5 points4 points3 points2 pointssuccessful integration L a w

Advanced

Proficient

Developing

Basic

7 points

5 points

3 points

1 point

Develop and present a novel argument that examines the Civil Rights Movement (CRM) within the context of post-World War II American History

Aligns connections between student’s thesis and the required themes from the CRM with a single, strong thesis statement that synthesizes student’s novel argument with primary and secondary sources.

Successfully and thoroughly cross-references 4 required themes with explicit examples from sources.

Aligns connections between student’s thesis and the required themes from the CRM with a single thesis statement; only very minor deviations from the thesis are present; the argument may tend to rehash another scholar’s ideas rather than reflect original thinking.

Successfully and thoroughly cross-references 3 required themes in general terms.

Aligns connections between student’s thesis and the required themes from the CRM with a somewhat weak and/or confusing thesis statement; deviations from the thesis statement are obvious and student occasionally summarizes rather than argues.

Attempts to cross-reference 3 required themes but some of the connections made are inaccurate and/or unsupported.

An attempt is made to align student’s thesis and the required themes from the CRM with a thesis statement, but is unsuccessful and the student tends to summarize the the CRM rather than create an argument.

Attempts to cross-reference 3 required themes but all of the connections made are inaccurate and/or unsupported.

5 points

4 points

3 points

2 points

Successful integration of primary and secondary sources to support arguments and connections

At least 4 secondary sources and 2 primary sources are deeply integrated into the presentation in a way that solidly supports the student’s argument.

Chicago style guide usage is perfect or near perfect.

At least 3 secondary sources and 1 primary source are deeply integrated into the presentation in a way that solidly supports the student’s argument.

Chicago style guide errors are minimal

At least 2 secondary sources and 1 primary source are inconsistently integrated into the presentation in a way that sometimes supports the student’s argument.

Chicago style guide errors are frequent and noticeable

At least 1 secondary source and 1 primary source are involved, but fail to adequately support the student’s argument.

Chicago style guide errors are ubiquitous throughout the presentation.

3 points

2 points

1 point

0.5 points

Writing, organization, presentation: Is the content understood?

The thesis statement appears clearly on its own slide.

Cross-references between the student’s argument and themes of the CRM are clearly organized in a way that makes it easy and even enjoyable for the audience to follow along.

Student claims and supporting evidence are linked together in an organized fashion.

Works cited appear on the final slide.

The thesis statement appears clearly on its own slide.

Cross-references between the student’s argument and themes of the CRM are organized in a way that usually makes it easy for the audience to follow along.

Student claims and supporting evidence are linked together in a mostly organized fashion.

Works cited appear on the final slide.

The thesis is obscured.

Cross-references between the student’s argument and themes of the CRM are not well organized and the audience has some difficulty following along.

Student claims and supporting evidence are inconsistently linked together and are somewhat disorganized.

Works cited are not properly formatted or organized.

There is no discernable thesis.

Cross-references between the student’s argument and themes of of the CRM are impossible to clearly identify within the presentation.

Student claims and supporting evidence are not linked together and are very disorganized.

The works cited slide is either missing and/or dispersed in a confusing way throughout many slides.

5 points

4 points

3 points

2 points

Analysis of other presentations

Responds to at least 3 other students’ arguments with substantive constructive criticism and at least one thoughtful question that expands on the understanding of the field and requires further research to answer fully; the question identifies a gap in the historiography.

Integrates secondary sources into all comments and questions in a sophisticated way (uses specific examples and details).

Responds to at least 3 other students’ arguments with substantive constructive criticism and at least one thoughtful question that encourages deeper thinking about the issue.

Integrates secondary sources into all comments and questions in a basic way (mentions/cites them).

Responds to at least 2 other students’ arguments with constructive criticism that is somewhat useful and a question that evokes only a basic or simple answer.

Integrates secondary sources into some comments and questions but not all.

Attempts to respond to at least 1 other student’s argument but fails to offer any useful feedback and cannot come up with a thoughtful question.

Does not integrate secondary sources into comments and questions.