The following 15 Sample Student Responses represent a range of score points.

Score for Sample Student Response #1: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas (must have a warrant to search for any evidence; you never know how long it could take to get a warrant and by the time you get it, the evidence could have been moved or destroyed) are provided with a little support (could set a murderer free). Compare to Anchor Paper #3.

Score for Sample Student Response #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. Fragments of basic ideas are presented (the suspect’s privacy is protected; all an investigator has to do to acquire evidence is to obtain a search warrant), but the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Sample Student Response #3: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are well supported (Fourth Amendment, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure; Fifth Amendment, right against self-incrimination; Ninth and Tenth Amendments, rights…are retained by the people; sometimes guilty people go free simply because a cop was careless). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated through extensive and integrated application of Supreme Court case law (Griswold v. Connecticut; Roe v. Wade), cause-and-effect reasoning (crime rates could go up, and citizens could lose faith in the effectiveness; if we give up one right, what’s to stop the government from trying to take away other rights), and analysis and evaluation (without individual rights we would be powerless against government oppression; it’s a slippery slope).

Score for Sample Student Response #4: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are supported (illegal to search a person or their home without a legal warrant and/or probable cause; if the illegal evidence could help send a person to jail because they did a crime, the person could be set free). Some application of analysis and evaluation (without this law no one would have any privacy, which is an individual right; privacy is very important, and if someone does a crime, the police just need probable cause to search them). Compare to Anchor Paper #6.

Score for Sample Student Response #5: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Concepts are accurate and well supported (the Fourth Amendment provides privacy protections to the extent that police cannot search one’s home without an invitation or a warrant supported by probable cause; by the time police get a warrant, the suspect could have easily gotten away with the evidence). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated through extensive and integrated application of analysis and evaluation (the police can search private areas that can move, such as cars; it is a principal idea that our justice system would rather see a hundred criminals go free than one innocent person in jail; there are exceptions to the rule that make it both fair and practical) and cause-and-effect reasoning (if police could go through people’s homes for any reason, the police could keep finding objects and evidence to constantly incriminate anyone and put them in jail, including innocent people by accident; as long as the hiding place is mobile, the police can search the cache instantly {so} it is less likely for a criminal to escape with self-incriminating evidence). Compare to Anchor Paper #7.

Score for Sample Student Response #6: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. A fragment of a basic idea is presented (if the police could get evidence illegally who’s to say they didn’t just make up the evidence), but the idea is skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Sample Student Response #7: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas (may only search a person’s property with a warrant; may only arrest a person with probable cause linked to a crime; by the time police arrive, the person has destroyed important evidence pertaining to their guilt or innocence) are provided with a little support (people could be hiding illegal things in their homes). Compare to Anchor Paper #3.

Score for Sample Student Response #8: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are supported (the Sixth and Fourth Amendments; otherwise police officers could storm into anyone’s house and use illegal evidence to convict them of a crime). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (wiretaps could be set up, and private conversations in the home would be legal for the prosecution’s use), Supreme Court case law (Mapp v. Ohio), and relevant literary analogy (the United States would start to resemble the novel 1984).

Score for Sample Student Response #9: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are well supported (rights granted in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments; ordinary people are guaranteed security from unfair government actions; however, incriminating evidence found unconstitutionally cannot be used). The extended application of analysis and evaluation (American government is based on the ideal that government cannot infringe on a person’s liberties and that it is better to have guilty people walk away free than to put innocent people into jail; limits government’s power by making sure those in authority follow certain rules to do things fairly) and cause-and-effect reasoning (without the rule, government could create false evidence to jail people who don’t agree with government policies) provide powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Sample Student Response #10: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. Fragments of basic ideas are presented (must have a search warrant; makes the system fair to all), but the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Sample Student Response #11: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas (if investigators collect evidence with a legal warrant, there will be no problems using the evidence in court; without the exclusionary rule, evidence could be obtained anyway the investigator wanted; many people would go to prison without having a fair trial) are provided with a little support (protect the rights of the accused). Compare to Anchor Paper #4.

Score for Sample Student Response #12: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of the exclusionary rule. Accurate concepts are supported (the Bill of Rights protects citizens from ‘unreasonable searches and seizures;’ it may be that clear evidence found illegally is thrown out, and a guilty person set free). Appropriate application of analysis and evaluation (that is a price we pay for our free democratic society; it is more right that a criminal be given a second chance than for an innocent person to be denied one; freedom for all means freedom for some of those we wish did not have it) provide some evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Sample Student Response #13: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of the exclusionary rule. Basic ideas (the Bill of Rights says that you need a search warrant issued by the court before you can search a person’s private property; before you can receive the warrant, you must explain why; a person has a right to his or her privacy) are provided with a little support (unless there is probable cause for a warrant, they should not have their privacy violated).

Score for Sample Student Response #14: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: This response is related to the question and shows only minimal knowledge. A fragment of a basic idea is provided (the Bill of Rights says that you cannot be searched unless the police have a warrant). However, the idea is skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Sample Student Response #15: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of the exclusionary rule. Concepts are accurate and well supported (is implied by the 4th Amendment’s protection against warrantless search and seizure; all the officer needs is probable cause and a judge’s approval). Extensive and integrated application of analysis and evaluation (the warrant requirement is a due process right that protects anyone accused of a crime and ensures a fair trial; provides a strong incentive for police officers to gather evidence in a way that does not violate the Constitution; police officers are skilled professionals) and cause-and-effect reasoning (no one can be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process and convicting someone based on evidence obtained without a warrant would violate the right to due process; if officers know any evidence they get illegally can’t be used, they won’t be tempted to cut corners), provide powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Anchor Papers used in scoring