Score Level 1 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates some understanding of the question. Although the student fails to evaluate the study, some changes that could strengthen the company’s claims (population size is too small; increase the amount of people; include people of all races and both genders) are provided. The supporting details are minimally effective.

Score Level 1 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates some understanding of the question. The student evaluates the study by addressing whether the consumers should or should not believe the claims (the consumers should not believe the claims made by this company). Two methods that would produce more reliable data (test their medicine and the medicines of their competitors; give exact data numbers) are listed. The supporting details are minimally effective.

Score Level 2 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a basic understanding of the question. An evaluation of the study (claims made by the pharmaceutical company are not founded to a justifiable extent; consumers should not believe the claims) is provided. A few changes that could strengthen the company’s study in terms of the sample (a larger sample population; patients should not be chosen at random but rather catagorized as the drug might have different effects on different ages and perhaps even social/ethnic backgrounds) are described, but others, such as testing the claims of “fastest-acting” and “longest-lasting,” are not addressed. Thus, the supporting details remain adequate.

Score Level 2 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a basic understanding of the question by providing adequate supporting details throughout. An evaluation of the study (though not innaccurate has not enough information to base one’s opinion’s on) is provided. Two changes that could strengthen the claims (conduct a study of a larger amount of people; at least 100; have a control of people without any medicine) are suggested. A method to produce more reliable data (several other groups with different types of medicines to compare speed, effectiveness, and side affects) is described, and overall, supporting details are adequate.

Score Level 3 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a good understanding of the question. An evaluation of the study (consumers should not believe the claims made by this company since the company’s study was not broad enough) is provided. Several suggestions that could strengthen the claims (they only experimented with 10 patients; use a much larger population, maybe use around 1,000 people, who are each tested on maybe the ten top brands of allergy medicine for 1 full year; use people in the study who have allergies) are described. Synthesis is shown in describing a valid change in the study (check their background to see if they take any other medication at the same time, or if they smoke) and how this change is relevant to the method of data collection (if they are involved with taking other medicines or smoking, the results of the study could be altered, not giving the true results). The supporting details are generally complete.

Score Level 3 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a good understanding of the question. An evaluation of the study (company may have found these results however, they are not exactly accurate) is provided. A specific change concerning the sample size (small testing group; up their group number to about 200 people) is suggested. Synthesis is used to describe the addition of a control group (create a control group by giving 100 people the pill and 100 people [the control] a sugar pill) and explain how it can strengthen the company’s claims (they can compare the group with medicine and the group without). The description of the method concerning data collection (record each persons symptoms and testimonies on effectiveness) is synthesized with the explanation of how it can create a more reliable study (because they know the true symptoms of the drug and whether or not its long lasting). The use of accurate scientific terminology (testing group; control) strengthens the response. Overall, the supporting details are generally complete.

Score Level 4 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a full and complete understanding of the question. An evaluation of the study (consumers shouldn’t believe the company) is provided. The description of how a control, a comparison to other companies, and a blind trial could strengthen the claims (need a control to tell if there’s any side effects; need to have the opposing company to be in the test or else how can they say it works faster or last longer; add more people … without telling who is who, give people the new medicine, the other companys medicine, and just blank medicine that has no effect) shows a synthesis of ideas. The description of the method (study the time it takes to kick in by making all of them take it at the same time and timing it; over a few weeks … see the side effects each one has) integrates the changes with the explanation of how they can create a more reliable study (then you can believe when they say that it’s fastest, longest lasting, fewest side effects).

Score Level 4 Anchor Paper

This response demonstrates a full and complete understanding of the question. The student uses synthesis to evaluate the study (Consumers should not believe the claims made by the company) by addressing specific flaws with the sample (only ten patients; were chosen at random and could have completely different allergies). Changes to the sample that would strengthen the claims (hundreds of patients should have been tested instead of ten; group the patients by similar allergies to determine if the medicine is only effective on certain groups) are described. The description of the methods continue to integrate specific changes to the sample (Within each group, other competitive medicines should have been tested; A control, on which no medicine is used, should also be used in each group) and explains how they can strengthen the claims (compare the effects of the medicine to normal conditions and validate the claim to having the fewest side effects).