Name: _______________________________ Date: ____________ Per._______
AP Language Canon Paper
Due Date:
Directions: This assignment requires you to synthesize a variety of sources into a coherent, well-written essay.
When you synthesize sources you refer to them to develop your position and cite them accurately.
You must use MLA citation format with a work cited page.
Your argument should be central; the sources should support this argument. Avoid merely summarizing sources.
Remember to attribute both direct and indirect citations.
Introduction:
Some nations have a defined national school curriculum, while others, such as the United States, do not. As a result,
students in high school English classes in the United States can read texts that vary widely from school to school, while
students in other countries may all read the same books in high school.
Assignment:
Review and re-read as needed any of the reading material you have done so far this school year (including summer
reading) carefully.
Write an essay that develops a position on whether or not there should be specific texts that all students of high school
English must read.
A few available sources:
“Amusing Ourselves to Death” Neil Postman
“Death of a Moth” Virginia Wolf
“Shooting an Elephant” by George Orwell
“Against School: How Public Education
Cripples our Kids and Why” John Taylor Gatto
“The Allegory of the Cave” by Plato
“Letter from Birmingham Jail” MLK Jr.
“On Compassion” Barbara Ascher
“Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas
Carr
“Get Smarter.” Jamais Cascio
Check List:
The author provides the required Toulmin model
______ 10
The author provides the required rough draft and peer review
______ 10
The author provides all three sources
______ 10
The author follows MLA format
______ 10
Name: _______________________________ Date: ____________ Per._______
Scoring Guide
9—Papers earning a score of 9 meet the criteria for 8 papers and, in addition, are especially sophisticated in their
argument, skillful in their synthesis of sources, structure of argument, close reading, and/or impressive in their control of
language.
8-Effective—Papers earning this score effectively develop an appropriate, clear, and significant perspective or thesis.
They support their perspective by successfully synthesizing*, persuading, arguing, or explaining sources and arguments.
Support is embedded in the author’s language and demonstrates strong understanding of the readings. The paper’s
organization works to support the content with a conclusion that does not merely summarize points already made.
Multiple perspectives are addressed in detail. The writer’s argument is convincing or thought provoking, and there is a
clear voice behind the ideas. Grammar or spelling errors are minimal and do not distract from the content.
7—Papers earning a score of 7 fit the description of 6 papers but are distinguished by more complete or more purposeful
argumentation and synthesis of sources or a more mature prose style.
6—Adequate—Papers earning a score of 6 adequately develop an appropriate and clear (even if just implied) thesis. They
develop their position by synthesizing, persuading, arguing, or explaining sources and arguments. Support is embedded in
the author’s language and demonstrates understanding of the readings. The writer’s argument is generally convincing and
the writer uses the sources to support a position, but the argument is less developed or less cogent than the arguments of
papers earning higher scores. The language may contain lapses in diction or syntax, and several selling or grammar errors,
but generally the prose is clear.
5— Papers earning an 5 develop a (even if just implied) thesis. They develop their position by synthesizing persuading,
arguing, or explaining sources and arguments, but their arguments and their use of sources are somewhat limited,
inconsistent, or uneven. The writer’s argument is generally clear, and the sources generally develop the writer’s position,
but the links between the sources and the argument may be strained. The writing may contain lapses in diction or syntax,
and several selling or grammar errors, but it usually conveys the writer’s ideas adequately.
4—Inadequate—Papers earning a 4 inadequately develop a perspective or significant thesis. They attempt to present an
argument and develop their position by persuading, arguing, or explaining sources and arguments but may misunderstand,
misrepresent, or oversimplify either their own argument or the sources they include. The link between the argument and
the sources is weak. The prose of these papers may suggest a lack of control in the writing as there are multiple spelling,
grammar, diction, and syntax errors.
3—Papers earning a score of 3 meet the criteria for the score of 4 but demonstrate less understanding of the sources, less
success in developing their own position or less control of writing.
2—Little Success—Papers earning a score of 2 demonstrate little success in developing a thesis. They may merely allude
to knowledge gained from reading the sources rather than citing the sources themselves. They lack structured argument
and rhetorical style. These papers may misread the sources, fail to present an argument, or substitute a simpler task by
merely responding to the question tangentially or by merely summarizing the sources. The prose of such papers often
demonstrates consistent weaknesses in writing, such as a lack of development or organization, grammatical problems, or a
lack of control.
1—Papers earning a score of 1 meet the criteria for a score of 2 but are especially simplistic or are weak in their control of
writing or do not cite even one source.
0—indicates an on-topic response that receives no credit, such as one that merely repeats the prompt.
— Indicates a blank response or one that is completely off topic.
9 = 100 8= 94
7 = 90
6 = 84
5 = 80
4 = 74
3 = 70
2 = 64
1 = 60
*for the purposes of scoring, synthesis refers to combining the sources and the writer’s position to form a cohesive,
supported argument accurately citing sources.