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

Standards for Superior Work (5)

Use of Evidence: Makes excellent use of primary sources in presentation, drawing information from the sources in the unit.

Subject Knowledge: Presentation offers an in-depth understanding of the primary sources, drawing on class discussions, readings, and own interpretation of the evidence. Presentation exhibits an original analysis of the material.

Organization: Presentation is coherently organized and makes purpose of project and position known to audience.

Use of Technology and Creativity: Uses visuals to enhance the presentation and presents material in an engaging manner.

Standards for Above-Average Work (4)

Use of Evidence: Uses the evidence presented in the primary sources and offers partial engagement with the sources in the presentation.

Subject Knowledge: Presentation offers good analysis and understanding of the primary sources, but analysis somewhat lacking in depth or breadth.

Organization: Presentation demonstrates good organization. Position being taken on the subject is at times unclear.

Use of Technology and Creativity: Makes good use of technology and visuals, but presentation text-heavy or cumbersome at times.

Standards for Average “Needs Help” Work (3)

Use of Evidence: Includes information from the primary sources but makes limited use of the material.

Subject Knowledge: Presentation demonstrates a fair level of understanding and analytical skill. Analysis of the evidence does not demonstrate an understanding of the larger historical context.

Organization: Presentation demonstrates an attempt at organization, but many aspects are hard to follow. Purpose of presentation not clearly stated, and position on the subject confusing.

Use of Technology and Creativity: Limited use of visuals or items used detracts from the presentation.

Standards for “Really Needs a Lot of Help” Work (2)

Use of Evidence: Content from primary sources is minimal, and there are many errors in the presentation.

Subject Knowledge: Poor understanding of the evidence is presented through no or severely limited analysis that does not incorporate larger themes or an understanding of the position and biases of historical character.

Organization: Unclear organization to the presentation. A misunderstanding of the position of historical character and purpose demonstrated in presentation.

Use of Technology and Creativity: Presentation text-heavy and not engaging to the audience. Use of visuals minimal.

Failing Work (1)

Use of Evidence: Does not use primary source evidence in presentation and demonstrates no clear understanding of the project.

Subject Knowledge: Presents no clear understanding of the assignment, evidence, or historical context.

Organization: No organization of project, and presentation reflects minimal effort.

Use of Technology and Creativity: No effort put into presentation. No use of visuals or other materials that engage the audience.