| Excellent | Very Good | Satisfactory | Fair | Poor | |
| Use of Evidence | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Evaluation of Evidence | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Clarity of Argument | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Quality of Writing | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Standards for Superior Work (5)
Use of Evidence: Primary source information used to buttress every point with at least one example.
Evaluation of Evidence: Recognizes that there are gaps in the historical record and missing evidence and may on occasion turn the missing evidence to the argument’s advantage.
Clarity of Argument: Answer/essay has a clear, well-articulated, and appropriate thesis. Well-written and appropriate integration of quoted material into sentences.
Quality of Writing: Answer/essay is well written in complete sentences with subject/verb agreement. If a longer essay, each paragraph contains a topic sentence, followed by supporting evidence and ending with a summary sentence. Transitions between paragraphs are appropriate and clear. The answer/essay is generally free from spelling and grammatical errors.
Standards for Above-Average Work (4)
Use of Evidence: Examples used to support most points. Some evidence does not support point or may appear where inappropriate.
Evaluation of Evidence: Appreciates gaps in the evidence or missing evidence but has difficulty in handling missing or incomplete evidence.
Clarity of Argument: Answer/essay has an appropriate thesis, but its articulation is confusing and/or vague. Quotations well integrated into sentences.
Quality of Writing: Answer/essay is generally well written and easy to follow. Paragraphs may not always contain a clear topic sentence, and transitions may sometimes be lacking. The answer/essay may contain a few spelling and grammatical errors.
Standards for Average “Needs Help” Work (3)
Use of Evidence: Examples used to support some points, but other points lack supporting evidence or use evidence where inappropriate.
Evaluation of Evidence: Has problems with incomplete or missing evidence and tends to ignore evidentiary gaps. At times, attempts to fill the gaps with unwarranted speculation or unsupported arguments.
Clarity of Argument: The answer/essay lacks a clear thesis or has one that is inappropriate to the topic. Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences.
Quality of Writing: Many paragraphs lack a clear topic sentence, and transitions are often weak. There are a number of places where word choice is weak and subject/verb agreement is lacking. There may be more than a few spelling and grammatical errors.
Standards for “Really Needs a Lot of Help” Work (2)
Use of Evidence: Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement.
Evaluation of Evidence: Does not see gaps in evidence or appreciate missing evidence. Attempts to “fill” lacunae with “manufactured” evidence or engages in wild speculation.
Clarity of Argument: The answer/essay has no thesis. Quotes are not integrated effectively.
Quality of Writing: Writing is weak with many grammatical and spelling errors.
Failing Work (1)
There has been minimal effort and no real understanding of the assignment.
Rubric for Grading Video or Digital Presentation Assignments
| Excellent | Very Good | Satisfactory | Fair | Poor | |
| Use of Evidence | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Evaluation of Evidence | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Clarity of Argument | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Quality of Presentation | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Standards for Superior Work (5)
Use of Evidence: Primary source information used to buttress every point with at least one example.
Evaluation of Evidence: Recognizes that there are gaps in the historical record and missing evidence and may on occasion turn the missing evidence to the argument’s advantage.
Clarity of Argument: Answer/essay has a clear, well-articulated, and appropriate thesis. Well-written and appropriate integration of quoted material into sentences.
Quality of Presentation: The video or digital presentation is clearly produced, easy to see and hear. Each section had a clear topic statement with supporting evidence, both in visual and audio material, and ends with a summary. Transitions between sections are appropriate and clear. Written materials as well as audio portions are free from spelling, grammatical, and pronunciation errors.
Standards for Above-Average Work (4)
Use of Evidence: Examples used to support most points. Some evidence does not support point or may appear where inappropriate.
Evaluation of Evidence: Appreciates gaps in the evidence or missing evidence but has difficulty in handling missing or incomplete evidence.
Clarity of Argument: Answer/essay has an appropriate thesis but its articulation is confusing and/or vague. Quotations well integrated into sentences.
Quality of Presentation: The video or digital presentation is generally clearly produced, easy to see and hear. Sections may not always have clear topics, and transitions between sections may be lacking. Written materials as well as audio portions may contain a few spelling, grammatical, and pronunciation errors.
Standards for Average “Needs Help” Work (3)
Use of Evidence: Examples used to support some points, but other points lack supporting evidence or use evidence where inappropriate.
Evaluation of Evidence: Has problems with incomplete or missing evidence and tends to ignore evidentiary gaps. At times, attempts to fill the gaps with unwarranted speculation or unsupported arguments.
Clarity of Argument: The answer/essay lacks a clear thesis or has one that is inappropriate to the topic. Quotes may be poorly integrated into sentences.
Quality of Presentation: Sections of the video or digital presentation lack clear topics, and transitions are often weak. There are a number of places where the choice of visual or audio material is weak. Written material as well as audio portions have more than a few spelling, grammatical, and pronunciation problems.
Standards for “Really Needs a Lot of Help” Work (2)
Use of Evidence: Very few or very weak examples. General failure to support statements, or evidence seems to support no statement.
Evaluation of Evidence: Does not see gaps in evidence or appreciate missing evidence. Attempts to “fill” lacunae with “manufactured” evidence or engages in wild speculation.
Clarity of Argument: The answer/essay has no thesis. Quotes are not integrated effectively.
Quality of Presentation: The video or digital presentation is weak with many problems in spelling, grammar, and pronunciation.
Failing Work (1)
There has been minimal effort and no real understanding of the assignment.