Question

your conclusion needs to: re - state your thesis in a manner different from your introduction, it needs (for argumentative papers) make a comment on alternative views (while making this other side seem reasonable in some way) and then rebutt them, and it needs a call to action if there is space. think of the scale as: 1 = f (60 or lower), 2 (between a 71 and a 70) = c, 3 (89 - 85) = b, 4 (86 - 93) = high b/low a, 5 = (94 - 100). a \0\ means the prompt was so off target that it could not be accepted.
sample:
reasons such as unique governing policies and balancing issues of the landscape are reasons why there are unusual factors when it comes to antarctica which do not exist anywhere else in the world. while some may point to similar seeming reasons elsewhere in the world, possibly because there are parallels on other continents with unique governing laws or environmental issues, none of them are the same as those in antarctica.
○ this sample is a 4
○ this sample is a 5
○ this sample is a 0
○ this sample is a 1
○ this sample is a 2
○ this sample is a 3

Explanation:

To determine the score, we analyze the sample against the conclusion requirements: re - state thesis (it does, about Antarctica's unique factors), comment on alternative views (acknowledges similar - seeming reasons elsewhere) and rebutt (says they aren't the same as Antarctica's), but there's no call to action. The score scale: 4 is High B/Low A (86 - 93). The sample meets most requirements but lacks a call to action, so it's a 4.

Answer:

A. This sample is a 4