Essay A: example of a very strong response

      In the reading selection we are told that middle aged cyclers from the ages of 35-54 are especially at risk of injuries requiring medical attention over young cyclists. Figure one in 1998 agrees that cyclists within that age bracket do in fact suffer more from brain, facial, and neck injuries then their younger counterparts. However, the reading selection says that middle aged cyclists suffer from these injuries nearly twice the rate riders do under the age of 16. Figure 1, in 1998 disagrees with this statement. While brain and neck injuries are almost double, the amount from adults to younger riders, facial injury does not.

      The reading selection continues to say that "the most important reason for the difference in rates of serious injury is the difference in the practice of helmet usage between older and younger cyclists." The reading selection found that "less than half of the adult cyclists regularly wear helmets compared to almost 75% of children under age 16." Figure two agrees with this theory by showing two graphs. The graph to the left shows that exactly 75% of 16 year old cyclists do in fact wear helmets. Only one percent does not wear a helmet for the young riders.

      In addition the graph to the left shows that 54% of cyclists between the age of 35-54 never wear helmets. I agree with the reading selection that if older cyclists had more helmet usage there would be less injuries. Clearly from figure one and figure two older cyclists have more injuries in the brain, neck, and face then the younger cyclists. Due to figure 2's description of how many older cyclist don't use helmets, I am inclined to agree that older cyclists would have to wear helmets more often to prevent their injuries.

Comments on Essay A
This response represents very successful perfonnance on the task. The writer identifies three claims from the reading selection and explains the relationship of Figures 1 and 2 to these claims with accuracy, a high degree of complexity, and insight.

The writer accomplishes this task by first stating one claim (middle aged cyclers from the ages of 35-54 are especially at risk of injuries.. .") and establishing a link to Figure 1 ("Figure one in 1998 agrees that cyclists within that age bracket do in fact suffer ..."). Next, the writer establishes a link between a second claim ("The reading selection found that 'less than half of the adult cyclists regularly wear helmets compared to almost 75% of children under age 16"') and Figure 2 ("Figure two agrees with this theory by showing two graphs. The graph to the left shows ..."). And in the last paragraph, the writer extends his analysis of Figures 1 and 2 and finishes his response by linking the data to a third claim (". ..if older cyclists had more helmet usage there would be less injuries.") ("Clearly from figure one and figure two older cyclists have more injuries in the brain, neck, and face. .."). Furthermore, the overall use of transitions and references, as well as clear language, help to facilitate communication of the writer's ideas.

Essay B: example of a strong response

      The reading selection "Bicycle Safety," which is based upon a research study claims that injuries resulting from bicycle accidents are a common occurrence. In addition, the reading also states that the chances of severe injuries are greater to middle-aged riders between the ages of 35-54 then to those riders who are under 16 years of age.

      The reading attributes this to several factors, the most important being that the middle age riders do not wear their helmets on a consistant basis leaving them more susceptible to serious injury.

      Both graph number one and graph number two support the claims of the reading. Graph number two supports the claim by showing that only 38% of middle-age riders consistantly wear a helmet where over 75% of riders under 16 years of age do consistently where a helmet Graph number one shows the number and the type of injuries that occur due to bicycle accidents broken down by age group and clearly indicate that injuries occur in a greater frequency to those in the middle-age bracket. In addition, the greatest & most obvious number of injuries that occur more frequently to middle-age riders are those of brain injuries which are more than doubled in the middle-age rider. This can be directly linked to both the claims of the reading and graph number two because brain injuries are generally caused by severe trama to the head which can be prevented by wearing a helmet, which protects one's head. In addition another supporting piece of data in graph one is that the difference in the number of extremity injuries (injuries to hands, arms & legs) are much lower. This is because these are area's that a helmet does not cover therefore, leading me to believe that there is less of a difference in the number of middle-age & younger riders who have these injuries.

      In conclusion, both graphs adequately support the major claim of the reading that many injuries to middle-age bicycle riders can be prevented if they choose to wear a protective helmet.

Comments on Essay B
This response represents a successful performance of the task. The writer identifies two claims and provides additional insight for one of the claims. The first claim is linked to Figure 2 ("Graph number two supports the claim by showing that only 38% of middle-age riders consistantly wear a helmet where over 75% of riders under 16 years of age do consistently where a helmet."). The second claim is linked to Figure 1 ("Graph number one shows the number and the type of injuries that occur due to bicycle accidents broken down by age group and clearly indicate that injuries occur in a greater frequency to those in the middle-age bracket. "). The writer goes on to discuss a relationship between Figure 2 and the second claim ("In addition, the greatest & most obvious number injuries that occur more frequently to middle-age riders are those of brain injuries which are more than doubled in the middle- age rider. This can be directly linked to both the claims of the reading and graph number two because..."). Although some of the writer's language contains errors and some sentences are not well formed, the meaning is clear. The flow of the response and the connections between ideas are satisfactory.

Essay C: example of a successful response

      Bicycle safety discusses the injury rate of 2 major groups, riders under 16 and middle-aged riders. The major claim of this article is there is a difference in injury rates between these two groups due to numberous factors, in particular wearing a helmet.

      By reviewing the data in both figure 1 and figure 2 it can be stated that many facts support claims made in the passage. In figure 1 we see that it is true in regards to brain and neck injuries middle-aged riders suffer nearly twice as much as riders under 16, but that doesn't seem to be the case for facial and extremety injuries. There is a smaller difference between the group in these 2 catagories of injuries. Reason being these injuries do not involve the head or neck and independent of helmet use.

      In figure 2 we see support for the claim of increased injuries do to not wearing a helmet. Only one percent of riders under 16 never wear a helmet compared to the 54% of middle-aged riders. While 75% of riders under 16 always wear a helmet compared to the 38% of middle-aged riders who always wears a helmet.

      If you examine both figures you can see direct correlation between the percentage of riders not wearing/sometimes wearing a helmet and the difference in the rate of head & neck injuries

Comments on Essay C
This response represents an adequate perfonnance of the task. The writer accurately identifies two claims from the reading selection and adequately explains the relationship of Figure 1 to one of these claims ("In figure 1 we see that it is true in regards to brain and neck injuries. ..") and Figure 2 to the other claim ("In figure 2 we see support for the claim of increased injuries do to not wearing a helmet."). However, the analysis does not go beyond the obvious interpretation. Although the writer's language contains errors and some sentences are not well formed, the writer's meaning is almost always clear. And the flow of the response and the connections between ideas are satisfactory.

Essay D: example of almost successful response

      As adults we always try to teach our children about safety and its importance. In the 1980's a law was passed that children under the age of fourteen should wear a helmet when riding their bikes. If found riding a bike without a helmet their parents were given a ticket. This came about due to many head injuries that were occurring when children would fall from their bikes. There is also a law against anyone riding a motor bike with a helmet.

      Looking at the statistics, it appears that the law needs to be changed and that adults should practice what they preach. Whereas 75% of children were wearing helmet it showed that only 38% of adults were, this could support the claim as to why 35-54 years old were at risk for injuries which happen at nearly twice the rate of riders under the age of 16. Also the claim that less than half of adult cyclists regularly wear helmets.

      The latter part of the report states that if there is to be a reduction in injuries among adults, attitudes toward helmet usage must change. The numbers in figure 2 support this claim. When you take a look at number of adults versus the number of children who wears a helmet it is approximately a ratio of 2 to 1. As I stated before may be the law needs to be changed to. Anyone who rides a bike should wear a helmet.

      There was no supporting evidence that physical ability had anything to do with adults being injuries. Adults between the ages of35-54 are almost always considered to be young healthy adults who are active.

Comments on Essay D
This response represents almost adequate performance of the task. In this response, the writer accurately identifies two claims from the reading selection and adequately explains the relationship of one claim to Figure 2 ("Whereas 75% of children were wearing a helmet it showed that only 38% of adults were, this could support the claim as to why 35-54 years old were at risk for injuries. .."). Although the writer goes on to state another claim, he fails to establish the connecting link to Figure 1.

Essay E: example of a poor response

      After looking at the two graphs and reading the report "Bicycle Safety" there are some major claims supported by the graphs. There is also some things that I saw that contradicted the claims as well.

      In figure 1, it showed the "Serious injuries among cyclists by type of Injury and Age Group in 1998" and the "Injuries requiring Emergency Room Visits per 1000 cyclists." As far as brain injuries there 10,000 cyclists under age 16 taken to the ER, and about 25,000 aged 35-54 yrs. There were about 7,000 cyclists under 16 taken in for neck injuries and 17,000 cyclists 35-54 years withe same injuries. As far as facial injuries, there were about 22,000 under 16 and 30,000 aged 35-54, and in the extremity fractures injury lists, about 29,000 under 16, and 40,000 ages 35.54.

      In Figure 2, the pie graph shows the frequency of helmet use. For cyclists under 16, only 75% wore helmets at all times, 24% sometimes, and 1% never wore them. Cyclists ages 35-54 showed percentages of 54% never wearing helmets, 8% sometimes, and 38% always wearing helmets.

      The report claimed that middle aged cyclists suffer from brain, facial, and neck injuries at nearly twice the rate as riders under age 16. This could be true for brain and neck injury, but as far as facial the rate seemed close to each other, and there was nothing stated about extremity fractures.

      Overall, I feel that there could have been more supporting evidence for the rates and percentages. There was evidence as far as helmet use and non-use, but it didn't support the cause the way it should have.

Comments on Essay E
This response demonstrates poor performance of the task. In the response, the writer accurately identifies one claim from the reading selection ("The report claimed that middle aged cyclists suffer from brain, facial, and neck injuries at nearly twice the rate...") and adequately establishes a relationship between that claim and Figure 2 ("In Figure 2, the pie graph shows the frequency of helmet use. For cyclists under 16, only 75% wore helmets at all times. ..."). However, even though the response includes a discussion of Figure 1, the writer fails to draw the connecting link between Figure 1 and a second claim.

Essay F: example of a very poor response

      There is no doubt in my mind that a middle-aged cyclist suffer more injuries than children after seeing Figure 1 chart. But most of those injuries are for not wearing a helmet. If you take a look at the difference between facial, brain, and neck injuries against extremity fractures, and the adult propensity to use helmet, Figure 2 very clear that most of their injuries are caused by the lack of helmet use.

      We also have to understand that children under 16 use their bike with a recreational purpose, and in safe places, like parks. On the other hand, adults, especially in Europe and Asia use their bike as a transportation tool and they have to deal with traffic, and other factors.

      The fact that we are adults does not mean that we are not going to have accident. We must learned from children that safety is very important point to take in consideration, specially when riding a bike. Helmets must be weared so that injuries are prevented.

Comments on Essay F
This response demonstrates some understanding of the claims but is unsuccessful because of a superficial interpretation of the data. Although the writer mentions Figures 1 and 2 in his essay, he fails to adequately link a claim to either one of the two figures. In the concluding paragraph, he seems to take the response in the direction of the writer's own opinion, something not called for in the directions.

BACK

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FORWARD