||There was no evidence of understanding the different
perspectives.(No inclusion of the differing opinions or it only includes
||There was little evidence of understanding the
perspectives. More than one perspective is included in the report. No or
little evidence is used to support the opinions.
||There was some evidence of understanding the
perspectives. More than one perspective is included in the report. Students
explained the pros and cons of taking these perspectives and supported their
arguments with examples.
||There was clear evidence of understanding the
different perspectives. Students found commonalties and differences between
the perspectives. Students used additional research to support their opinions.
Students analyzed the sources from which these perspectives were told \and
considered the author's biases and agendas.
||There was no evidence of understanding
the information (the history and politics). Students used facts incorrectly
or confused facts with opinions.
||There was little evidence of understanding
the information (the history and politics)
||There was some evidence of understanding
the information (the history and politics). Students used facts correctly
to support their assertions.
||There was clear evidence of understanding
the material. Students demonstrated a mastery of the history through accurately
referencing examples throughout the report to support their assertions.
Students analyzed the information from their research and considered the
|Overall Quality of Writing
|| This report uses poor English and needs to
||The writing in this report is difficult to understand.
Paragraphs and/or choices of words often don't make sense, or else it looks
like the writing was done by someone other than the authors.
||This report has many interesting things in it.
The writing is understandable, but there are some places where it may be
hard to understand. The writing could probably have been improved if the
authors had asked for reviewers to give them more suggestions for improvement.
|The report is interesting to read and holds
the visitor's attention. Writing is simple, clear, direct, and in an active
voice. Paragraphs are well structured and there is a logical flow from one
paragraph to the next, and from one page to the next.
|Writing of Details
||There is a variety of supporting
information, much of which is useful, adds interest and contributes to an
understanding of the project's main idea. Some of the information may not
seem to fit or doesn't seem to make any important contribution.
||There is a rich variety of relevant
supporting information that is useful, adds interest and contributes to
an understanding of the project's main idea. Supporting details can include
things like, anecdotes, interpretation, stories, graphics, URLs to supporting
Web sites, photographs, sounds, video, etc..
|Need for Revision
||There is not enough detail and information to
support the report's answer to the question. There may not be enough variety
in the information provided. Or there may be too much information which
is not interesting or useful or relevant to the question.
||Report needs extensive editing
||Report could be improved with editing and revision.
||Report needs little or no editing or revision.