| 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 and Digital Presentation Assignments
| Excellent | Very Good | Satisfactory | Fair | Poor | |
| Selection of Sources | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Evaluation of Sources | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Quality of Written Captions | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Bibliography | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Standards for Superior Work (5)
Selection of Sources: Presentation includes five to seven additional posters that were produced outside the United States during World War I or that were produced in the United States during World War II. Posters depict a variety of different themes and ideas.
Evaluation of Sources: Captions provide a rich and insightful analysis of each poster, draw connections between posters, and situate the posters in the appropriate historical context.
Quality of Written Captions: Each caption is clear and well written in complete sentences with subject/verb agreement. The caption is generally free from spelling and grammatical errors.
Bibliography: Bibliography lists all primary and secondary sources and is formatted in accordance with the Chicago Manual of Style.
Standards for Above Average Work (4)
Selection of Sources: Presentation includes five or six additional posters that were produced outside the United States during World War I or that were produced in the United States during World War II (one poster may not fit this criteria). Some posters may present themes that are too similar to one another.
Evaluation of Sources: Captions offer a thoughtful analysis of each poster. They may or may not draw connections between posters. They should make an attempt to situate the posters in the appropriate historical context.
Quality of Written Captions: Most captions are clear and well written in complete sentences. The caption may contain a few spelling and grammatical errors.
Bibliography: Bibliography attempts to lists all primary and secondary sources, in accordance with the Chicago Manual of Style, but may contain a few errors.
Standards for Average “Needs Help” Work (3)
Selection of Sources: Presentation includes four or more posters that were produced outside the United States during World War I or that were produced in the United States during World War II (some of the posters might not fit this criteria). The posters selected do not reflect much attention to diverse themes or messages.
Evaluation of Sources: Captions describe the poster without analyzing them. They typically do not draw connections between the posters. They do not situate the posters adequately in their historical context.
Quality of Written Captions: Several of the captions are clear, but others are not well written. There are a number of places where word choice is weak and subject and verbs do not agree. There may be more than a few spelling and grammatical errors.
Bibliography: Bibliography lists all primary and secondary sources, but fails to do so in accordance with the Chicago Manual of Style.
Standards for “Really Needs a Lot of Help” Work (2)
Selection of Sources: Presentation does not include enough sources, or many of the sources chosen do not fit the criteria of the assignment.
Evaluation of Sources: Captions may describe the contents of the poster, but make no effort to analyze them, to compare them with one another, or to situate them in the appropriate historical context.
Quality of Written Captions: Most captions are poorly written. Writing is weak with many grammatical and spelling errors.
Bibliography: Bibliography is either incomplete and improperly formatted or not included at all.
Failing Work (1)
There has been minimal effort and no real understanding of the assignment.