his 202 aja review 1

Meets minimum page requirement (2 full pages).

Does not meet minimum page requirement (1.5 pages or less)

Answers the specific AJA requirements. Incorporates pertinent and detailed information from scholarly work. Maintains focus/avoids being sidetracked by tangents. Presents all information clearly and concisely and in an organized manner. Avoids distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems.

Answers most of the AJA requirements, however, may miss one of the following (thesis, purpose, relationship to history, or target audience). Incorporates pertinent and detailed information from scholarly work. Maintains focus/avoids being sidetracked by tangents. Presents all information clearly and concisely and in an organized manner. Avoids distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems.

Answers many of the AJA requirements, however, missed more than one of the following (thesis, purpose, relationship to history, or target audience). Incorporates pertinent and detailed information from scholarly work. Maintains focus/avoids being sidetracked by tangents. Presents all information clearly and concisely and in an organized manner. Avoids distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems.

May have met all the AJA requirements, however did not incorporate pertinent and detailed information from the scholarly work and/or sidetracked off into a reactionary tangent. Presents information in a manner that is sometimes unclear, and/or has significant organization problems. Avoids distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems.

May have met all the AJA requirement, however did not incorporate pertinent and detailed information from the scholarly work and/or sidetracked off into a reactionary tangent. Provides no information that can be understood or related to the specific topic May lack any recognizable organization May contain enough distracting grammar/spelling/etc. problems to make it substantially incomprehensible.

Identified 3 specific primary sources.

Identified 2 specific primary sources.

Identified 1 specific primary source.

Identified primary sources, but not specific.

Identified the wrong source.

No attempt made to identify primary sources.

Support/contradict the textbook with a direct quote from textbook.

Support/contradiction validated with page number or chapter reference instead of a direct quote.

Support/contradiction asserted without any specific validation from the textbook using a direct quote. Does include a generalized narrative of why support/contradict the textbook.

Support/contradiction asserted without any specific validation from the textbook using a direct quote. Also lacks any sort of generalize narrative of why support or contradiction was proposed.

Student stated that it did not support or contradict the textbook without validation.

Student obviously did not read the book so their analysis of support or contradiction is too general, too vague, and/or incorrect.

No support/contradiction of the textbook.