Scoring Guide for HS Constitutional Issues.09.03.08 · Scoring Guide HS Constitutional Issues CBA ... If an outside reviewer cannot follow the points made in a CBA response due to

Scoring Guide HS Constitutional Issues CBA

1

Scoring Notes for Secondary Social Studies CBAs (Grades 6‐12)

The following rules apply when scoring any of the Social Studies Classroom‐Based Assessments (CBAs) for grades 6‐12.

1. Position: All CBA responses should include a position. In some cases, such as the “Constitutional Issues” CBA, this position is meant to be persuasive. For other CBAs, such as the “Enduring Cultures” CBA, it is the well‐reasoned conclusion that the student has drawn about the cultures being examined. In both cases, however, the response must do more than simply restate information. Instead, every CBA response should make a case or argument for looking at a particular issue, topic, or event in a particular way.

2. Explanation and Analysis for Background, Reasons, or Evidence: Any required explanation or analysis should include at least one specific detail or example as well as the student’s commentary on how the detail or example relates to the position, issue, or topic being addressed in the CBA response. Just providing commentary or just listing specific details is not adequate to earn a response credit for explaining or analyzing something.

3. Sources: All CBAs for grades 6‐12 require responses to use and cite 3 or more sources. To be credited for the use and citation of a source, the response must explicitly address the source within the text and provide enough bibliographic information so that an outside reviewer could find the source (e.g., author, title, and url for an online article) or, at least, be able to corroborate the existence of the source (e.g., informal interviews). The only source for which a student does not need to provide bibliographic information is the U.S. Constitution.

4. A.C.C.E.: There are four qualities that any CBA response must have to earn credit. In short, they must be accurate, clear, cohesive, and explicit in addressing the relevant concepts.

a. Cohesive: All parts, paragraphs, or sections of a CBA response must fit together in one cohesive whole. If it is so disjointed that an outside reviewer would not be able to gather the overall position, it cannot earn credit.

b. Clear: If an outside reviewer cannot follow the points made in a CBA response due to lack of clarity, it cannot be credited.

c. Explicit: Responses should address concepts and elements required by the rubric in explicit terms. For example, if the rubric requires the response to include a discussion of a particular perspective, it should be clear to an outside reviewer where that discussion is in the response. Credit should not be given to points that require inferences to be made.

d. Accurate: For a response to earn any credit, the information provided for a particular criterion must be accurate. The following is a supplemental criterion to be used in conjunction with CBA’s rubric when the response contains inaccuracies.

4 – Excellent 3 – Proficient 2 – Partial 1 ‐MinimalThe response contains no inaccuracies

The response contains a few minor inaccuracies that do not contradict or weaken the overall response.

The response contains several minor inaccuracies or one or more major inaccuracies that contradict or weaken the overall response.

The response is largely inaccurate.

5. Writing: Conventions, organization, and style are not formally evaluated when using the CBA rubric alone.

However, OSPI recommends that teachers use a writing rubric to supplement the scoring of responses to the CBAs.


2

Scoring Guide for the High School Constitutional Issues CBA (Recommended for 11th Grade)

The following document outlines only some of the many ways students could reach proficiency in responding to this particular CBA. It is meant to provide abbreviated examples* of how the rubric works. It is recommended that for each criterion, you begin with Score Point 3 (“Meeting Standard): it is highlighted because the purpose of the task is to see if students can meet standard (i.e., reach proficiency).

Criterion A – PositionScore Rubric Language Sample Response4 – Excellent (Exceeding Standard)

States a position on the issue that Includes a proposal for balancing individual rights and the common good. AND Includes an analysis of how to advocate for this position.

Individuals in major U.S. cities should be able to own and carry handguns; if all bans were repealed, people would be able to exercise their 2nd Amendment right. Studies also show that a repeal on all bans would make society safer by deterring crime. Analyzing the NRA’s efforts to effect legislation reveals that making this repeal a reality requires working to pass legislation at the local, state, and federal levels.

3 – Proficient (Meeting Standard)

States a position on the issue that • Evaluates or considers the

interaction between individual rights and the common good AND

• Includes an analysis of how to advocate for this position.

Individuals in major U.S. cities should be able to own and carry handguns. Studies show that a repeal of all bans would make society safer by deterring crime. While gun control advocates claim that increased access to guns would cause some people to lose their right to life, the improvement in overall public safety makes it worth it. Analyzing the NRA’s efforts to effect legislation reveals that making this repeal a reality requires working to pass legislation at the local, state, and federal levels.

2 (and below) Partial (Not Meeting Standard)

States a position on the issue that Evaluates or considers the interaction between individual rights and the common good but does NOT Include an analysis of how to advocate for this position.

Individuals in major U.S. cities should be able to own and carry handguns. Studies show that a repeal on all bans would make society safer by deterring crime. While gun control advocates claim that increased access to guns would cause some people to lose their right to life, the improvement in overall public safety makes it worth it.

Criterion B – Reasons and Evidence

Score Rubric Language Sample Response4 – Excellent (Exceeding Standard)

Provides reason(s) for the position supported by evidence. The evidence includes: • An analysis of how the Constitution

promotes two or more specific ideals or principles logically connected to the issue.

As stated, the 2nd Amendment states that “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Several Supreme Court cases have debated whether this right extends to individuals. I agree with XX’s argument in the recent case YY when she says that, of course, this is an individual right because ZZ… In addition, the Constitution’s Preamble states that one role the government must play is to “promote the general welfare” and “provide for the general defense.” A repeal of these bans would help the government meet these goals. In addition, the 14th Amendment extended protection for individual rights from infringement from the state government.

* Note: The source references and citations used in the sample credited responses are only meant to serve as illustrations of how the rubric works. They are often not actual sources.


3


Provides reason(s) for the position supported by evidence. The evidence includes: • An analysis of how the Constitution

promotes one specific ideal or principle logically connected to the issue.

As stated, the 2nd Amendment states that “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Several Supreme Court cases have debated whether this right extends to individuals. I agree with XX’s argument in the recent case YY when she says that, of course, this is an individual right because ZZ…


Provides reason(s) for the position supported by evidence. The evidence includes: A reference to the Constitution WITHOUT an analysis of how the Constitution logically connects to the issue.

As stated, the 2nd Amendment states that “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Several Supreme Court cases have debated whether this right extends to individuals.

Criterion C – Reasons & EvidenceScore Rubric Language Sample Response4 – Excellent (Exceeding Standard)

The evidence for the position includes: • A detailed evaluation of how well a

court case OR a government policy upheld a constitutional principle related to the issue, including:

• A discussion of competing viewpoints related to the case or policy.

Several Supreme Court cases have debated whether this right extends to individuals. I agree with XX’s argument in the recent case YY when she says that, of course, this is an individual right because ZZ. Given this argument, cities that try to ban hand guns are acting unconstitutionally. The case involved AA and BB. AA made the opposing argument stating that the bans were helpful to the common good. BB countered by stating that there is no evidence that these bans have any effect whatsoever on crime.


The evidence for the position includes: • An evaluation of how well a court

case OR a government policy upheld a constitutional principle related to the issue.

Several Supreme Court cases have debated whether this right extends to individuals. I agree with XX’s argument in the recent case YY when she says that, of course, this is an individual right because ZZ. Given this argument, cities that try to ban hand guns are acting unconstitutionally.


The evidence for the position includes: • A description of a court case or a

government policy WITHOUT an evaluation of how it upheld constitutional principles related to the issue.

The Supreme Court Case AA v. BB debated whether the right to own guns extends to individuals.

Criterion D – Reasons & EvidenceScore Rubric Language Sample Response4 – Excellent (Exceeding Standard)

The evidence for the position includes: A fair interpretation and a refutation of a position on the issue that contrasts with the student’s own.

AA states that bans on handguns have lead to a reduction in violence in most cities. She cites DD and EE as evidence. However, there is a great deal of data that refutes these points. For example, one study shows that DD and EE do not support the argument for banning handguns…


The evidence for the position includes: • A fair interpretation of a position on

the issue that contrasts with the student’s own.

AA states that bans on handguns have lead to a reduction in violence in most cities. She cites DD and EE as evidence.


4


The evidence for the position includes: • A description of a position(s) on the

issue with no evaluation.information logically supports the position on the issue.

AA states that bans on handguns have lead to a reduction in violence in most cities.

Criterion E – Referencing & Citing SourcesScore Rubric Language Sample Credited Source Reference & Citation4 – Excellent (Exceeding Standard)

• Makes explicit references within the paper or presentation to four or more credible sources that provide relevant information.

• Cites sources within the paper, presentation, or bibliography.

I agree with XX’s argument in the recent case YY when she says that, of course, this is an individual right because ZZ. Given this argument, cities that try to ban hand guns are acting unconstitutionally. (Miers, 2008). Works Cited Miers, H. (2008). 2nd Amendment for All? Time. (NOTE: This is only one credited source. To reach proficiency, a response would need to cite and reference THREE sources. In addition, it is recommended that teachers have a designated format for referencing and citing sources.)


• Makes explicit references within the paper or presentation to three credible sources that provide relevant information.



• Makes explicit references within the paper or presentation to two credible sources that provide relevant information.



5

Student Sample #9 ‐ The Ramification of Constitutional Abuse

Government may draw their power from many dissimilar places. Democracy’s true strength, however,

can be traced to a single source: the will of the people. Historian Linda R. Monk states in her article Why We the

People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change that, through citizen action, the will of the people is realized.

The subjects of a democracy must sometimes fight for their rights, but such endeavors are necessary to mold the

government into formidable administration that protects the freedom of its occupants. If the citizens of a

democratic society do not constantly involve themselves in politics, their influence is lost and the government shall

be unable to effectively enact the desires of its residents.

These residents are protected from “cruel and unusual punishment” by the Constitution. Torture is a

savage, brutal form of interrogation that reduces those enacting the examination to simple barbarians; vicious

monsters who will perform abhorrent1 deeds in order to obtain desired information. Torture in itself is little more

than “cruel and unusual punishment”, and is therefore unconstitutional.

The inhumane treatment of men and women alike was severely criticized in the 1600’s by the citizens of

England. The country’s residents believed that the punishments enacted upon criminals were sadistic and uncivil;

callous retributions that seemed inappropriate for a society that claimed to be above savagery (Freedman 131‐

134). Since that time, people have continued to debate which punishments are permissible in a civilization and

which are not. Recently, that argument has focused upon the topic of torture. When President George W. Bush

announced that the War on Terrorism was not a traditional war and any enemies captured during the conflict

would therefore not be granted the rights set forth by the Geneva Conventions, the debate escalated to new levels

(U.S. Army Bans).

Torture is used to extract information from prisoners and suspected criminals quickly. These deeds are

performed to protect America and its citizens. However, such atrocious events violate the very ruling powers that

they seek to defend. They assault the laws that were established to hold the United States together, ultimately

1 Abhorrent: Very offensive or disgusting.

Comment [c1]: Criterion A – Position: The position discusses individual rights.


6

weakening its government by promoting the use of unreliable information; knowledge that may or may not have

been altered by a detainee who has been subjected to psychologically harmful interrogation.

When America’s founding fathers forged the Constitution, they charged the United States with the duty of

upholding the law. Since America is most certainly a constitutional government, it must do everything in its power

to maintain the principles set in place upon its creation. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land; the

assortment of resolute rules that determine what is acceptable within America’s prosperous society.

The first ten amendments to the Constitution are known collectively as the Bill of Rights. This group of

amendments provided individuals with numerous rights; vested2 privileges that gave unimaginable freedom as

well as protection from those who might oppress others. The Eighth Amendment states that no individual may be

subjected to “cruel and unusual punishment”; a description that is quite appropriate for the act of torture. The

Eighth Amendment guaranteed the right to avoid any sort of sadistic penalty or retribution. This right is most

certainly violated by the utilization of torture. While this barbaric practice known as torture challenges the

supreme law of the land, it appears to be supported by another section within that very collection of governing

rules.

The Preamble to the Constitution states that the government of the United States should “provide for the

common defense”. The rights of certain individuals may be infringed in special cases, if in doing so, the

government works toward the security of its country and its citizens. Security is a necessary quality if a community

is to succeed. Without a steadfast, ever‐present feeling of safety and protection, stability is impossible to achieve.

Without stability and trust in one another, the members of a community cannot possibly hope to work together

efficiently.

It is because of this that the phrase, “provide for the common defense” seems to encourage the use of

torture and aggressive interrogation methods, for they have proven swifter than other techniques. If a common

defense is to be achieved and maintained, then certain precautions must be taken to protect the citizens of the

2 Vested: Something that he been given or bestowed.

Comment [c2]: Criterion B – Reasons and Evidence Related to Principles and Ideals: Response analyzes how the 8th Amendment promotes ideals related to the issue. Criterion D – Sources: The response quotes and cites the Constitution.

Comment [c3]: Criterion B – Reasons and Evidence Related to Principles and Ideals: Response analyzes how the Preamble promotes ideals related to the issue.


7

United States. While security and the common good of the people appear to support the utilization of torture,

however, they are undermined by the psychological effects that such harsh deeds have upon their victims.

For example, Zayn Abidin Muhammed Hussein abu Zubaida was apprehended shortly after the attacks on

September, 11, 2001 for his ties with al‐Qaeda. During his weeks of detainment, Abu Zubaida would not provide

his captors with any information, despite their tenacious3 lectures and harangues4. When he would not cooperate,

CIA operatives transported Abu Zubaida to a secret prison, as yet undisclosed, and subjected him to an

interrogation method known as waterboarding. Shortly after the incident, Abu Zubaida provided his captors with

the information they required. Later, at a military hearing, “Abu Zubaida asserted that he was tortured by the CIA,

ad that he told his questioners whatever they wanted to hear to make the torture stop.” (Warrick and Eggen)

In a report issued by ABC News, anonymous CIA operatives described the action of waterboarding as the

following:

The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet.

Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the

gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the

treatment to a halt. (Ross)

Waterboarding is and has been a controversial subject for quite some time. In the ABC News report, Brian

Ross also noted that former CIA operative Bob Baer said that waterboarding is “”bad interrogation. I mean, you

can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture’s bas enough.”” (qtd. In Ross and Esposito)

It is in this way that torture weakens America’s defenses rather than strengthens them. The mental

suffering and psychological pain inflicted during such physical anguish becomes so inundating5 that one may begin

to divulge information that may or may not be true. If that inaccurate information is acted upon, America’s

security will be compromised rather than fortified.

3 Tenacious: Relentless. Something or someone that will not give up. 4 Harangue: A long and aggressive scolding. 5 Inundate: To overwhelm.

Comment [c4]: Criterion A – Position: Position evaluates the interaction between individual rights and the common good.

Comment [c5]: Criterion D – Sources: The response cites Ross and Esposito source within the paper and provides adequate information on this source in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well.


8

In a similar manner, physical abuse has been used in the past to attain speedy confessions that would

otherwise seem impossible to obtain. These supposed disclosures of guilt are commonly unreliable, though, for

those that confess usually do so for fear of death through torture. Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled

that confessions cadged6 through physical and mental abuse are unreliable, and thus should not be used as

evidence.

Such a case appeared before the court on January 10, 1936, labeled as Brown v. State of Mississippi. A

group of individuals were convicted for murder, a conviction that was based upon the confessions extorted from

the persons rather than physical evidence. The individuals took their case before the Supreme Court, who in turn

decreed that the verdict was void due to a lack of evidence. Mr. Chief Justice Hughes announced the opinions of

the court, stating that, “The conviction and sentence were void for want of the essential elements of due process,

and the proceeding thus vitiated could be challenged in any appropriate manner” (297 U.S. 278). The forced

admissions of guilt were deemed void along with the approved convictions.

If confessions gathered through physical abuse have been deemed inaccurate, then it would make a great

deal of sense to regard information retrieved in a similar manner of torture to be unreliable as well. While the

majority of institutions and organizations within the government believe in such a connection, it is lamentable7 to

note that one association in particular does not: the Central Intelligence Agency.

The U.S. Field Manual on Interrogation, also referred to as the FM 34‐52, prohibits the use of torture or

rather harsh coercion techniques during an interrogation (United States). In 2005, the Detainee Treatment Act

applied the manual to all interrogations enacted by the government. However, this act “left a loophole allowing

the CIA to use aggressive techniques barred by that document” (Warrick and Pincus).

The Bush Administration wishes to allow for the use of harsh interrogative techniques, and continuously

acts as a roadblock for any and all the fight for the rights of prisoners. In September 2006, the Bush Administration

6 Cadge: To steal or take something that wasn’t mean for you. 7 Lamentable: Regrettable or unfortunate.

Comment [c6]: Criterion C – Reasons and Evidence Related to Court Cases: Response analyzes how well a court case upheld a constitutional principle (due process) related to the issue


9

and the Republican Party came to an agreement after quarreling over a bill involving interrogation techniques. A

news report, issued by CNN shortly after this consensus8 was made, describes the following:

But the agreement explicitly gives the president “the authority for the United States to interpret

the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions.” President Bush hailed the agreement,

saying it will preserve the “most important toll we have” in the war against terror – the ability of

the CIA to interrogate detainees and “get their secrets.” (Deal on Detainee)

The Central Intelligence Agency abuses this loophole, choosing to torture their prisoners to retrieve

information in a swift yet disingenuous9 manner rather than build a strong relationship of trust with the detainee

which would yield more reliable, incisive10 results. In a study headed by Colleen Cordes, executive director of

Psychologists for Social Responsibility, an assemblage of season military interrogators and psychologists gathered

to study the psychological aspects of torture. The experienced interrogators revealed that a “detainee’s fear … can

easily turn to anger, which may escalate to the point that the interrogator … loses all possibility of cooperation

from the detainee.” The interrogators also note that “Cooperation is crucial to the goal of trustworthy

information”, for, when torture is enacted, “the innocent are apt to fabricate and those with real information …

are apt to alter the information or present carefully rehearsed lies instead” (Cordes).

The CIA devotes its time to recovering information that could save lives of innocent, law‐abiding citizens;

a noble cause. Unfortunately, the way in which they gather their intel challenges the very nature of their cause.

The CIA is interested in protecting America as the Preamble to the Constitution notes, but the methods they utilize

weakens the security of the United States through false information and unreliable facts spewed from the mouths

of frightened prisoners.

8 Consensus: An agreement. 9 Disingenuous: Not honest or sincere. 10 Incisive: Accurate and exact.

Comment [c7]: Criterion D – Sources: The response cites Cordes source within the paper and provides adequate information on this source in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well.

Comment [c8]: Criterion D – Reasons Related to Opposing Viewpoints: It interprets the CIA’s viewpoint and provides a refutation of this viewpoint.


10

Unlike the Central Intelligence Agency, however, the US Army excoriates11 the act of torture and attempts

to avoid such harsh interrogation techniques at all costs. The entire organization is regulated by a single standard:

The U.S. Field manual on Interrogation. It is through this manual that the guidelines for the U.S. Army and all other

armed forces are set. While torture and other forms of enhanced interrogation are allowed within the CIA, the

field manual strictly forbids any sort of related techniques that may violate the human rights of detainees.

It is difficult, however, for the U.S. Army to operate without errors or confusion if the CI chooses to utilize

special interrogative privileges. Retired Army General Paul J. Kern, along with twenty‐seven other generals, agrees

that the CIA should be restricted to the rules described in the U.S. Field Manual on Interrogation. Kern noted in a

report by the Washington Post that “having two sets of standards for interrogation – one for the CIA and another

for the military – has created problems of credibility and accountability” (Warrick and Pincus).

The U.S. Army realizes that torture in an inhuman deed that violates the Constitution. The unreliable

information that violent interrogation techniques acquire impairs the security of the United States rather than

improves it, creating a roadblock that the government must overcome should they try to, “provide for the

common defense.”

An agreement must be reached between associations on either side of the argument. Perhaps the

Central Intelligence Agency should be regulated by the U.S. Field Manual on Interrogation, or perhaps they should

simply create a new set of standards that does not violate any human right defined by the Geneva Conventions.

Whatever consensus is reached, however, torture must be abolished if the security of America is to be preserved.

As a democratic society, the United States must reflect the views and opinions of its citizens. Therefore,

the citizens of America must come forth to stop the unconstitutional acts of torture. If the occupants of the

country unanimously confront and speak out against the brutish deed of torture, the government will bend to the

will of the people, and the blight of torture shall no longer plague the image of America.

11 Excoriate: To criticize someone or something harshly.

Comment [c9]: Criterion D – Sources: The response cites the Warrick and Pincus source within the paper and provides adequate information on this source in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well.

Comment [c10]: Criterion A – Position: Response states a clear position.


11

Works Citied

Brown v. State of Mississippi. 297 U.S. 278. U.S. Supreme Court. 1936.

Cordes, Colleen. “Rethinking the Psychology of Torture.” Psychology for Social Responsibility. (Nov. 2006).

14 Jan. 2008. <http://www.psysr.org/tortureseminar.htm>

“Deal on Detainee Treatment Quells GOP Revolt.” CNN. (22 Sept. 2006) 14 Jan. 2008

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/21/terror/bill>.

Freedman, Russell. In Defense of Liberty. New York: Scholastic, 2003.

Monk, Linda R. “Why We the People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change.” History Now: American

History Online. September 2007. The Constitution. 19 Nov. 2007.

<http://www.historynow.org/09_2007.historian.html>.

“Republicans Stop Bill to Ban Waterboarding.” CBS News. (14 Dec. 2007) 19 Dec. 2007

<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/14/national/printable3621015.shtml>.

Ross, Brian, and Richard Esposito. “CIA’s Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described.” ABC News. (18 Nov. 2005).

12 Dec. 2007 <http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=1322866>.

“U.S. Army Bans Torture of Prisoners.” CBS News. (6 Sept. 2006) 12 Dec. 2007

<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/06/terror/printable1976599.shtml>.

United States. Department of the Army. Human Intelligence Collector Operations. Washington, DC: 6 Sept.

2006

Warrick, Joby, and Dan Eggan. “Waterboarding Recounted.” The Washington Posty. (11 Dec. 2007). 21 Dec.

2007 <http://www.washintonpost.com/wp‐

dyn/content/article/2007/12/10/AR2007121002091_pf.html>.


12

Warrick, Joby, and Walter Pincus. “House Passes Bill to Ban CIA’s Use of Harsh Interrogation Tactics.” The

Washington Post. (14 Dec. 2007). 19 Dec. 2007 <http://www.washintonpost.com/wp‐

dyn/content/article/2007/12/13/AR2007121301288_pf.html>.


13

Works Consulted

Conniff, Ruth. “Innocent Victim of U.S. Torture Policy.” The Progressive. (21 Sept. 2006) 4 Jan. 2008.

<http://www.progressive.org/node/3969/print>.

Mazzetti, Mark. “C.I.A. Destroyed Two Tapes Showing Interrogations.” The New York Times. (7 Dec. 2007) 7

Dec. 2007.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/07/washington/07intel.html?_r=1&sq=C.I.A.%20Destoryed%20Two%

20Tapes%20Showing%20Interrogations&oref=slogin&scp=1&pagewanted=print>.

Mulvaney, Patrick. “Dismay Grows Over U.S. Torture School.” Global Policy Forum. (15 Nov. 2006) 14 Dec.

2007. <http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/interbention/2006/1115soa.htm>.

Pincus, Walter. “Waterboarding Historically Controversial.” The Washington Post. (5 Oct. 2006) 4 Dec. 2007.

<http://www.washintonpost.com/wp‐dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100402005_pf.html>.

“Senate Ignores Veto Threat in Limiting Detainee Treatment.” CNN. (6 Oct. 2005) 4 Jan. 2008.

<http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/06/senate.detainees/index.html>.

“Torture and the Constitution.” The Washington Post. (11 Dec. 2005) 3 Jan. 2008.

<http://www.washintonpost.com/wp‐dyn/content/article/2005/12/10/AR2005121000934_pf.html>.


14

Scoring Matrix ‐ High School ‐ Constitutional Issues ‐ Paper: _____Student Sample #9________

CRITERION A

The response earns a 2 for the Position. It states a position on the issue (Torture must be abolished). It also addresses individual rights (discussion of the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment) and the common good (discussion of common defense). In addition, the position evaluates the interaction between individual rights and the common good (against torture because it violates rights and does not benefit the gathering of information for the “war on terror”). However, while it does also discuss changes that should be implemented (the manual should be changed), the response does not analyze how to advocate for its position (the call to “speak out” is not adequately specific). Moreover, it does not include a proposal for balancing individual rights and the common good related to the position. Hence, the response earns a 2 for this criterion.

Position – Common Good & Individual Rights & Call to Action CRITERION:

Yes or No? Comments

States a position on the issue that… Yes Torture must be abolished – p.8

…discusses individual rights Yes p. 2 description of rights – cruel and unusual punishment

…discusses the common good Yes pp.3‐4 – common defense

…evaluates the interaction between individual rights and the common good.

Yes Against the use of torture not only because it violates rights and because it would benefit the gathering of information for the war on terror

…Includes an analysis of how to advocate for this position.

No p.8 – change the manual – not related to civic action;

The call to “speak out” is not adequately specific

… Includes a proposal for balancing individual rights and the common good.

Score: _2__

CRITERION B

This response earns a 4 for Reasons and Evidence related to ideals and principles by explaining the relationship between two or more constitutional principles and the issue. In discussing the issue of torture, the response analyzes how Constitution promotes principles related to the issue. It analyzes the principle of “the common


15

defense” (referencing the Preamble of the Constitution), and the 8th Amendment (the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment is a commonly cited principle in cases related to the interrogations techniques applied to suspects in the “war on terror”). As each of these is accurately explained within the context of the issue, each is credited.

Reasons/Evidence – Principles and Policies/Cases CRITERION:

Yes or No? Accurate? Comments

Provides reason(s) for the position supported by evidence.

Yes Gives the military bad information; diminished the image of the US

A reference to the Constitution that is relevant to the issue

Yes Cites the preamble (common defense)

… and an analysis of how the Constitution logically connects to the issue.

Yes It logically connects the Constitution (8th

Amendment and the Preamble) to the issue because courts are currently considering whether detainees should be provided constitutional protections

…An analysis of how the Constitution promotes an ideal or principle logically connected to the issue.

Yes Cruel and unusual punishment

…An analysis of how the Constitution promotes a SECOND ideal or principle logically connected to the issue.

Yes Common defense

Score: __4__

CRITERION C

This response earns a 3 for Reasons and Evidence related to court cases or government policies by evaluating how well a court case upheld democratic ideals or principles related to the issue. The response references the case Brown v. State of Mississippi and discusses the decision the Supreme Court made related to the constitutional principle of due process (voiding forced admissions of guilt). However, it does not provide a discussion of more than one of the viewpoints involved in the case. As a result, the response earns a “3” for this criterion.


16



A description of a court case or a government policy

Yes p.5 Brown v. State of Mississippi; 2005 – The Detainee Treatment Act

The evidence includes…

… An evaluation of how well a court case OR a government policy has upheld democratic ideals or principles related to the issue.

Yes pp.5‐6 Brown v. State of Mississippi; 2005 – The Detainee Treatment Act

… including a discussion of competing viewpoints related to the case or policy.

No

Score: __3__

CRITERION D

The responses earn a 4 for Reasons related to other positions. It interprets two contrasting viewpoints of Bush and the CIA. It also provides a critique of Bush’s perspective. In addition, ir provides a refutation of the CIA’s position. Thus, it receives a “4” for this criterion.

Reasons/Evidence – Other Positions CRITERION:

Yes or No? Comments

The evidence for the position includes: …a description of another position on the issue.

Yes Bush; The CIA

…An interpretation of one contrasting position on the issue other than the student’s own.

Yes Bush statement – critiques the viewpoint (p.6)

… and a refutation of a position on the issue that contrasts with the student’s own.

Yes Critiques logic of CIA’s position

Score: __4___


17

CRITERION E

This response earns a 4 for Sources. The response paraphrases and cites the Constitution within the text of the response. In addition, the response cites Cordes, Warrick and Pincus, and Ross and Esposito sources within the paper and provides adequate information on these sources in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well. Thus, it earns a “4” for this criterion.

Task Yes/

No?

Paraphrases/

Quotes Source?

Relevant/

Supportive?

Comments

Makes an explicit reference to a FIRST source

Yes Yes Yes The Constitution

Makes an explicit reference to a SECOND source

Yes Yes Yes Warrick and Pincus

Makes an explicit reference to a THIRD source

Yes Yes Yes Ross and Esposito

Makes an explicit reference to a FOURTH source

Yes Yes Yes Cordes

OTHER SOURCES

Score: __4__


18

Student Sample #26 ‐ Bible Courses Taught in Public Schools

Everyone is affected in some way to the laws written in the Constitution. As citizens of a democratic

government it is important to be apart of this decision making process because it will affect every individual living

in the United States. Today educational courses are already set in curriculum, giving students little choice in what

they learn in public schools. The theory of evolution is taught in science classes, however teaching ht Bible as

literature is not allowed in schools. This is a breech of the Supreme Law of the Land, for the Constitution protects

our rights as people of the United States of America.

Out of the many constitutional issues being debated today, one has the potential to increase tolerance in

public schools while exercising student’s right to freedom of speech. Bible literature courses should be offered in

all public schools as an elective. By offering this class, students who want to take it will be able to learn from a

secular interpretation of the Bible. Studying it as a piece of literature not a belief. “Our government focuses on

the three branches of government created by the Constitution instead of the foundation upon which they rest: an

active citizenry” (Monk.)

The theory of evolution is taught in public schools, however teaching the Bible as literature is not allowed.

Students don’t have a choice in learning evolution. The first amendment in our Constitution states that there must

be a separation between church and state, and that everyone has the freedom to choose to participate in the

religion of their choosing. This amendment is honored in allowing biblical courses in schools, because it’s purpose

is not to persuade students to partake in religious actions, but merely participate with an educational overlook. It

is also important that as citizen of a democratic government, students should be allowed freedom of speech and

expression, as of now not only are several religious texts discouraged from educational facilities, but in many cases

they are ban; which is unconstitutional and against the law.

Comment [c11]: Criterion A – Position: Student states a position on a public issue.

Comment [c12]: Criterion E – Sources: The response provides adequate information on the Monk source in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well.

Comment [c13]: Criterion A – Position: Student’s position addresses individual rights.


19

Bible literature courses should be offered in all public schools; but should also be optional. This way, no

one would be forced to take it and therefore wouldn’t be put into a situation that could offend. From these

courses, students will study the Bible as a piece of literature from a secular perspective, they are not learning the

religion or beliefs.

As old as the debate between religion and state have been, the case of offering a bible literature class in

public schools is a hot issue that is today in the supreme court. One particular case is the Moreno v. Ector Country

School Board where a lawsuit was filed in Midland federal court calling for the Ector County Independent School

District to eliminate the Bible curriculum that was implemented12 in August, saying it violated individual religious

liberties. Previously there was a bible class offered, where the King James version was taught from a secular13

perspective as historical evidence.

“On Dec. 6, 2005 the Bible Curriculum Committee was formed and recommended both the Bible Literacy

Project’s textbook and one by the National Council of Bible Curriculum in Public Schools. The on Dec. 20, 2005,

trustees adopted the Nation Council’s curriculum.” (Marsilio.) Many parents, board members and community

members were against this curriculum before it was even set into motion, and even as the class became

established, there were still several opposing it. Many had argued that the class was unconstitutional because it

focused on one religion, others said the religion should be banned from all school related activities, and some were

even uncomfortable with the risk of having their children exposed to the Bible. However, though there be many

opposing the class, Permian Senior Kelly Combs is in favor of it and looks at it with the respect of anther history

class. “It seems to me that if kids have an interest in anything, they should have the opportunity to be exposed on

that. Our ancestors came to America to have Christian religious freedoms.” (Combs.)

It is important to realize that though it is unconstitutional to preference one religion over another, as the

Establishment Clause covers, in the occasion of the Independent School District, the Bible curriculum is completely

constitutional because the class remain entirely optional. The course was offered only as an elective to any

12 Implemented: carried out 13 Secular: pertaining to worldly things now regarding religion

Comment [c14]: Criterion E – Sources: The response provides adequate information on the Combs source in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for this source as well.

Comment [c15]: Criterion C – Reasons Related to Court Case: Response includes a detailed discussion of the competing viewpoints involved in a relevant court case but the response does not discuss how the case upheld a principle because it has not been decided yet.


20

students who desired to participate, and also was not required for any student who did not want to participate.

And through that option of choice the class was Constitutional.

Three main, supporting democratic ideals of this issue are cooperation, equality and tolerance.

Cooperation would be demonstrated by allowing biblical courses, school districts would be working hand and hand

with those wishing to take and teach religious courses; as would make equality an important ideal as well. To

attain equality, there needs to be that choice, and the accordance14 between those who learn of evolution, and

those who choose to take bible lit. There are also some risks against teaching bible courses that go in hand with

equality. If schools adopt the Christian bible, arguments can be made that the school should spend equal amount

of time teaching and offering courses of religions to be taught, such as the Book of Mormon, the Koran15, etc.

However, because it is an optional class, taught merely from an education perspective, the option of different

religious texts is not required.

Finally, the most important democratic ideal involved here is tolerance. Tolerance is a fair and objective

attitude towards those who’s actions or beliefs differ from one’s own. This would be practiced and gained in

allowing public schools to teach the bible because many do not believe, or agree with this proposal, and bringing it

into public places, such as schools, would heighten16 respect for those who’s beliefs differ. Also, non‐religious

students who take the class, would be learning the historic background of a popular belief in our nation, at which

they would gain more understanding and tolerance toward that particular belief and practice.

Out of the supporting Constitutional Principles, the one that protects this issue the most is Popular

Sovereignty17. This gives the people the right to vote, to decide, to voice their opinion. Here, the Constitution

protects these rights of speech and choice by allowing citizen of this democracy to vote through elections. This

would serve the cause of teaching religious courses in school because it gives the right to decide to the people,

which would allow for each district, independently, to choose whether or not to allow biblical courses to be taught

14 Accordance: agreement, conformity 15 Koran: sacred text of Islam 16 Heighten: to increase the amount of 17 Sovereignty: rightful status, supreme and independent authority power.

Comment [c16]: Criterion B – Reasons Related to Ideals and Principles – The response explains how the issue relates to the constitutional principle of popular sovereignty


21

in their district or school. Furthermore, it would also allow for the students individually to decide whether or not

they wish to take the class.

Students are citizens of democracy, and through that should have the right to freedom of religion, press,

and expression, as is declared in the first Amendment of the Constitution. Here, in the ratified18 Constitution, or,

the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging19 the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right

of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for the redress of grievances.”

(Constitution.) As stated, the Constitution protects the right of allowing biblical courses to be taught in public

schools, as well as the students participating in the class, or other religious activated to their comfort.

Every individual has the right to learn what they want to, but also to practice whatever religion they want.

This is part of the separation of church and states. Because of this, students would first have an option whether to

be apart of the class or not, also, the bible literature class would strictly be for educational purposes and not for

converting reasons.

Our country and government thrives off of the national guidelines written in the Constitution, and of this

famous document, a single sentence sums it up, and it is known as the preamble. Starting with the words, “We the

people”, the preamble is secured with a promise that involves all those living in America, and the sentences ends

with “…secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity20…” This simple sentences is vital to the

Constitution. It protects not only individual rights, but the common good of the people. As I have previously

mentioned, each citizen of the United States is given individual rights through the First Amendments, in this there

is the Establishment Clause which keeps congress from creating a law in establishing a religion, or, the preference

of one religious belief or practice over another. Though these clauses gives the people many rights, it is the

preamble which prioritizes the common good over all else. In the event that an individual right conflicts with the

common good of people, the individual right will be compromised, as it is stated in the preamble.

18 Ratify: to confirm by expressing consent 19 Abridge: to shorten, reduce, or cut off 20 Posterity: succeeding for future generations

Comment [c17]: Criterion E – Sources: The response cites the Constitution.

Comment [c18]: Criterion A – Position: Student’s position addresses the common good (although only briefly).

Comment [c19]: Criterion B – Reasons Related to Ideals and Principles – The response explains how the issue relates to two constitutional principles: the common good and the Establishment Clause.


22

The government policy for the matter of Bible literature classes is somewhat complex, however there is

also some leniency. While every state, district and county must adhere21 to the Constitution and national

government, the final decision of whether or not a bible class can be offered lays not in the hands of the national

or state government, but of the district. In a recent article entitled Teaching the Bible in Public School written in

response to the Time Magazine story, author Suzanne Hadley shares the statistics: “Right now public‐school

courses on the Bible are employed in 460 districts in at least 37 states.” (Hadley.) Furthermore, it is up to the

members of the district board to decide whether a biblical course can be offered, and if the decision is yes, thus

begins a process of approving a Constitution appropriate curriculum.

Apart from the case that is currently in the supreme court, previously mentioned, the Certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit June 19, 2000, was a case that also made it to the Supreme court

argued in March 29, 2000. At Santa Fe High School, since 1995, an elected a student council chaplain delivered a

prayer over the public address system before each home varsity football game. Several people including Mormon

and Catholic students and their mothers, even alumni filed a suit challenging this practice under the Establishment

Clause of the First Amendment. After pending, the court decided that “the Fifth Circuit held that, even as modified

by the District Court, the football prayer policy was invalid.” (Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for

the Fifth Circuit June 19, 2000)

In this example, the Supreme Court was correct in deeming this prayer practice unconstitutional. By

reciting a prayer over a public address system, during a public gathering is breeching the Establishment Clause, and

should not happen. However, this is a completely different matter than that of bible literature classes because on

the courses there would be no religious practices, such as prayers, and also unlike a public display of ritual, the

classes would be taught from strictly a secular perspective. Most importantly, this Supreme Court case differs

from the the one being debated now by the option of choice. In the Ector County Independent School District

case, students have the choice whether or not to take the offered bible courses as an elective, whereas in the Fifth

Circuit case, spectators did not have the option not to take part in the prayer.

21 Adhere: to stay attached

Comment [c20]: Criterion D – Sources: The response cites an article by Suzanne Hadley within the text of the response.


23

There are many supporting stakeholders for offering bible courses in school, one of which is the Young

Men’s Christian Association, this world‐wide, apolitical22 social movement group works with a special emphasis on

community development and youth. This group aims to increase individual and social development encompassing

spiritual, intellectual even physical methods. As a way to reach their goals, they enthusiastically support the

teaching of bible literature in public schools. “I have seen what the Bible, taught as a regular daily class, with tests,

promotions, reports, and credits attained for diploma for graduation, can do for young boys of upper elementary,

junior high, and high school age. It is a shame that public school youngsters cannot have the same privilege as

pupils in a private school, where they find it the most interesting and rewarding subject they study. Cannot the

same thing be offered the public schools as an elective study and as a gift, apart from all taxes, by the YMCA in

cooperation with the YWCA, and PTA, members of churches, and other individuals who see its value?” (McCallie).

Although many are in support of biblical courses, there are a few groups, such as the Texas Freedom

Network, who are opposing of the idea. In the past the TFN has also opposed things such as “National Prayer Day,

because they believe that like teaching biblical courses, it is a waste of public education funds and curriculum

space” (TFN).

The TFN has had several run0ins with supporting stakeholder NCBCPS (national council on bible

curriculum in public schools) who’s objective is to serve the public through educational efforts concerning the

people’s first amendment right to religious freedom and expression. They go about this by interesting a state

certified bible course (elective) into public high schools in America. The curriculum’s plan is to convey the content

of the Bible as literature and historic use. The program is concerned with education rather than indoctrination23 of

students. The central approach is to simply study the Bible, which is arguably the one of the most influential books

in the world, as a foundation document with an approach that is comprehensive program strictly of secular

education.

22 Apolitical: not involved or interested in politics 23 Indoctrination: to instruct or teach

Comment [c22]: Criterion A – Position: The student discusses ways to implement her/his recommendation but does not explain how to advocate for the position.

Comment [c23]: Criterion D ‐ Reasons related to other positions. It briefly describes the Texas Freedom Network but does not provide an interpretation of this contrasting position on the issue. Thus, it cannot receive any more than two points for this criterion.


24

Moreover, it is important to recognize that offering bible literature classes to be taught in school sis in

every way, Constitutional. It would provide students with the opportunity to become more knowledgeable, and

thus, more tolerant towards other religions while gaining historic understanding. This is not a new issue, similar

cases has been brought to the Supreme Court in the past, yet none of complete relevance, for Bible literature

classes do not breech the Establishment Clause due to the simple fact that it is an elective. Therefore, if a student

is offended by, or does not wish to take the course, he doesn’t have to. There is a case currently in the Supreme

Court discussing whether or not Bible literature classes abide to the First Amendment, but once the court deems it

Constitutional, the decisions will then by up to the district in question.

Due to that fact, it is the job of the citizens to make their opinions heard, to go to the public school

administrators with the proposal of offering Bible classes, and if a school already does offer them, it is in the hands

of the citizens to support and attend them. Offering Bible literature classes in public schools is a great way to

increase tolerance and cooperation, and it is entirely Constitutional, therefore, all public schools should offer Bible

Literature as an elective.


25

Works Cited:

Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit June 19, 2000

Combs, Kelly. ACLU, Parents Sue ECISD. www.oaoa.com/onset?id. 3 January 2008.

Hadley, Suzanne. Teaching Bible in Public Schools. March 26, 2007.

Marsilio, Elaine. ACLU, Parents Sue ECISD. www.oaoa.com/onset?id. 3 January 2008.

Monk, Linda R. “Why We the People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change.” History Now: American History Online. September 2007. The Constitution. 19 Nov. 2007)

The Constitution of the United States

Works Consulted:

Babist, Elanor. www.aclu.org/religion/schools/. December 2007.

Goodman, Brenda. Teaching the Bible in Georgia’s Public Schools. March 29, 2006

Johnson, Luke. A Bible Curriculum for Public Schools. December 2007.

Texas Freedom Network. NCBCPS Responds to Second Round of Attacks by Liberal Texas group. 26, September, 2006.

Young Mens Christian Association. www.britannica.com/eb/article/Young‐Mens‐Chritisan‐Associtation. December 2007.


26

Annotated Bibliography

Monk, Linda R. “Why We the People? Citizens as Agents of Constitutional Change.” History Now: American

History Online. September 2007. The Constitution. 19 Nov. 2007.

<http://www.historynow.org/09_2007/histroian.html>. This article faces the question of who is included in “we

the people” during the amending of the Constitution. It also discusses the Bill of Rights, and who in America has a

vote. The Indian Removal Act and civic movements are used as stepping stones to the process leading the

equality. I will analyze this article in my CBA by referring to the process it explains about the amending of The

Constitution. I also this it is important to clarify that by “we the people”, I, and the federal government is referring

to all human citizens of America.


27

Scoring Matrix ‐ High School ‐ Constitutional Issues ‐ Paper: _____Student Sample #26________

CRITERION A

The response earns a 2 for the Position. It states a position on the issue (every public school should offer Bible Literature as an elective). It also addresses individual rights (discussion of First Amendment related to the Establishment Clause) and the common good (discusses common good in connection with the “We the People” portion of the Constitution’s Preamble). However, the position never evaluates the interaction between individual rights and the common good. Moreover, while it does reference what people can do to offer classes on the Bible (e.g., YMCA could offer classes), it does it include an analysis of how to advocate for the position. By stating a position and merely discussing individual rights and the common good, the response can only earn 2 points for this criterion.

Position – Common Good & Individual Rights & Call to Action CRITERION:

Yes or No? Comments

States a position on the issue that… Yes Every public school should offer Bible Literature as an elective

…discusses individual rights Yes Bottom of p. 5‐6 – discussion of First Amendment rights related to the Establishment Clause

…discusses the common good Yes Addresses the common good on pp. 5‐6

…evaluates the interaction between individual rights and the common good.

No No clear evaluation of interaction given weak discussion of common good

…Includes an analysis of how to advocate for this position.

Discussion of YMCA does not connect with the govt; Last paragraph – go to school administrators

… Includes a proposal for balancing individual rights and the common good.

Score: _2__


28

CRITERION B

This response earns a 4 for Reasons and Evidence related to ideals and principles by explaining the relationship between two or more constitutional principles and the issue. In discussing the possible bible as literature class, the response explains how the issue relates to the Establishment Clause, the common good (referencing the “We the People” clause of the Constitution), and popular sovereignty. As each of these is accurately explained within the context of the issue, each is credited.

Reasons/Evidence – Principles and Policies/Cases CRITERION: Yes or No? Accurate? Comments

Provides reason(s) for the position supported by evidence.

A reference to the Constitution that is relevant to the issue

Yes

… and an analysis of how the Constitution logically connects to the issue.

Yes Analysis of 1st

Amendment

…An analysis of how the Constitution promotes a SECOND ideal or principle logically connected to the issue.

Yes Preamble and popular sovereignty

Score: __4__

CRITERION C

This response earns a 3 for Reasons and Evidence related to court cases or government policies by evaluating how well a court case upheld democratic ideals or principles related to the issue. The response references the case Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and discusses the decision the Supreme Court made to uphold Establishment Clause. However, it does not provide a discussion of more than one of the viewpoints involved in the case. As a result, the response can earn no more than three points for this criterion.



A description of a court case or a government policy


29

The evidence includes…

… An evaluation of how well a court case OR a government policy has upheld democratic ideals or principles related to the issue.

Yes Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

… including a discussion of competing viewpoints related to the case or policy.

Yes Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit –description of how the Supreme Court upheld Establishment Clause

The student also discusses the Moreno v Ector County School Board and includes a detailed discussion of the competing viewpoints involved in a relevant court case but the response does not discuss how the case upheld a principle because it has not been decided yet

Score: __3__

CRITERION D

The responses earns a 2 for Reasons related to other positions. It briefly describes the Texas Freedom Network but does not provide an interpretation of this contrasting position on the issue. Thus, it cannot receive any more than two points for this criterion.

Reasons/Evidence – Other Positions CRITERION:

Yes or No? Comments

The evidence for the position includes: …a description of another position on the issue.

Yes Texas Freedom Network – briefly describes, but does not analyze why this group is against teaching biblical courses – no connection back to his argument; tells information about the group, but there is no commentary about the strength of their position

…An interpretation of one contrasting position on the issue other than the student’s own.


30

… and a refutation of a position on the issue that contrasts with the student’s own.

Score: __2___

CRITERION E

This response earns a 4 for Sources. The response cites the Constitution and an article by Suzanne Hadley within the text of the response. In addition, the response cites the Monk and Combs sources within the paper and provides adequate information on these sources in its bibliography and thus, also receives credit for these sources as well. Thus, it earns four points for this criterion.

Task Yes/

No?

Paraphrases/

Quotes Source?

Relevant/

Supportive?

Comments

Makes an explicit reference to a FIRST source

Yes Yes Yes The Constitution

Makes an explicit reference to a SECOND source

Yes Yes Yes p.6 – In a recent article by Suzanne Hadley…

Makes an explicit reference to a THIRD source

Yes Yes Yes Monk

Makes an explicit reference to a FOURTH source

Yes Yes Yes Combs

OTHER SOURCES

Score: __4__

Scoring Note: An act, amendment, or a court case will be credited for this source.

Annotated bibliographies may be submitted to ensure the credibility of the sources cited.

-

Documents

Scoring Guide for HS Constitutional Issues.09.03.08 · Scoring Guide HS Constitutional Issues CBA ... If an outside reviewer cannot follow the points made in a CBA response due to