. Students are often assined teacher designed projects. While most students complete these over summer projects many students don't due to lack of intrest in the assined topic. To improve student input schools should move towards student designed projects so students will be more intrested and and involved in the project.

While a summer project is not something most students would like to do over there break, teachers could allow there students to choose a topic or unit to base there project on. Students can use this to there advantage and choose a topic they were intreasted. Students could learn and still enjoy working on the project. Students also have an easier time working on topics that they have knowledge on allowing them to complete there work easily. Students can take advantage of being able to design there own project and choose a topic or unit that they struggled on through out the year. Working on these weak points can strengthen your skills for next school year. Students can go back and look at past notes and worksheets helping improve there skills in that topic.

Students being able to design there projects could allow the student to create something they enjoy doing over the summer with friends and family, rather then students thinking of it as another teacher assined project that is boring. Instead they can create something that they think of as fun but still educates them. They could also use this project to study or learn upcoming cirriculum for next year. This would allow the student to get a head start on future units and topics.

Overall schools that require summer break projects should move towards student designed projects over teacher designed ones. When students have the ability to choose from certain topics and units they can decide what is best for them. Using the project to work on material that they were intrested in through out the year and want to further research and learn about or use the oppurtunity to study material that the student had trouble with over the school year so that they can be caught up for next year. Furthermore students can create projects that will help them with future cirriculum for next year. In conclusion schools should use student designed projects because it allows the student to choose how they want to utilize the time for either further studying a topic, going back and reviewing areas they had trouble in or learning future topics for next school year.For most people it is more common to get from place to place by hopping in a car. But, what if we never used cars, or at least limited them? Lives would be inpacted in a very positive way. In

In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars

, by Elisabeth Rosenthal,

Paris bans driving due to smog

, by Robert Duffer,

Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogata

, by Andrew Selsky, and

The End of Car Culture

, by Elisabeth Rosenthal the authors show how cars are not a neccesity to life and how our communities can even be better off without them. Because of the positive impact on our enviroment and the increase of a community, limiting car usage is a serious idea worty of a second look.

Cars, especially in America, are a major source of transportation. Without them many people would not have an easy way to commute to where they need to be. But, convience is causing more pain than pleasure and startign to harm our enviroment. Cars just by themselves cause around fifty percent of the greenhouse gases that are emited into the atmospere. Similarly they cause twelve percent in Europe (par. 5) Logically it would make sense to find the root of a problem and change it to make the problem go away, but in the case of cars, cars are a root in the pollution problem, but many people need them to ge to get where they need to be. The easiest solution to this is to limit our car use and add more busses and easier, more acessable areas for bikes and walking. Pollution will lower and people will still get to where they need to be. Pollution is a major topic regarding the safety of our enviroment and cars have been a proven source of much of the pollution in the air. Using less cars coensides with less pollution in our surroundings. Paris, France was suffering from very high pollution in the air. To combat this, for five days certain people, based on their lisecense plate number, were not allowed to use their cars. Though not everyone complied, after the five days the smog went from the levels found in the worst city for pollution, Beijing China, down by sixty percent (par.14). In just under a week Paris went from being the most polluted it had ever been to a better, safer level. If a city just by limiting the car usage by half was able to make such a drastic difference in that time, imagine it being limited more over a wider area. There is a possibility of totally correcting the pollution problem worldwide, or at least making it better and more easily handled. Although the enviroment is important, cars are also affecting the way we interact as people in a community.

Because we have cars, we never really see the senery around us. We exit our houses, jump in our cars, drive, and walk ito our destination. There is no contact with nature or other people passing by. Limiting cars can lead to the increase of interaction and better looking cities. In Bogota, there is a day once a year called "car-free day", in which no one is allowed any use of their personal cars and fined if they do not comply. Because of this there has been an increase in new high-end resturants and places to shop. The community has also added more city parks and places for sports. There is no traffic rush hour and due to the increased walking the old broken sidewalks have been replaced with larger new ones (par.28). No one wants to not only have to walk, but have to walk on a surface that is hard to walk on and unappealing. Due to this, people started to create parks and sports centers for a nice place to be as well as a nice place to look at. And because of the increased foot traffic, there have been more people opening shops and resturants, as no one speeding by in a car will notice a small corner store, but someone strolling by, taking in the scenery will. In response to the increased foot traffic, it is important that there is somewhere to actually put your foot, and old cracked pavement won't cut it. If there are less cars, less road pavement is needed and more sidewalk pavement is. So, the old pavement is replaced with more pavement that is in better shape. All the walking and passing people causes people to be more social and to interact more often. The members of a community are more together. Mr. Sivak, a researcher, had noticed both of his children are not interested in getting a driver's licence. Everything they do is centered around walking, public transport, and carpooling. They don't find it necissary to have a car and licence (par. 39). The children of the researcher don't have or need a car because what they do doesn't require them to have one. They get a more full experience not being in a car all the time. In a carpool they get to socialize with friends and while walking they get an outdoor and community experience.

In short, cars are an easy way to get from area to area, but they are very harful to the enviroment and our community. They add pollution to the air and cut off our everyday contact. If we limited the use of cars we would lower pollution, casuse our cities to be more attractive, have better ways of transport, and be closer as people in an area. So, is a car still going to be your most common way of transport? Think of the good you would do to the world if it wasn't. Electoral college is a unfar way to vote for a president becasue it make the government officals bias to the more popular states such as Flordia or Texas. I think that we should get rid of the electoral college because it make the smaller states feel left out compared to larger states. If the president was elected by the population not by the "Government" how would it change the way the U.S. worked today.

The text informs me that under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for the slate of electors who in turn elect the president. In my opinion I think that there should be more than 3 votes or 4 votes for a state to elect a president. If the United States went to a population voting system the elections would be more fair to people that live in the smaller states. The text also informs me that in 2000 the U.S. presidential race, Al Gore received more individual votes than George W. Bush nationwide, but Bush wont the election, receiving 271 electoral votes the Gore's 266. If the case of Gore losing the election a year later Bush went to war on Iraq.

If the United States went to a population voting system the percentage of votes would increase dramaticly to cause a honest election. If the election where to happen next election cycle I think that it would change the way the United States votes. People are fooled by the president when they say "I will lower taxes, Protect the environment, or Stop the wars we are in" I thnk that it's a trick for them to win the votes they need to win. If the population voted for the president i think that the United States would not be in debt.

The reason I think that the voting regulations is broken is that smaller states like Rhoad Island is a state that gets 3-10 votes and Claifonia gets 55 votes. If the only thing that make people happy is to be heard by the bigger people in life. If you where a 18 year old kid in a small state trying to make a  new product that could help millions but your in that state that wont let you be heard by the rest of the country. Driverless cars are coming. Are we ready for driverless cars? Yes we are. Driverless cars alert us of danger. We still pay attention to the road. Also, we take full responsibility for any accidents, not the manufacturer.

Driverless cars come with lots of sensors that will alert us of danger. If you back out of the drive way, the car will alert you if something is in the way. The car goes the speed limit. It tells us when to take over the wheel. It is a safe car.

Just because the car drives itself, doesn't mean we don't pay attention to the road. The car has a camera watching us. If we crash they will see if it was our fault or not. There are also cameras on the outside of the car. We will have our eyes on the road at all times.

The car won't cause accidents, it would be us. Since the car has cameras in it we will know the truth. Now bad drivers won't be able to lie. They also can't say it was the cars fault. We watch the road and the car watches us.

I think driverless cars is a great idea. People are bad drivers. The car will alert us of danger. It will make sure we pay attention of the road. Especially since it has cameras in it for proof. Driverless cars is a great and safe idea. People are surrending their cars. these days, people do not see the need for them, and are switching to other means of trasportation such as bike riding, or public transport. This switch has lowered emissions, and greenhouse gasses, reducing smog.

Many cities are implementinng this reduction of cars, and have experienced a reduction in pollution.

cars emmit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, this is a fact. Reducing the amount of cars on the road reduces the co2 in the atmosphere. In paris bans driving due to smog

, paris banned cars for a day; "the smog cleared enough monday... rescind the ban for odd-number plates on Teusday" (Duffer 19). this proves that the ban did indeed reduce the smog in paris. In