# data[].attributes.body
This essay does not have input from the students thought process to answer the prompt, rather resorting to restating facts. Level 1 DOK of analysis.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no thesis or claim. The student is very vague and did not contextualize any historical background knowledge. Student seems to be able to deconstruct the document but does not relate it back to the question nor give it a true purpose to back up any claim. This seems almost as an annotation or outline not an essay.

# data[].attributes.body
This student just made a list of the documents and tried to describe what each was discussing without first creating an argument or thesis. There wasn't any analysis because there wasn't a thesis that the documents were supposed to provide evidence for.

# data[].attributes.body
The author has a good thesis, contextualization, and supporting evidence. However, I wonder if they could have been more to the point.

# data[].attributes.headline
This essay uses documents to loosely connect to the prompt, but without explicitly providing a thesis that addresses the prompt, or reasoning that the documents are then supporting.

# data[].attributes.subject
This essay uses documents to loosely connect to the prompt, but without explicitly providing a thesis that addresses the prompt, or reasoning that the documents are then supporting.

# data[].attributes.body
In Essay 1C the student lists all documents but gives no insight or discussion as to their importance to the US's expanding role.

# data[].attributes.body
This essay provides a clear thesis is connected back to consistently in well-organized body paragraphs with reasoning. The body paragraphs also provide numerous examples of specific evidence from documents that do in fact support the thesis and line of reasoning in a given paragraph.

# data[].attributes.body
Good contextualization, brings in outside evidence and uses docs well.  Students demonstrates a nuanced understanding of the topic.

# data[].attributes.body
I thought that Essay 1A demonstrated their understanding of the US's turn towards Imperialism and the reasons behind it. Their weakness was omitting the relative importance of these points.

# data[].attributes.body
In Essay 1A, the students provides the reader with background information and an thesis that is argued throughout the essay. The students uses paraphrased text evidence to support their analysis of guiding question. Lastly, the student does a good job in supporting their claims through thoroughly bringing new insight to historical period being analyzed rather than simply stating facts.

# data[].attributes.body
Seemed to build an argument that the US wanted to expand due to superiority complex and gain industrial footholds across the world. Also, mentioned specifically why some were opposed to expansionist policy. Used sources to back up claim of American Superiority as well as contrasting views. In conclusion repeated their thesis.

# data[].attributes.body
No thesis or contextualization. Goes through docs in order without trying to group them.

# data[].attributes.body
Essay 1C lists documents and describes them superficially

# data[].attributes.body
This would be an exemplar that I would give to my students. It is clearly organized and clearly sites information from the documents. It is document driven. You can tell that they understood the documents and let them inform their argument.

# data[].attributes.body
1-A

1. Structured well. Context and thesis sets up argument
2. Well developed thesis. Note it includes a counterargument.
3. Judicious use of documents. No long quotes.
4. Uses sourcing skills (context, audience, purpose, or point of view) to SUPPORT their argument.
5. Use of historical facts but and explanation of those facts supports thesis.

1-C

1. Student did not set up DBQ with context and thesis. Did not use documents to make an argument (there was none). Displayed poor understanding of context.

# data[].attributes.body
There is no thesis statement in the essay and the context is lacking significant details. The body paragraphs are more of an outline rather than an essay centered around the thesis statement.

# data[].attributes.body
The student described the various motives for imperialism and used the documents to support the descriptions, but he/she didn't seem to address the part of the prompt about the relative importance of the different causes, so it doesn't seem as though the student had a deep understanding of the motives. However, he/she did attempt to make the response complex by including anti-imperialist viewpoints.

# data[].attributes.body
Essay 1A uses evidence from documents, cites documents

# data[].attributes.body
Essay 1C is not cohesive at all. It is almost written as a list or bullet pointed outline. They are missing major components of an essay- contextualization and thesis. Also, they did not do any sourcing or use any outside evidence. This essay would score very low.

# data[].attributes.body
Student creates a defensible claim by providing both sides of the imperialistic debate. An analysis of the documents that goes beyond descripting with outside information peppered throughout. Provides both points and counterpoints for the arguments of the documents to show a deep understanding of the topic at hand.

# data[].attributes.body
Lists documents, but lacks thesis statement & analysis

# data[].attributes.body
Develops a consistent argument throughout; uses sources seffectively

# data[].attributes.body
Developed thesis, contextualization, uses the docs in service of the argument, good sourcing of the docs, complexity

# data[].attributes.body
No thesis statement
References to the documents are not strong and do not flow well in the essay.
Reads like a pre write

# data[].attributes.body
This essay has a complex thesis statement that is supported throughout the essay by providing evidence from documents and a detailed analysis of those documents. This essay also uses outside information to support the thesis statement.

# data[].attributes.body
Introduction doesn't hold much contextualization nor a solid thesis. Simply an outline or annotations of specific documents.

# data[].attributes.body
This essay is document-driven. "In Doc A, it talks about . . . " It fails to connect the documents to a claim or to source them.

# data[].attributes.body
Essay 1C is a list of what is each document and ignores all other parts of the task. Essay is descriptive and not analytical and never formulates a defensible claim.

# data[].attributes.body
Mentions speaker for docs where applicable. Analyzes how the docs answer the prompt. Uses HIPP.

# data[].attributes.body
Definitely has an argument that was supported by the documents provided. The writer also did a great job of pointing out the connecting the theme of the documents & applying it to his/her analysis.

# data[].attributes.body
This essay does not analyze the documents. It simply states what the docs are generally about.

# data[].attributes.body
This essay seems to be more of an outline.

# data[].attributes.body
Thesis is strong
The essay had good examples and did reference the documents.
Made points that fit into the timeline of the prompt
Had analysis as to why the documents proved the thesis