The following 7 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 (no evidence obtained without a search warrant; may need that evidence). However, the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas are presented (in the Bill of Rights it says no illegal searches/seizures without a permit; may have been evidence in a house, but by the time it takes to get a warrant it may be gone).

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas (prosecutors can’t violate the defendant’s privacy to gain incriminating evidence without a warrant; the person may be guilty, and the only evidence is in that property) are provided with a little support (unconstitutional to do otherwise).

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are supported (a person cannot be searched without a warrant; persuades the police to act inside the law, but because of this technicality some criminals do not have to serve their sentences). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (nothing should outweigh the need to keep criminals off the street; it is government’s job to keep us safe).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the exclusionary rule. Concepts are accurate and supported (the Bill of Rights guarantees this country’s citizens due process, fair trials; there will be no unfair evidence; cases will be more difficult to prove). Appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (court should be fair and not subtly in favor of one side; if that is what it takes to have an unbiased and fair courtroom, then that is a very small price to pay) provides some evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Concepts are accurate and well supported (the Constitution directly prohibits unlawful searches and seizures; someone getting off of a charge because of an honest mistake by the cops). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated by extensive application of Supreme Court case law (Mapp v. Ohio; Court has ruled since Mapp that any evidence found in an unlawful raid, in which the police were not to blame, was to be legal in court) and analysis and evaluation (everyone having protection of privacy, except when searched in a legal manner; this “Good Faith Exception” helps stop criminals from getting off on a mistake).

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are well supported (the 4th Amendment dictates ‘no unreasonable search and seizure;’ police will not be encouraged to use illegal means to acquire evidence; incriminating evidence may be thrown out simply because it wasn’t obtained in the right way). Extensive and integrated application of Supreme Court case law (Weeks v. U.S.; Mapp v. Ohio), cause-and-effect reasoning (this keeps the police honest and lets citizens feel secure; a criminal may go free and endanger public safety), weighing of competing interests (the need for public safety outweighs a criminal’s right to privacy), and analysis and evaluation (we should severely punish any officer who violates the warrant laws but still uses the evidence if needed; just because evidence may be obtained the wrong way doesn’t mean the evidence isn’t real) provide powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Additional Scored Student Responses