Rubric dimensions were revised in 2023 to sharpen argumentation, contextualization, and Level 1 descriptions¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? In May/June 2023 the authors specified that historical argumentation must be in relation to evidence and evaluated by the student, refocused contextualization on explaining relevance of contextual factors, and added selecting and listing to Level 1 descriptions. → Hardy 2023

Evidence¶

Hardy 2023¶

Hardy, A., Iwatani, E., Means, B., & Seylar, J. (2023). Rubrics for examining historical thinking skills in high school world history activities and student work. Digital Promise. (Original work published 2021). https://doi.org/10.51388/20.500.12265/111

q1 · i? · design · r2

The version-update note records the authors' own 2023 revisions to the rubric definitions, including adding selecting and listing to Level 1 descriptions and other minor modifications. This is a documented design change, not an empirical test.

"May/June 2023: We specified that historical argumentation should be in relation to evidence and that the evaluation should be the student's. We modified historical contextualization to focus on explaining the relevance of contextual factors rather than providing analyses."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Six historical thinking dimensions — historical argumentation, causation, comparison, contextualization, continuity and change over time, and sourcing — were selected as rubric assessment targets based on convergence across U.S. national frameworks and the WHP course guide — related
• Rubric scoring supports answering diagnostic questions about opportunities for and evidence of historical thinking — related
• The historical thinking rubrics were developed with construct and validity evidence from the literature and teacher/reviewer review — related
• Evaluative questions elicit more historical reasoning than explanatory questions — related
• Students' historical argumentation rarely includes counterarguments or weighing of arguments — related