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 given (censor obscene material; protects children), but the ideas are skeletal and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #2: Rubric Score 1

Annotation: Only minimal knowledge is demonstrated by this response. Although fragments of basic ideas are provided (if it interferes with national security; during wartime if something about national security was printed the government could fall apart), the ideas are general and incomplete.

Score for Anchor Paper #3: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Basic ideas are presented (you can be found guilty of libel or slander if you say or write something that is harmful to the reputation of another person; could lose their job, their family, their home).

Score for Anchor Paper #4: Rubric Score 2

Annotation: This response shows knowledge of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Basic ideas (the government censors information to protect national security; and/or cause American citizens to panic or become fearful; classified information about the military that could threaten national security) are provided with a little support (it will protect the country).

Score for Anchor Paper #5: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Concepts are accurate and supported (government can prohibit libel and slander; can also keep information confidential during war time or a state of emergency for the sake of national defense; classified information may also be withheld). Some evidence of higher order thinking skills is provided through appropriate application of cause-and-effect reasoning, analysis, and evaluation (in the case of libel an individual's reputation and wellbeing is protected; withholding information during wartime and keeping classified information hidden are issues of nation defense that prevent national secrets from being used against us; in the case of individual rights and national safety government limitations on the press are acceptable).

Score for Anchor Paper #6: Rubric Score 3

Annotation: This response shows some understanding of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Accurate concepts are supported (if what they are writing is a threat to national security, then the government has the right to prevent the information from being printed; during a court case, if the release of information about a defendant may interfere with the defendant's right to a fair trial). Appropriate application of analysis by weighing competing interests (they have to balance the public's right to know with an individual's right to a fair trial; they {limits} are for national security and an individuals right to due process) shows some evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Score for Anchor Paper #7: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Concepts are accurate and well supported (government can limit the freedom of the press in newspapers and magazines by censoring them against seditious and defamitory speech). Powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills is demonstrated by extended and integrated application of analysis, evaluation, cause-and-effect reasoning (seditious speech can rally people or make them try a overthrow; could lead to support for terrorist attacks; too many limitation could cause us to become an authoritarian and totalitarian government in which nothing can be said about governmental flaws or misconceptions), and citation of relevant Supreme Court case law (Gitlow v. New York).

Score for Anchor Paper #8: Rubric Score 4

Annotation: This response shows understanding of governmental limits on freedom of the press. Accurate concepts are well supported (when they are libelous or advocate violence or destruction of property). Extensive application of analysis and evaluation (protect the rights of other people; the right to swing your fist ends where another person's nose begins; rights are never absolute; they would be inciting a riot, urging others to break the law; the government has a responsibility to protect its citizens), integrated with cause-and-effect reasoning (libel could damage a person's reputation, inhibiting them from getting a job or being elected to an office; it may also harm their relationships with others), demonstrates powerful evidence of higher order thinking skills.

Additional Scored Student Responses