HIS 200 Module Seven Short Response Guidelines and Rubric
Overview: The short response activities in the webtext throughout this course are designed to show your understanding of key concepts as you engage with course content.
Prompt: During the seventh week of the course, you will respond to several questions in the webtext as you complete each learning block. At the end of Module Seven, you will review your answers to these questions and ensure that you have responded to each question. It is important that you answer each question; otherwise, the words “[no response]” will appear in brackets when you submit the assignment. The questions and their original locations in the webtext are listed in this table in case you want to refer back to the reading as you edit, but you can edit your responses to all the questions directly in Module Seven: Thinking About History, learning block 7-4 (page 4) in the webtext, before exporting to Word for submission to your instructor in your learning environment.
Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-1 (page 2):
- Question 1: Name three historical lenses that you could apply to gain a fuller picture of the relationship between Natives and white
- Question 2: Revise the thesis statement at the top of this page to reflect a more complex view of the relationship between Natives and white settlers. Your revised thesis statement should be longer than one sentence.
Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-2 (page 2):
- Question 3: Name three historical lenses that you could use to look at the events described in the video you just
- Question 4: Massasoit’s decision to approach the Pilgrims about an alliance was contingent on what previous event or events? (Name one or )
- Question 5: Name one short-term consequence and one long-term consequence of the alliance between the Wampanoag and the
Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-3 (page 3):
- Question 6: How has your understanding of the historical event in your essay changed as a result of your research? Describe one instance of a misconception or a wrong idea you had about your topic that has been corrected after researching and writing about it.
Module Seven: Thinking About History, Learning Block 7-4 (page 2):
- Question 7: Name four historical lenses through which you could analyze the events of the Cherokee Specify one aspect of this event for
Note: Full answer to this question is available after purchase.
each lens that you cite.
Question 8: Agree or disagree with the following thesis statement: “The Treaty of New Echota was invalid, and the National Party was correct to oppose it.” Cite at least three historical facts that support your position.
Rubric
Guidelines for Submission: Your response to Question 1 should be no more than 1 sentence in length. Your responses to Questions 2, 6, 7, and 8 should be 2–3 sentences in length. Your responses to Questions 3, 4, and 5 should be 1–2 sentences in length. Follow the instructions at the bottom of Module Seven: Thinking About History, learning block 7-4 (page 4) in the webtext, to download your work and submit it to your instructor as a single Microsoft Word document uploaded to your learning environment. Refer to the Submitting Webtext Assignments Guide for assistance on downloading, saving, and submitting this assignment.
| Critical Elements |
Exemplary |
Proficient |
Needs Improvement |
Not Evident |
Value |
| Engagement |
Written responses completely address all short answer prompts
(100%) |
Written responses completely address the majority of short answer prompts
(85%) |
Written responses address the minority of short answer prompts
(55%) |
No written responses provided to address any short answer prompts
(0%) |
30 |
| Relevance |
|
Written responses directly address short answer prompts, drawing from presented course concepts and terminology (100%) |
Written responses are topically related to short answer prompts, but responses do not consistently draw from presented course concepts and terminology
(85%) |
Written responses do not address topics identified in short answer prompts (0%) |
20 |
| Accuracy |
Written responses are completely accurate (100%) |
Written responses contain minor errors but are mostly accurate
(85%) |
Written responses contain major errors
(55%) |
No written responses are provided
(0%) |
20 |
| Critical Thinking |
|
Written responses demonstrate understanding of course content through inclusion of original ideas and examples (100%) |
Written responses demonstrate understanding of course content through reiteration of provided materials, but do not consistently include original ideas and examples
(85%) |
Written responses do not reflect original ideas and examples
(0%) |
20 |
| Articulation of Response |
|
Written responses are captured in complete sentences without grammatical errors impacting legibility and the clarity of response
(100%) |
Written responses are captured in incomplete sentences or include numerous grammatical errors that negatively impact legibility and the clarity of response
(85%) |
No written responses are captured in complete sentences (0%) |
10 |
| Total |
100% |
Related; SCI 200 Project Part Two: Speaking Notes Draft Guidelines and Rubric
Order This Paper
Reviews
There are no reviews yet.