Initial Source Selection (20pts)

20 pts — (A) Identifies five or more high-quality secondary sources on the selected theme. Selections cover five separate decades and reflect different schools of historiographical schools or points of view. Summary of the sources shows an superior understanding of the topic and research. Bibliography is created using Chicago Manual of Style.

18 pts — (B) Identifies five high-quality secondary sources on the selected theme. Selections cover five separate decades and reflect several schools of historiographical schools or points of view. Summary of the sources shows a good understanding of the topic and research. Bibliography is created using Chicago Manual of Style.

16 pts — (C) Identifies five quality secondary sources on the selected theme. Selections cover three separate decades and reflect several schools points of view. Summary of the sources shows an adequate understanding of the topic and research. Bibliography is created using Chicago Manual of Style with some errors.

14 pts — (D) Identifies less than five quality secondary sources on the selected theme. Selections cover two decades and do not reflect various schools or points of view. Summary of the sources shows an unfamiliarity with the topic and research. Bibliography does not conform to the Chicago Manual of Style.

12 pts — (F) Identifies less than five secondary sources on the selected theme. Selections do not cover a range or time or points of view. Summary of the sources is missing or shows a lack of research or analysis of the topic and research. Bibliography does not conform to the Chicago Manual of Style.

StoryMap Pages (60 pts)

60 pts — (A)  Three or more sources are detailed on at least three StoryMap pages. Map and chronology are accurately rendered. The  author is identified and well contextualized in terms of both historiographical themes and biographical details. A succinct and well-written summary of the source relates to the overall theme of the Story Map. Visuals are appealing, correctly cited, and appropriate to the source described.

52 pts — (B) Three sources are detailed on at least three StoryMap pages. Map and chronology are accurately rendered. The author is identified and contextualized in terms of historiographical themes and biographical details. The summary of the source relates to the overall theme of the Story Map. Visuals are correctly cited, and appropriate to the source described.

46 pts — (C) Three sources are detailed on at least three StoryMap pages. Map and chronology are accurately rendered. The author is identified and contextualized in either in terms of historiographical themes or biographical details. The summary of the source is not well related to the overall theme of the Story Map. Visuals are mostly cited, and relevant to the source described.

38 pts — (D) Less than three sources are detailed on a minimum of three StoryMap pages. Map and chronology are not clearly. The author identification and contextualization are lacking in interpretation of historiographical themes and biographical details. The source summaries do not relate clearly to the overall theme of the Story Map. Visuals are generally not cited and not always relevant to the source described.

30 pts — (F) Less than three sources are detailed on a minimum of three StoryMap pages. Map and chronology are inaccurate or missing. Authors are not identified or identified incorrectly. Source summary is incorrect or missing. Visuals are missing, not cited, or not relevant to the source described.

Group Work and Presentation (20 pts)

20 pts — (A)  Group prepared detailed historical context for the Story Map entries in the form of a well-written introduction and inserts that cover both historiographical trends and historical events. Presentation was engaging and all members of the group participating equally.

18 pts — (B)  Group prepared detailed historical context for the Story Map entries in the form of an introduction and relevant inserts that covered both historiographical trends and historical events. Presentation was prepared, with all members of the group participating equally.

16 pts — (C) Group prepared limited historical context for the Story Map entries in the form of introduction and inserts that adequately cover either historiographical trends or historical events. The presentation was adequate prepared, though some members participated more and less than others.

14 pts — (D)  Group prepared inadequate historical context for the Story Map entries in the form of introduction and inserts. Relevant historiographical trends and historical events were missing or inaccurately rendered. The presentation felt unprepared, inadequate, with some members participating less than others.

12 pts — (F) Group created few or no contextual entries, limited or inaccurate context, no introduction to the Story Map. The presentation was unprepared or was not made, not all members participated.