Poses a central question with Poses a relevant, central Poses a compelling central Poses an important and compelling Develop Central unclear relevance to the topic question that is specific question that is targeted central question that is targeted enough Research OR enough to guide initial enough to guide investigation. to guide in-depth investigation. Questions Question is too broad or investigation. narrow in scope to guide initial Clearly explains question’s Thoroughly explains how question investigation. Clearly explains a connection importance to the field and its builds on the existing ideas and debates between question and existing relationship to existing expert of experts about an enduring issue in Identifies a connection expert ideas. ideas and debates. the field. between question and existing information or ideas. Supporting questions are Explains how supporting Explains clear relationships Thoroughly explains expert debates Develop loosely related to central questions relate to the central between specific supporting related to a specific supporting question Supporting question. question to help guide questions and central question, and how specific supporting questions Research investigation. and to relevant expert ideas or contribute to central question. Questions debates. Identifies additional questions that emerge from this investigation. Consults one or two relevant Consults multiple sources Consults multiple relevant Consults multiple, significant sources of Determine sources that share point of relevant to the inquiry and that sources of various types (e.g., various types (e.g., primary, secondary, Helpful Sources view. represent multiple points of primary, secondary, print, print, digital, visual, graphic) that view. digital, visual, graphic) that represent a wide range of significant represent varied and significant points of view. points of view. Identifies gaps in evidence related to available sources. Accurately summarizes others’ Critiques others’ argument(s) Critiques the strengths and Thoroughly critiques the strengths and Critique argument(s) or explanation(s). or explanation(s) in terms of weaknesses of others’ weaknesses of others’ argument(s) or Arguments or Critique is absent, loosely supporting sources, evidence, argument(s) or explanation(s) in explanation(s) in terms of accuracy, Explanations in related, or focuses on and/or logic. terms of supporting sources, supporting sources, evidence, and logic, Secondary insignificant details. evidence, and/or logic, using using well-chosen examples. Sources well-chosen examples.
Develop Central Research Questions Poses a central question with unclear relevance to the topic OR Question is too broad or narrow in scope to guide initial investigation. Identifies a connection between question and existing information or ideas. Poses a relevant, central question that is specific enough to guide initial investigation. Clearly explains a connection between question and existing expert ideas. Poses a compelling central question that is targeted enough to guide investigation. Clearly explains question’s importance to the field and its relationship to existing expert ideas and debates. Poses an important and compelling central question that is targeted enough to guide in-depth investigation. Thoroughly explains how question builds on the existing ideas and debates of experts about an enduring issue in the field. Develop Supporting Research Questions Supporting questions are loosely related to central question. Explains how supporting questions relate to the central question to help guide investigation. Explains clear relationships between specific supporting questions and central question, and to relevant expert ideas or debates. Thoroughly explains expert debates related to a specific supporting question and how specific supporting questions contribute to central question. Identifies additional questions that emerge from this investigation. Determine Helpful Sources Consults one or two relevant sources that share point of view. Consults multiple sources relevant to the inquiry and that represent multiple points of view. Consults multiple relevant sources of various types (e.g., primary, secondary, print, digital, visual, graphic) that represent varied and significant points of view. Consults multiple, significant sources of various types (e.g., primary, secondary, print, digital, visual, graphic) that represent a wide range of significant points of view. Identifies gaps in evidence related to available sources. Critique Arguments or Explanations in Secondary Sources Accurately summarizes others’ argument(s) or explanation(s). Critique is absent, loosely related, or focuses on insignificant details. Critiques others’ argument(s) or explanation(s) in terms of supporting sources, evidence, and/or logic. Critiques the strengths and weaknesses of others’ argument(s) or explanation(s) in terms of supporting sources, evidence, and/or logic, using well-chosen examples. Thoroughly critiques the strengths and weaknesses of others’ argument(s) or explanation(s) in terms of accuracy, supporting sources, evidence, and logic, using well-chosen examples.