History Rubric Performance Task Part 2 – Argumentative Report
Criteria / Level
Purpose, Focus &
Organization:
How well did the writer
state his/her thesis &
maintain focus?
How well did the writer
address the alternate &
opposing claims?
How well did the claims
and ideas logically flow?
How effective are the
introduction &
conclusion for the
purpose?
Advanced 4
The response is fully sustained &
is consistently & purposely
focused:
 Thesis is clearly stated,
focused, & has a strongly
maintained position that
addresses the prompt;
 Alternate or opposing claims
are clearly developed;
 Logical progression of
claims and ideas from
beginning to end
 Effective introduction and
conclusion for purpose
Proficient 3
The response is adequately
sustained & generally focused:
 Thesis is clear & position is
mostly maintained, though
some loosely related
material may be present;
 Alternate or opposing
claims are acknowledged
but not clearly developed;
 Adequate progression of
claims and ideas from
beginning to end
 Adequate introduction and
conclusion for purpose
Nearing Proficient 2
The response is somewhat
sustained & may have a minor drift
in focus:
 Thesis may be clearly focused
on the selected position but is
insufficiently sustained;
 Alternate or opposing claims
are missing;
 Uneven progression of claims
and ideas from beginning to
end
 Introduction and conclusion, if
present, are weak or
inappropriate for purpose
Novice/Emerging 1
The response may be
related to the purpose but
may provide little or no
focus:
 Thesis is vague or
missing and may drift
from the assigned focus;
 Alternate or opposing
claims are missing;
 Position may be
confusing or ambiguous
in relation to the claims
and ideas
 Missing introduction and
conclusion
Unacceptable
Insufficient,
unreadable,
incoherent,
off-topic, or
off-purpose
writing.
Use of Documents:
How well did the student
use documents in the
support of the thesis and
claims?
How accurately &
effectively did the writer
cite evidence from the
provided documents?
The response provides thorough
and convincing support/evidence
with accurate citation:
 Use of documents is
substantial, accurate and
interwoven throughout the
essay
 Evidence is consistently &
correctly cited in MLA
format;
The response provides adequate
support/evidence with citation:
 Documents are used to
accurately support the
thesis and claims
 Evidence is mostly cited,
although sources may be
incorrectly cited
The response provides uneven,
cursory support/evidence with
attempted citation:
 Documents are weakly
applied and limited in
number
 Citations are inconsistently
used
The response provides
minimal support/evidence
with no citation:
 No documents are used
to support the thesis
and claims
 Citations are not used
Insufficient,
unreadable,
incoherent,
off-topic, or
off-purpose
writing.
Historical Analysis:
How well did the writer use
outside historical
information to
contextualize the
documents and support
the thesis and/or
claims?
How historically accurate is
the writer’s use of the
evidence?
How accurately did the
writer analyze the
usefulness of the
documents?
The response achieves
substantial depth of analysis that
is specific and relevant:

Writer uses relevant and
substantial outside
information/historical facts
to support the thesis and
claims.
 Contains no significant
factual errors or
misrepresentation of
information
 Usefulness of the
documents to the historical
argument is persuasively
addressed
The response achieves some
depth and specificity, but at
times explains rather than
critically analyzes the evidence:
 Writer uses some relevant
and substantial outside
information/historical facts
to support the thesis and
claims
 May contain minor factual
errors that do not seriously
detract from the quality of
the essay
 Usefulness of documents
to the historical argument
is sometimes addressed
The response achieves little depth
and is informative rather than
argumentative:
 Writer uses minimal outside
information/ historical facts
to support the thesis and
claims
 May contain major factual or
interpretive errors
 Usefulness of documents to
the historical argument is not
directly addressed
The response provides no
analysis and/or limited
information:
 Uses no outside
information/historical
facts to support the
thesis and claims.
 Contains numerous
factual or interpretive
errors both major and
minor
 Usefulness of any
documents to the
historical argument is
ignored
Insufficient,
unreadable,
incoherent,
off-topic, or
off-purpose
writing.
Language and
Conventions:
How well did the writer
express ideas using
precise language &
vocabulary appropriate
to the purpose of the
essay?
How well did the writer
follow rules of sentence
structure, usage,
punctuation, spelling &
capitalization?
How well did the writer use
a variety of transitions to
connect ideas?
The response effectively
expresses ideas with precise
language, conventions and
transitions.

Language is accurate and
appropriate for the
purpose

Response demonstrates
command of conventions

Consistent use of a variety
of transitional strategies to
clarify the relationships
between & among ideas;
The response adequately
expresses ideas using a mixture
of precise and general language,
conventions and transitions

Language is mostly
accurate and appropriate
for the purpose

Response mostly
demonstrates command of
conventions

Adequate use of
transitional strategies with
some variety to clarify the
relationships between &
among ideas;
The response expresses ideas,
uses conventions, and uses
transitions in a simplistic, vague, or
confusing manner.

Language is informal and/or
general

Response demonstrates
partial command of
conventions; some
rereading may be required

Inconsistent use of
transitional strategies and/or
little variety;
The expression of ideas is
vague, lacks clarity,
conventions, transitions and
is confusing

Language is
inappropriate or fails
to communicate an
awareness of
purpose;

Errors are frequent
and severe and
meaning is obscured

Few or no transitional
strategies are evident;
Insufficient,
unreadable,
incoherent,
off-topic, or
off-purpose
writing.
Social Studies Performance Task Rubric Part 1. Kalispell, MT: Kalispell Public School District. Summer 2013.
Updated 5/20/2014
Created with reference to Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. “Grade 11 Performance Task Sample Item.” 2012. http://sampleitems.smarterbalanced.org/itempreview/sbac/ELA.htm# Web. 10/15/12.