Historical Thinking Skills Scoring Rubric Secondary

Close Reading Strategies Strategies/Procedural Concepts Procedural Concepts

Criteria Sourcing Critical Reading Corroboration Contextualizing Claim Evidence
Identification: Fully understands the Questions the author's thesis Constructs an Applies prior and new Formulates a plausible Justifies claims using
meaning and content of sources. and determines viewpoint and interpretation of events knowledge to interpretation, appropriate direct
Attribution: Cites all authors and all evidence to evaluate claims, using information and determine the argument, or claim evidence from a variety
original dates of primary and highlighting what the author perspectives in multiple historical setting of based on the evaluation of reliable sources.
secondary sources. leaves out. sources. Identifies sources. Uses that of evidence found in a
Perspective: Evaluates the reliability Cites accurate examples of how consistencies and setting to interpret variety of primary and
4 sources based on the authors the author uses persuasive inconsistencies among the sources within the secondary sources.
perspective and when and why they language and specific words and various accounts. historical context as
were produced. phrases to influence the reader. opposed to a present-
Seeks answers to questions left day mindset.
unanswered in the source to
formulate an interpretation.
Identification: Mostly understands Analyzes the author's thesis, Explains similarities and Applies prior and new Generates a reasonable Justifies claims using
the meaning and content of sources. determines the viewpoint and differences by knowledge to interpretation, some appropriate direct
Attribution: Cites most authors and evidence to evaluate the claims; comparing information determine the argument, or claim evidence from a variety
most original dates of primary and may highlight what the author and perspectives in historical setting of based on an evaluation of reliable sources.
secondary sources. leaves out. multiple sources. the sources. May of the evidence found
Cites examples of how the attempt an in selected primary and
3 Perspective: Examines the reliability
author uses persuasive language interpretation of some secondary sources.
of sources based on the authors
perspective and when and why they and specific words and phrases to sources with a
were produced. influence the reader. present-day mindset
Notes that the author has left or with a limited
some questions unanswered. application to the
historical context.
Identification: Understands the States the author's claims and Identifies similarities and Attempts to States an Justifies claims using
meaning and content of sources with evidence presented to prove those differences in determine the interpretation, generalizations or
appropriate scaffolding and support. claims. information in multiple historical setting of argument, or claim that limited appropriate
Attribution: Cites some authors and Determines the authors sources. sources without fully may or may not based direct evidence.
viewpoint. understanding the on evidence found in
2 some original dates of primary and
Notes how language is used to historical context. selected primary and
secondary sources.
persuade. secondary sources.
Perspective: Attempts to evaluate
the reliability of sources.

Identification: Attempts to Attempts to identify the authors Demonstrates little to no Demonstrates no Does not state an Does not justify or
understand the meaning and content claims, viewpoint, or evidence. attempt to examine attempt to original claim, support claims using
of sources with the appropriate sources for understand the argument, or appropriate direct
scaffolding and support. corroborating or historical setting of interpretation. evidence.
conflicting evidence. sources.
1 Attribution: Cites few authors and
few original dates of primary and
secondary sources.
Perspective: Does not adequately
examine reliability.

UMBC Center for History Education, 2013. Adapted from the work of the Stanford History Education Group and Bruce VanSledright, Assessing Historical Thinking and Understanding: Innovative Ideas for New Standards, (New York: Routledge, 2014).