Rubric
Out of 100 points for this assignment:
5 points for opening with a clear description of your intent: what you are doing and why you are doing it. This description of intent should be one paragraph or less. For example, “I am adding an example to section 2.1 because I felt it needed another example of this type”. Or, “I am rewriting the explanation on page 314 because it didn't make sense to me, and I think the way I've written it sounds better”. Also, please specifically state whether or not you would release your work with a Creative Commons Attribution license for possibly adding it to the book.
35 points for how clear your submission is. For example, you would lose points for sentences that do not make sense as sentences. Or you would lose points if your submission comes with a graph whose details are unlcear. Or you could lose points for reaching some conclusion without explaining the steps that lead to that conclusion. And there are other potential issues with clarity too. Bring your work to me before turing it in, and I can let you know how it stands with respect to clarity. If you do lose points for clarity, I will explain how/why.
15 points for keeping your submission reasonalby concise while still keeping it clear. This should be an easy item to ace. You simply need to avoid letting your work go off into side discussions that are not relevant to the mathematics you are trying to teach.
25 points for having no incorrect mathematics in your work. Since these contributions may end up in the book, we don't want any errors!
20 points for submitting something that fits well into the section you are improving. For instance, if you were to add an example about advanced number theory to the section on graphing lines, you would probably get zero out of 20. If your work is a bad fit in more subtle ways, you might not get all 20 points here. Bring your work to me before turing it in, and I can let you know how well it seems to fit. If you do lose points for this item, I will explain how/why.
