School Improvement in Maryland
Public Release Item Scoring Information Return

Goal 1 Political Systems

Expectation 1.2 The student will evaluate how the United States government has maintained a balance between protecting rights and maintaining order.

Indicator 1.2.1 The student will analyze the impact of landmark Supreme Court decisions on governmental powers, rights, and responsibilities of citizens in our changing society.

Assessment Limits:

  • Cases included: Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland, Plessy v. Ferguson, Brown v. Board of Education, Miranda v. Arizona, Gideon v. Wainwright, Tinker v. Des Moines Board of Education, and New Jersey v. T.L.O.
  • Other cases that address the same issues could be used, but information about these cases will be provided in the item.

Brief Constructed Response (BCR) Item - Released in 2004

Read the excerpt below.

“[neither] students or teachers shed their constitutional rights of freedom of speech or expression at the school house gate.”

–Tinker v. Des Moines School District
  • Explain how the point of view expressed in the excerpt above could conflict with the functioning of a school.
     
  • Do you agree or disagree with the position taken in this excerpt? Explain.
     
  • Include details and examples to support your answer.
     
Write your answer in the answer box below.

The following 10 Anchor Papers represent a range of score points and are used in conjunction with the rubrics to assess student responses.

Anchor Paper #1

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #1: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. Fragments of basic ideas are presented (express what they feel; everyone should be able to talk whenever), but the ideas are general and incomplete.


Anchor Paper #2

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. Although fragments of basic ideas are provided (could offend someone; be threatening), the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.


Anchor Paper #3

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of freedom of speech in a school setting. Basic ideas are presented (no one would learn anything; have to be some rules of respect; if no rules, classrooms would be chaos). The response is adequate for a score of "2."


Anchor Paper #4

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of freedom of speech in a school setting. Basic ideas are presented (student may say something disrespectful; could cause problems; school is special environment) and provided with a little support (protect everyone's best interests).


Anchor Paper #5

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of freedom of speech in a school setting. Basic ideas (guidelines to follow; school has the right; freedom of speech and expression should be regulated) are provided with a little support (can't use profanity; monitored).


Anchor Paper #6

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of freedom of speech in a school setting. Concepts are accurate and supported (curse words; could offend and cause chaos; express same ideas on accessories or clothing). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated through appropriate application of analysis, evaluation, and cause-and-effect reasoning (some type of limitations; still allow students and teachers to speak and express themselves freely; no one would be offended; peaceful environment).


Anchor Paper #7

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of freedom of speech in a school setting. Concepts are accurate and supported (could be opinionated and disrupt classes; armbands were not appropriate, but the kids insisted; kids won that case). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (shouldn't be taken to an extreme; draw the line at endangerment of other people).


Anchor Paper #8

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of freedom of speech in a school setting. Accurate concepts are supported (person who is exercising that right could get in trouble; Supreme Court ruled that students could wear the armbands as a form of symbolic speech). Appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (libel, slander, "fighting words," and other bad forms of speech; you keep your rights, but they are limited) shows some evidence of higher order thinking skills.


Anchor Paper #9

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #9: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of freedom of speech in a school setting. Concepts (to maintain order and to provide a quality education, schools need to limit First Amendment rights; you are not allowed to curse or yell; you are not allowed to wear inappropriate clothing) are accurate and well supported. Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated by extended and integrated application of analysis, evaluation, and cause-and-effect reasoning (cursing or yelling stops learning; limiting distractions is justified; students should be able to talk within reason, but some limitations on rights are necessary).


Anchor Paper #10

image of student response

Score for Anchor Paper #10: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of freedom of speech in a school setting. Accurate concepts (could express view on racial discrimination or other hurtful subjects which might lead to bullying; wearing a t-shirt; if the view is against popular opinion, others might feel offended) are well supported. Application of extensive analysis and evaluation (one person's rights end where they interfere with someone else's; schools are "in loco parentis;" students and teachers should maintain their constitutional rights, but with limits) integrated with cause-and-effect reasoning (could lead to a disruption of classes; could endanger the well-being of everyone at school) provides powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.


Brief Constructed Response (BCR) Rubric
Print: Scoring Rubric (pdf)
Score 4

This response shows understanding of the content, question, and/or problem. The response is insightful, integrates knowledge, and demonstrates powerful application.

  • The application shows powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.
  • Concepts are accurate and well supported.
  • There are no misconceptions.
  • The response is comprehensive.
Score 3

This response shows some understanding of the content, question, and/or problem. The response includes appropriate application that demonstrates evidence of higher order thinking skills.

  • The application shows some evidence of higher order thinking skills.
  • Concepts are accurate and supported.
  • There are no interfering misconceptions.
  • The response may not develop all parts equally.
Score 2

This response shows knowledge of the content, question, and/or problem. The response is acceptable with some key ideas. The response shows little or no evidence of application.

  • The response includes some basic ideas.
  • The response provides little or no support.
  • There are minimal misconceptions.
Score 1

This response shows minimal knowledge of the content, question, and/or problem. The response is related to the question, but it is inadequate.

  • The response includes incomplete or fragmented ideas or knowledge.
  • There may be significant misconceptions.
Score 0

The response is completely incorrect or irrelevant. There may be no response.

Knowledge and Understanding indicate the degree to which the response reflects a grasp of the content, question, and/or problem presented in the stimulus. The response indicates mastery that progresses from knowledge to understanding.

Last Revised June 2001
/share/clg/xml/public_release/government/2004_121_gov05.xml