Position Paper Guidelines

/

Possible Points

/ Points

Content

Your paper should provide answers to:
-  What is the article about? (1-2 sentence summary)
-  Why is the problem addressed interesting or important?
-  What are the positive aspects of the article?
-  What are the negative aspects of the article?
-  Which relevant problems does the article not address?
-  What are the counterarguments?
and you must clearly state your position in the first paragraph / The paper must address the following in this section to receive full credit: student’s position (argument), any counterargument, and textual evidence (must include citations). Any missing elements will result in lowering of grade.
Paper clearly states position/answers question in the first paragraph. Answers other questions, and provides a solid argument and counterargument with evidence in paper. (20 points)
Paper is missing one of the elements: position/argument, counterargument, or evidence or any of the above is weak. (14 points)
Paper is missing two of the elements or the argument or counterargument is very weak (i.e., no evidence provided) (8 points)
Paper is missing central focus or argument. There is not any textual reference provided by student. (3 points)
Do not use outside research; use only readings (you still need to cite them) provide ideas gathered from in-class discussions, or you can come up with your own theory (but explain it – clearly). (There is not enough space for outside research.) / Evidence provided via references to reading with proper citation (20 points)
Evidence may have been provided, however the citation is missing or not correct (10 points)
You must suggest future research directions that you believe would help solidify your position in your final paragraph. For example, if you chose an article on wage disparity, you could suggest research in the areas of different labor classes, education levels, etc. / Student suggests further research in last paragraph that would solidify his/her argument (15 points)
Student suggests further research that does not solidify student’s original argument (3 points)

Style

Proofread your writing. Position papers are meant to be succinct and to the point – that means as writers you have to cast aside all the tricks you learned in English lit. Write to show me that you have read and understood the article. Also, do not assume that spell and grammar check are perfect. As this assignment is short in length, it means that you will have to edit and revise. / Grammar and mechanics are (almost) free from error. (8 points)
A few style errors, but still legible and comprehensible. Paper has same error(s) consistently. (4 points)
Paper has many or repeated grammatical and or mechanical errors. Paper is difficult to read or hard to understand due to errors. (2 points)
Format 2 pages, double-spaced, 1” margins, Times New Roman 11-12 pt. type size, strictly enforced both minimum and maximum length (or 1 page, single-spaced) / Follows page format (2 pts)
No cover sheet: do not waste paper (put name/page # as header on each page) / Name/Page # on every page (Header) (2 pts)
MLA for citing (when necessary); I’d recommend http://www.easybib.com / Correct citation (3 pts)
References are missing. You must cite whenever you “borrow, paraphrase, steal, or use” someone’s words or ideas, otherwise it is plagiarism. (Note: Paper will not receive any credit)

TOTAL ( /70 PTS)


Formative Assessment – Rubric Rationale

The rubric above is for my Advanced Placement U.S. Politics and American Government (AP Government) senior class. It was originally assigned for their position papers, during the economics mini-unit on economic theory and globalization, which precedes the government unit. Although this rubric is task specific, I feel it is “sufficiently generic” (Wiggins, 1998, p. 268) or practical enough that it could be used in my government unit (or in my mainstream classes with additional scaffolding). Students have taken a pause from writing position papers because there is not enough time for them to write position papers on a weekly basis. (I have already given them other assignments and readings to prepare for the upcoming AP exam.)

These were some of the California State Content Standards addressed during the economics mini-unit:

12e.1.4 Evaluate the role of private property as an incentive in conserving and improving scarce resources, including renewable and nonrenewable natural resources.

12e.1.5 Analyze the role of a market economy in establishing and preserving political and personal liberty (e.g., through the works of Adam Smith).

12e.6 Students analyze issues of international trade and explain how the U.S. economy affects, and is affected by, economic forces beyond its borders.

12e.6.3 Understand the changing role of international political borders and territorial sovereignty in a global economy.

During the economics mini-unit, students wrote a series of three position papers. I allowed for revisions if they did not receive a passing grade (usually below 60 percent). For the most part, I attributed student failure due to a combination of several reasons: 1) they did not read the assignments and it was apparent because students did not include an argument and or evidence, 2) students did not address the research question in the last section of their paper, 3) the paper was missing several or all of the central elements (argument, counterargument, evidence, citation).

In preparation for writing the position papers, students read assigned scholarly journals and news articles and then took a position on those readings. In addition to providing students the position paper guidelines (which I distributed to students when we reviewed the expectations of the first position paper), I reviewed the rubric with them in class several times and did a “temperature check” and asked students how they were doing on their papers. Overall, most students performed well on the position papers as long as they: 1) completed the readings, 2) took a position, 3) provided counterarguments, 4) provided textual evidence, and 5) followed instructions (i.e., guidelines).

When rating or creating the rubric, students were not involved in the process (as suggested by Nitko, pp. 231-236) as this particular rubric’s intent was to measure students’ ability to analyze the reading material and concisely state their argument. As I had crafted the rubric before students had written their papers and had an idea of what I desired, it was a top-down approach (p. 234). However, there are times (when I craft rubrics for free response questions or essay exams) when my approach is usually bottom-up (p. 236), when I take samples of student work and then create the rubric.

As this is an AP class, there was minimal class time spent on teaching students how to write the paper. Essentially, I informed them they had to provide a critique in two pages (double-spaced) or less and they needed to cite evidence for their argument. Moreover, I stressed the need for language that got to the point, as it is a tool that is necessary on the AP Government exam. Over the course of the economics mini-unit, students had to write three position papers and it was my understanding that with each paper they would improve their arguments, and comprehension of the reading, which most students did.

When grading the first position papers, I had the guidelines in front of me (in fact I had the guidelines in front of me when I graded each series of papers) and I found it was easier to score the papers. What was surprising was that there were a handful of students who despite the oral instructions in class and the written guidelines still failed to follow instructions. To help these students, I attached the guidelines to every graded paper so students would know where they had received (or lost) points. After I handed back the papers, I explained my general comments and explained to students that they could rewrite their papers if they received a failing grade. I also distributed a copy of a redacted “A” paper to students. We discussed what the student did well and why the student received an “A.”

The guidelines are split into three evaluative criteria: content, format, and style. Format and style only comprise of twenty percent of the rubric’s overall point-value (15 of 70 points). My reasons for including them in the rubric were because I did not want to read a slew of incoherent papers, full of grammatical errors that would stilt the reading. But I did not weight either of these categories too heavily, as students can feasibly write a paper with poor grammar and style and pass the assignment according to my rubric. However, if students write an illegible paper and fail to provide evidence via textual references, or fail to provide a research question, then students are more than likely to fail the assignment (as it those are more heavily weighted and deal with content in my eyes). Also, another reason for not weighting these categories too heavily is that the AP Government exam does not give much, if any, weight to grammar or style. Readers only look for content, knowledge, and application of that knowledge; however there have been occasions when readers will dock points if spellings of certain names (e.g., politicians) are incorrect, as the readers will assume students lack the knowledge.

I think the content guidelines are relatively specific, but general enough, that they lead students to answer specific open ended questions. I know it can be hard to write down your thoughts in one to two pages, but I want students to cultivate this skill, especially for the AP exam in May. From the beginning of the school year, I have reviewed free response question (FRQ) writing skills and techniques with students. Students have been accustomed to writing FRQs on a weekly basis and on their unit exams. I believe the skills (analysis and synthesis, in particular) learned via the position papers have helped students prepare for the FRQs, which count for 50 percent of the AP exam score.

Because every student had access to all the readings and the guidelines beforehand, I believe that the assignment was standardized for each AP Government student. However, because students may have been absent and therefore missed class discussions and other in-class activities that may have helped prepare them in writing for the paper, this could have tainted the reliability factor. Another possible issue of reliability could be varying degrees of understanding of the reading material among students. Even with the class discussion, there was not adequate time to discuss every reading, therefore students chose readings they either liked or felt were “easiest” to decipher. Therefore, students who have higher level reading and analytical skills had more success with these assignments. According to Omrod, “reliability is a necessary condition for validity” (p. 23), so that could possibly explain the students who received a low grade on their position papers. Now writing this paper, I can consider that there were several reasons for student failure: students were absent and missed in class discussions, students did not read the assignment directions, and or students did not understand the readings.

Therefore, next time I teach these lessons, I can scaffold the lesson by providing graphic organizers for the readings, having more in class discussions, and checking for understanding more often (e.g., oral assessments, quizzes). For the students who did not read the rubric carefully or pay attention in class when instructions were given, those students made the same patterned mistakes on subsequent position papers (e.g., if students forgot to mention a research question in the first paper, they usually forgot to mention a research question in the second and third papers). As mentioned earlier, I included a rubric with my comments on student papers, but those did not seem to help some of these more “absent-minded” students. I now understand that some students may have performed poorly on the assignment because they did not comprehend the readings, and for those students I need to provide tools (e.g., graphic organizers) to synthesize the readings.