(CS) Demonstrate an understanding of the media, genre, craft and presentation of art. |
Quality of “demonstration of understanding" of media, genre, craft and presentation is superficial as evidenced by the exemplar. |
Quality of exemplar’s “demonstration of understanding" of media, genre, craft and presentation of art demonstrates some understanding of these four features needed to study the fruit of creative endeavor. |
Quality of exemplar’s “demonstration of understanding” of media, genre, craft and presentation of art demonstrates an understanding of these four features needed to study the fruit of creative endeavor. |
(CS) Articulate an understanding of the complexity of defining and interpreting art. |
Quality of “articulation” will demonstrate no awareness of this complexity. |
Quality of “articulation” will demonstrate basic interpretive skills and an appreciation for the open-ended nature of creative studies. |
Quality of “articulation” will demonstrate interpretive skills necessary for a close reading of a work of art and an understanding of the open-ended nature of creative studies. |
(CS) Examine the contexts and influences of art. |
Quality of “examination” will be superficial or nonexistent. |
Quality of “examination” will demonstrate an awareness that context alters meaning and that all art is influenced by precedent. |
Quality of “examination” will demonstrate an ability to interpret how context alters meaning and that all art is influenced by precedent. |
(CS) Practice the improvisational and technical processes of art. |
Evidence of “practice” is superficial. |
Evidence of “practice” is apparent. |
Evidence of “practice” suggests advanced skill. |
(IS) Understand individual, systemic, and/or social processes. |
Example does not demonstrate an even basic understanding of at least one individual, system or social process. |
Example demonstrates a basic understanding of an individual, systemic or social process. |
Example illustrates an in-depth understanding of an individual, systemic or social process or has demonstrated a clear understanding of more than one process. |
(IS) Analyze individuals, systems, and/or societies through multiple frames of reference. |
Example analyzes individuals, systems and/or societies through only one frame of reference. |
Example analyzes individuals, systems and/or societies through more than one frame of reference. |
Example provides in-depth, clear analyses of individuals, systems and/or societies through more than one frame of reference. |
(IS) Think critically about the ways that society affects individual behavior and/or individual behavior affects society. |
Sample fails to critically examine the interplay between individual behavior and society. |
Sample illustrates that the student can think critically about the reciprocal relationship between individuals and society. |
Example provides a critical look at multiple ways in which there is a reciprocal relationship between individuals and society. |
(IS) Articulate how key theoretical principles can be used to explain individual and social processes, inform public policy and/or develop practical approaches to human problems across local, regional, and/or global contexts. |
Example fails to coherently articulate how theory can be applied to explain one or more of the following: individual and social processes, public policy, development of practical approaches to human problems across contexts. |
Example demonstrates how theory can be applied, but is unclear or lacking in depth. |
Example clearly articulates how theory can be applied to explain one or more of the following: individual and social processes, public policy, development of practical approaches to human problems across contexts. |
(NW) Demonstrate an understanding of the theoretical and/or experimental background of a particular topic or model, sufficient to form or identify a hypothesis. |
Example fails to provide a scientific foundation for model or hypothesis – or uses model or hypothesis incorrectly. |
Example presents a scientific model or hypothesis, but does not thoroughly explain. |
Example presents a scientific model or hypothesis, connecting it to experimental results, historical studies/literature, or historical interpretations. |
(NW) Demonstrate an ability to critically analyze scientific results discussing strengths and weaknesses. |
Example fails to critically analyze results. |
Critically analyzes the results, but does not provide adequate detail on strengths and weaknesses. |
Example recognizes the strengths and weaknesses within a model or hypothesis then critically analyzes results based on evidence. |
(NW) Demonstrate how scientific results can be extended to more general situations in contemporary society. |
Example fails to coherently convey how discoveries can be applied more broadly. |
Example attempts to extend results more broadly, but is unclear or is lacking depth. |
Example clearly conveys how a given technology or discovery can impact other similar situations or discoveries. |
(QR) Frame contextual questions using mathematical representation. |
Example fails to provide a contextual question, or fails to use recognized mathematical representations to translate the relevant question. |
Example uses recognized mathematical representations to translate contextual questions. |
Example uses recognized mathematical representations to pose questions (student generated) that are relevant and unambiguous. |
(QR) Apply models to deduce consequences or make predictions. |
Model is unclear or absent, or no clear conclusions or predictions are articulated. |
Example indicates a model, and the model is applied to make conclusions, however some of the terms or supporting work are absent. |
All of the terms are clearly defined, the supporting work is evident, and the model is applied appropriately to make conclusions. |
(QR) Communicate quantitative arguments using clear prose. |
Exemplar indicates an inability to use, or improper use or interpretation of, commonly accepted mathematical representations. |
Example adequately conveys a verbal interpretation of a mathematical argument. The example suffers from minor omissions or errors. |
Example completely and clearly conveys a verbal interpretation of a mathematical argument. |
(QR) Critique quantitative arguments with respect to assumptions, constraints, and logical coherence. |
Example acknowledges neither the appropriate assumptions and constraints of the model, nor the strengths and weaknesses of the argument. |
Example considers the appropriate assumptions and constraints of the model, or the strengths and weaknesses of the argument, but not both. |
Exemplar considers the appropriate assumptions and constraints of the model, and the strengths and weaknesses of the argument. |
(UQ) Identify and analyze or evaluate core assumptions and paradigms through which knowledge and/or values are acquired and assessed. |
Writing sample does not identify and analyze or evaluate at any substantive level the core assumptions and/or the paradigms through which knowledge and/or values are acquired or assessed. |
Writing sample somewhat identifies and analyzes or evaluates core assumptions and/or the paradigms through which knowledge and/or values are acquired or assessed. |
Writing sample clearly identifies and analyzes, or evaluates core assumptions and paradigms through which knowledge and/or values are acquired or assessed. |
(UQ) Examine and analyze the ambiguities and tensions inherent in competing truth claims, fundamental beliefs, and/or cultural practices. |
Writing sample does not include any evidence of examination and analysis of competing truth claims, fundamental beliefs, and/or cultural practices. |
Writing sample includes some evidence of logical and insightful examination and analysis of competing truth claims, fundamental beliefs, and/or cultural practices. |
Writing sample includes clear evidence of logical and insightful examination and analysis of competing truth claims, fundamental beliefs, and/or cultural practices. |
(UQ) Demonstrate greater self-knowledge and awareness of social responsibility through engaged self-reflection. |
Writing sample fails to employ or engage any question that leads to deeper insights into our actions and ways of belonging in communities. |
Writing sample includes some evidence of critical self-knowledge and awareness of social responsibility. |
Writing sample includes significant evidence of critical self-knowledge and awareness of social responsibility. |
(UQ) Articulate and engage core questions that lead to examined insights into our actions and ways of belonging in communities. |
Writing sample fails to employ or engage any question that leads to deeper insights into our actions and ways of belonging in communities. |
Writing sample productively employs or engages at least one question that leads to deeper insights into our actions and ways of belonging in communities. |
Writing sample shows strong evidence of productively and insightfully articulating or engaging at least one question that leads to deeper insights into our actions and ways of belonging in communities. |
(VP) Identify, analyze, and contextualize primary sources. |
Sample is unsatisfactory if either of the following is true:
- student does not understand what a primary source is.
- student cannot place the primary source into larger context.
|
Writing sample illustrates that the student recognizes the relationship between primary source materials and interpretations of the past in a broader context. |
Writing sample illustrates that student can use primary source material(s) to develop interpretations of the past in a broader context. |
(VP) Identify and critique secondary, scholarly arguments about the past. |
Writing sample is unsatisfactory if either of the following is true:
- student does not understand what a secondary source is.
- student is unable to articulate the strengths and weaknesses of a secondary source.
|
Writing sample illustrates that student understands what a secondary scholarly argument about the past is and that some scholarly arguments about the past are better grounded in evidence than others. |
Writing sample illustrates that student can recognize a secondary scholarly argument about the past and discuss its strengths and weaknesses. |
(VP) Develop and defend an analytical or interpretive argument about the past. |
Writing sample is unsatisfactory if either of the following is true:
- student cannot make an analytical or interpretive argument about the past.
- student is unable to marshal evidence to support an analytical or interpretive argument.
|
Writing sample illustrates that student is able to make an analytical or interpretive argument about the past that requires more evidence. |
Writing sample illustrates that student can make a convincing analytical or interpretive argument about the past that is grounded in evidence. |
(VP) Recognize that differences separate people past and present, though all people share a common humanity. |
Writing sample is unsatisfactory if either of the following is true:
- student does not understand that particular cultural practices, assumption, or ideas (etc.) are historically situated.
- student believes that current cultural practices, assumptions, or ideas (etc.) are universally true and applicable for all times.
|
Writing sample illustrates that student recognizes the historic specificity of a particular cultural practice, assumption, or idea (etc.). |
Writing sample illustrates that student understands the historic specificity of a particular cultural practice, assumption, or idea (etc.) and is able to explain why these prevailed in the time period in question. |
(VP) Evaluate the reliability of evidence about the past. |
Writing sample is unsatisfactory if the student believes that all evidence is created equal. |
Writing sample illustrates student recognizes that some historical evidence is stronger than others. |
Writing sample illustrates student understands how to weigh the merits of historical evidence and that evidence about the past is limited in scope. |