The following 8 Anchor Papers represent a range of score points and are used in conjunction with the rubrics to assess student responses.

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 (you as a citizen are directly helped; can give benefits to younger citizens too), but the ideas are general and incomplete.

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 (have the opportunity to become healthy citizens; will require more taxes), the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of government sponsored healthcare. Basic ideas are supplied (gives a lot of health benefits for people who can’t afford the high-priced drugs; they take a lot of taxes out; when someone gets older, they sometimes don’t have enough incoming money to pay for medicine every month). The response is adequate for a score of “2.”

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of government sponsored healthcare. Basic ideas are presented (wouldn’t have to worry about people not being able to afford healthcare; the prices of medical services may go up; may not get as many benefits as if they would have bought their own plan) and provided with a little support (give everyone a chance to have healthcare).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of government sponsored healthcare. Concepts are accurate and supported (cost of medicines won’t be such a burden; the freedom of the patient is not there when it comes to choosing treatment). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (the elderly with a small retirement check and/or Social Security must sacrifice other expenses, like food and rent, because they have to stay alive; Medicare and Medicaid do not cover all procedures [such as] experimental treatments [so] it may have to come out of their own pockets; if there is more funding, the government may be more lenient towards new procedures).

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of government sponsored healthcare. Accurate concepts are supported (need health care at the same level as those who can afford it; keeps people healthy; competition for other healthcare companies). Appropriate application of analysis and cause-and-effect reasoning (major healthcare companies lose business to the government; those companies must continue to operate otherwise higher income families would not be offered any medical care; to support people who have no other way to afford healthcare; otherwise, the government endangers the market for healthcare) show some evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of government sponsored healthcare. Concepts (everyone has an opportunity; people relying too heavily on these programs) 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 (people with low incomes may not be motivated to get a job because they know that the government will cover their healthcare needs; people begin to abuse the system; wasted money that could go to education or defense; one of the goals of the government is to provide services and to maintain health and safety; just because someone can’t afford the rising cost of healthcare doesn’t mean they should be denied an opportunity to live).

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of government sponsored healthcare. Accurate concepts (allows people who cannot afford healthcare to afford it; increases taxes; takes money away from other areas) are well supported. Application of extensive analysis and evaluation (elderly people…their medical expenses are usually more expensive; money appropriated for schools may be moved to healthcare; it is inhuman and unethical for a person to get better medical attention because he is wealthy and for another person to get less attention because he can’t afford it), integrated with cause-and-effect reasoning (by achieving medical help, their standards of living will also increase; low income people will be able to get back on their feet more quickly; this improves the economy because more people will be working at a given time; may also cause low income citizens to work less hard because everything is being given to them; bad for the economy), demonstrates powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Additional Scored Student Responses