AP History DBQ Rubric and Scoring Criteria

Thesis and Claim Development

The Document-Based Question (DBQ) rubric allocates one point for the creation of a thesis or claim. To earn this point, the response must provide a historically defensible thesis or claim that establishes a clear line of reasoning. According to the decision rules provided by the College Board, the thesis must proactively respond to the prompt rather than merely restating or rephrasing the question. Structurally, the thesis must be presented as one or more sentences located in a single, specific place within the essay, traditionally either in the introduction or the conclusion of the document.

Broader Historical Contextualization

A single point is available for contextualization. This requires the student to describe a broader historical context relevant to the prompt. This context may include historical events, developments, or processes that occur before, during, or continue after the specific time frame of the prompt. Decision rules stipulate that the point is not awarded for a mere phrase or passing reference; the response must actively describe the relationship between the topic of the prompt and the broader historical landscape. This context serves to ground the specific argument within the larger narrative of the time period.

Utilization of Evidence from Documents

The rubric allows for up to two points for the use of evidence derived from the provided documents. To earn the first point, a student must use the content of at least three documents to address the specific topic of the prompt. To earn the second point (for a total of two points in this sub-category), the student must use the content of at least six documents to support a specific argument in response to the prompt. A critical decision rule for these points is that the response must accurately describe the documents rather than simply quoting from them. To achieve the two-point threshold, the student must move beyond description and successfully integrate the document content into their argumentative structure.

Incorporation of Evidence Beyond the Documents

One additional point is reserved for the use of evidence beyond the provided documents. The student must use at least one additional piece of specific historical evidence that is not found in the documents but is relevant to an argument regarding the prompt. The decision rules clarify that the student must describe this evidence in detail, and it must consist of more than a phrase or a reference. Furthermore, this additional piece of evidence must be distinct and different from the evidence or information used to earn the point for contextualization.

Analysis of Document Sourcing

Under the Analysis and Reasoning category, one point is available for the sourcing of documents. For at least three of the documents used, the student must explain how or why the document's point of view, purpose, historical situation, and/or audience is relevant to an argument. The decision rules emphasize that the student must explain the relevance of these factors rather than simply identifying them. This requires a deeper level of analysis that links the origins or context of the document directly to the strength or bias of the claim being made.

Demonstrating Complex Historical Understanding

The final point in the rubric is awarded for demonstrating a complex understanding of the historical development that is the focus of the prompt. This involves using evidence to corroborate, qualify, or modify an argument that addresses the question. This understanding must be an integral part of the argument itself, not just a phrase or reference. Complex understanding can be demonstrated in several ways, including:

  • Explaining the nuance of an issue by analyzing multiple variables.

  • Explaining both similarity and difference, both continuity and change, or multiple causes and effects.

  • Explaining relevant and insightful connections within and across different historical periods.

  • Confirming the validity of an argument by corroborating multiple perspectives across various themes.

  • Qualifying or modifying an argument by considering diverse or alternative views or pieces of evidence.