APUSH Thesis Point Scoring Activity #2

Would you award the point?

Assume that you have been hired by College Board to “serve as a reader” for the 2021 AP US History Exam, with this exam calling upon the students to respond to the following teacher-created prompt:

Evaluate the extent to which the government’s response to financial panics and downturns changed from 1890–1913.

Also, assume that when scoring this exam, you see what essentially amounts to two different attempts to earn the thesis point.

Attempt #1
The government’s response to financial panics and downturns changed to some extent from 1890 to 1913. During the time period, the US experienced the Financial Panic of 1907 and, as a result of this panic, the US government created the Federal Reserve System.

Attempt #2
The government’s response to financial panics and downturns changed to some extent from 1890 to 1913. During the time period, the US experienced the Financial Panic of 1907 and, as a result of this panic, the US government created a stronger financial regulatory system.

Would you give the thesis point to either?

Sidenote #1

In the week leading up to the writing of this blog post, I placed this question before “my team.”

My team consists of many well-respected APUSH teachers and experienced “exam readers” and according to the team, Attempt #1 DOES NOT earn the Thesis Point. To say the government created the Federal Reserve System is a mere expression of evidence and an expression of evidence is not a claim.

A claim, as many teach it, is a big, bad, bold, and generally-worded assertion that leaves most readers thinking, “oh ya, what makes you say that? Can you prove it?”

But this is not how most readers will react to the words “. . . created the Federal Reserve System.” After reading these words, most readers will react by asking themselves, “The Federal Reserve System? I don’t remember exactly what that is. Maybe I better look it up on Wikipedia before reading any further.”

Furthermore, expressions of evidence belong in the body paragraph of the essay, and there should be used to support the claim. In other words, mention of the Federal Reserve System is too specific for inclusion into a thesis. Mention of it needs to occur later in the argument.

Attempt #2, says the team, DOES earn the Thesis Point. It’s a big, bad, bold generally-worded assertion that leaves the reader thinking, “oh ya, what makes you say that? Can you prove it?”

It also establishes a line of reasoning that then can be supported, in a body paragraph, with a detailing of the creation of the Federal Reserve System.

Furthermore, it’s historically defensible.

Lastly, #2 should not be viewed as a restating or rephrasing of the prompt unless the reader is only looking at the first sentence. But to only look at the first sentence and from that look to withhold the awarding of the Thesis Point goes against what the rubric says . . . that a thesis may consist of one or more sentences.

Bottom Line
Neither Attempt #1 nor Attempt #2 are examples of a “strong thesis.” One might even consider both “low-bar.” However, Attempt #2 would, in the eyes of most (but not all) members of my team, earn the point, whereas Attempt #1 would not.

A Sampling of the Feedback I’ve Received
“When a prompt is asking for “change,” I look for the answer to provide the “how” it changed. Although both attempts address the “the extent to which” component (or degree), the second does a better job of showing change by pointing out “created a stronger financial regulatory system.” I would have preferred for the student to be more explicit about what it changed from (i.e., from the government not getting involved or being more “laissez-faire”) but believe this meets the minimum threshold to earn credit at the Reading. The first attempt, however, just shows the government “created the Federal Reserve System,” which implies a change of it not existing previously, which, in my opinion, would not suffice.”

Another Sampling of the Feedback I’ve Received
“It seems to me that neither of the thesis statements do more than repeat the question. The question is a change over time question. That means you must identify what the government response to depressions was earlier and either how it changed or how it didn’t change. The question sets itself up to examine the response of the highly experienced and to the Panic of 1893 and how that response changed (or didn’t) to the Panic of 1907. Neither of the responses seems to do that. They just start with the Panic of 1907 and say this is how the government reacted, not what it changed from.”

This member also offered up what he considered a top-rated thesis.

• The government changed its response from the Panic of 1893 to the Panic of 1907 by assuming a greater federal responsibility for maintaining a stable economy.
• Between 1890 and 1913, the federal government’s response changed from the philosophy that economic recessions were a “natural clearing mechanism” that required no government action to a more proactive role in maintaining a stable economy.”

The LEQ/DBQ Rubric
For a student to earn the Thesis Point, the thesis must make a historically defensible claim that (1) responds to the prompt rather than restating or rephrasing the prompt and (2) establishes a line of reasoning.