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 (making laws; no hunting), but 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 provided (habitat only for birds and no people; put them in a zoo), but the ideas are general and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Basic ideas are presented (keep them in a zoo; make it illegal to destroy large oriole habitats) and provided with a little support (the bird would be safe and would have somewhere to reproduce safely).

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Basic ideas (set aside land to be a state park; create zoning laws that prohibit cultivation) are provided with a little support (parks would cost more money).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Accurate concepts are supported (set aside land for wildlife sanctuaries; require developers to set aside land; ask federal government to set aside federal land). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is shown through appropriate application of analysis and analogy (it's like Smart Growth - that program forces developers to fund new schools in their area if needed).

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Accurate concepts are supported (create more wildlife refuges and include artificial habitat; raise them in captivity; pass a law). Appropriate application of analysis, along with compare/contrast (it would not be like putting the birds in captivity since most animals have shorter life-spans in captivity; help the species rather than hurt it), shows some evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Concepts are accurate and well supported (bring some birds out of the wild to multiply and send them back; reserve portions of land so that the oriole could repopulate). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated by extended application of integrated analysis, evaluation, and cause-and-effect reasoning (leaves the problem of the ruined environment; would be beneficial to other animals also; seems like a dead-end route because open land is being sold and developed; unlikely that enough land would be set aside; some people care more about making money; many preserves would probably be sold later on so the new orioles would just die anyway).

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of state governmental actions that could help preserve the oriole. Accurate concepts (increase funding; set aside natural habitat areas; promote programs) are well supported. Application of extensive analysis and evaluation (zoning restrictions would stop the destruction; would stop any interference that would directly affect the birds; natural resources and land would be conserved; save many other species; save endangered plants, too) provides powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Additional Scored Student Responses