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. Although fragments of basic ideas are provided (the effects the music has; taking away their freedom of speech), the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. Fragments of basic ideas are presented (may influence young children; Bill of Rights gives us freedom of speech and expression), but the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the issue of music censorship. Basic ideas are presented (censor music because of the violence it provokes; we have freedom of speech, but some artists violate that by using 'fighting words' encouraging violent behavior).

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the issue of music censorship. Basic ideas (because it offends many people; first amendment gives you freedom of speech; violates the singer's first amendment rights) are provided with a little support (they have a right to speak but you don't have to listen to them).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the issue of music censorship. Concepts are accurate and supported (provokes violence and drug use; might offend certain groups or violate their rights). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated by appropriate application of analysis through comparison/contrast (if it's played on a boom box at a park for all to hear, it needs to be censored, {but} if you play it in your house then censorship is unneeded; in public, you could offend, {but} at your own residence you may decide what you hear and do not hear).

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the issue of music censorship. Accurate concepts are supported (they believe certain music makes people become more violent; some lawmakers believe laws censoring music will help reduce violence; First Amendment). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (this includes the right, to a certain extent, to say things that are offensive; just because you don't like the things someone is singing doesn't give you the right to censor).

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the issue of music censorship. Accurate concepts are well supported (these lyrics are used in such a way that can provoke a violent or malicious act; music is a protected form of speech, and the artist has a First Amendment right). Application of extensive analysis and evaluation (Supreme Court ruling in the Schenk case; lawmakers may feel that these lyrics are a form of fighting words; artists have a right to publish the expression of their ideas; Supreme Court has ruled against prior restraint, and censorship is a form of prior restraint) provides powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the issue of music censorship. Concepts are accurate and well supported (negative effect on children; First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech to artists). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided by integrated application of analysis and evaluation (the music poses no clear and present danger and, therefore, is perfectly constitutional; "I may not agree with what you say, but I will die to defend your right to say it"), effective and relevant example ("Cop Killer"), and cause-and-effect reasoning (lots of people heard it, but didn't go out and kill cops).

Additional Scored Student Responses