New York Performance Standards Consortium Student ___________________________________________________ Social Studies Research Paper Title of Research ___________________________________________ Teacher or External Evaluator __________________________________________________________________ Date________ Overall evaluation ___________________________ Signature __________________________________________________ 09/08 Performance Indicators Viewpoint Effective and Appropriate Use Of Evidence Effective Organization Outstanding Has sharply defined, compelling organizing idea, thesis or question. Coherent, complex, sophisticated arguments support organizing idea/thesis. Opposing arguments opposing organizing idea/thesis are clearly presented. Supporting arguments include specific, relevant, and highly persuasive evidence, drawn from both primary and secondary sources. Uses quotations and paraphrasing appropriately to sustain an argument. Clearly, thoughtfully, and thoroughly explains or analyzes the connection between the evidence and supporting arguments. Each opposing argument is supported by consistently clear, well-connected, and focused evidence. Clear, thoughtful, and precise explanation for the lack of persuasiveness in each opposing argument’s evidence. Counter-evidence may be introduced. Clear introduction presents thesis in a highly engaging, compelling manner. Each argument clearly supports an overall structure. Consistent, effective transitions develop ideas and arguments logically& build to compelling, persuasive conclusion. Distinct conclusion synthesizes arguments that support idea/general thesis. Good Competent Needs Revision Has clearly defined organizing Organizing thesis, idea or idea, thesis or question question is comprehensible but Coherent, sometimes complex not especially clear arguments support organizing Coherent but rarely complex or idea/thesis. sophisticated arguments Arguments opposing the support organizing idea/thesis. organizing idea/thesis are Opposing arguments are clearly presented. clearly presented but not always thoroughly explained Supporting arguments include Evidence for supporting relevant and mostly persuasive arguments are sometimes evidence, drawn from both specific, mostly relevant and primary and secondary source. generally persuasive, Uses quotations and Use of quotations and paraphrasing appropriately to paraphrasing is too inconsistent sustain an argument. to sustain an argument. Mostly clear and thoughtful Some explanation of how the explanation or analysis of how evidence presented supports the evidence presented supports each argument, but the each argument. explanation are not always Each opposing argument is clear and thorough. supported by evidence that is Evidence for opposing mostly clear and wellarguments is not consistently connected. introduced or critiqued. Clear, thoughtful, and mostly Clear and thoughtful response precise explanation for the lack to the opposing argument may of persuasiveness in each reference, but does not always opposing argument’s evidence. specify, evidence. Counter-evidence may be introduced. Organizing idea, thesis, or question is not clear. Arguments lack coherence and/or clarity Arguments opposing the organizing idea/thesis are either missing or not clearly presented. Clear introduction presents thesis in an engaging manner. Each argument presented supports an overall structure Usually uses effective transitions to connect ideas and arguments, leading to a persuasive conclusion. Distinct conclusion partly synthesizes, but mostly represents the major arguments to support idea/general thesis Introduction and the thesis it contains are not clear. Arguments presented are not clearly or supportively connected to the overall structure Transitions between arguments are largely unclear. Conclusion is either vague or unclear and poorly connected to the paper’s major arguments. Mostly clear introduction presents thesis in a coherent, comprehensible manner. Most arguments presented in clearly support the overall structure. Transitions are sometimes abrupt but the arguments and conclusion mostly connect. Conclusion represents major arguments and connects them to thesis; some synthesis. Supporting arguments lack clear, persuasive, or relevant supporting evidence. Quotations and paraphrasing are inappropriately used to support arguments No explanation or analysis of how or why the evidence supports each argument. Evidence supporting opposing arguments is either missing or poorly integrated. Response to opposing argument is general and not based on an analysis of evidence. Performance Indicators Understanding of Implications and Context Strong, Engaged Student Voice Conventions External Assessment and Validation Outstanding Good Arguments, ideas, and voice Arguments and ideas, and reflect a highly informed voice reflect a somewhat awareness of the larger informed awareness of the historical, political, or larger historical, political, or cultural context surrounding cultural context surrounding questions addressed in the questions addressed in the paper. paper. Broader implications of the Some broader implication of central arguments are presented the central argument is and thoroughly explored. presented and explored. Confident, highly fluid writing Confident writing style is style is evident; writes with evident; writes with engaging, lively, engaging, articulate mostly articulate language that language that yields wellyields developed and original developed, original ideas and ideas and some new new understanding. Paper has understanding. Paper has an distinct, individual identity that individual identity that manifests itself throughout. manifests itself at important points in the text. Grammar and punctuation Grammar and punctuation nearly flawless. mostly correct. Appropriate and accessible Appropriate and accessible documentation of sources documentation of sources (complete, well-organized (complete, well-organized bibliography and citations). bibliography and citations) Competent Needs Revision Arguments, ideas, and voice Arguments, ideas and voice reflect a very general, reflect almost no awareness of somewhat less informed the larger historical, political, awareness of the larger or cultural context surrounding historical, political, or cultural the questions addressed in the context surrounding questions paper. addressed in the paper The broader implications of the The broader implications of the central argument are neither central argument are alluded to presented nor explored. but not necessarily explored. Engaged but somewhat Awkward, wooden, or tentative or basic writing style; confusing writing style: student writes clearly but language is voice is buried at best; writing such that original ideas are not is disorganized and ideas in fully expressed or developed. general are poorly expressed. Paper has clear viewpoint but Viewpoint is obscured or lacks persuasive conviction. inhibited by the writing. Grammar and punctuation sometimes flawed, but not in a manner that undermines the coherence and clarity of the paper’s ideas. Accessible, complete but somewhat imprecise bibliography and citations Communicates clear Communicates clear Communicates a mostly clear understanding of the paper’s understanding of the paper’s and basic understanding of the ideas and arguments in an ideas and arguments in an paper’s ideas and arguments in appropriate, consistently appropriate, sometimes an appropriate, thoughtful sophisticated way that sophisticated way that though not necessarily demonstrates ownership to demonstrates ownership to sophisticated manner to assessors. assessors. examiners. Presentation and response to Presentation and response to Presentation and response to questions reflect the coherence questions reflect the coherence questions may not fully reflect and depth of the paper. and depth of the paper. the coherence and depth of the Answers questions accurately, Answers questions accurately, paper, but they are nevertheless thoughtfully, and effectively, thoughtfully, and effectively, clear and thoughtful. developing new ideas when developing new ideas when Answers to questions are they are appropriate. Presents they are appropriate. mostly accurate, thoughtful, relevant evidence that may not and effective. have appeared in the paper. Consistently defective grammar and punctuation Inappropriate and/or mistaken documentation of sources (poorly organized, incomplete bibliography and citations). Fails to communicate a clear and basic understanding of the paper’s ideas and arguments in an appropriate, thoughtful manner. Presentation and response to questions reflects the incoherence and general weakness of the paper. Answers questions superficially, inappropriately, or incorrectly.