Evidence from the Documents
The response earned 1 point for using at least three documents to address the topic of the prompt. The response
correctly uses the content of all seven documents.
The response earned 1 point for using the content of at least six documents to support an argument in response
to the prompt. In the second paragraph, the response uses Documents 2 and 4 to support the argument that the
lack of government regulation led to reforms at the federal and state level. The response uses Document 2 to
argue that reforms by the federal government regulated railroads and shifted public attitudes toward trusts. It
uses Document 4 to support an argument that governments became “more democratic in their approach to
passing bills and laws.” In the third paragraph, the response uses Documents 7 and 1 to support an argument
about social reforms. The response uses Document 7 to support an argument that the government became more
liberal by supporting Prohibition and women’s suffrage. Document 1 is used to support the reform of city
corruption by political bosses. In the same paragraph, Documents 3 and 6 are used to support an argument that
state and local governments were also influenced by the Progressive movement.
Evidence Beyond the Documents
The response earned 1 point for using at least one additional piece of specific historical evidence that relates to
an argument about the prompt. The response provides a large amount of well-described outside evidence. In the
second paragraph, the Clayton Anti-Trust Act is accurately described as helping labor as opposed to harming
“them like the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.” In the third paragraph, for example, the Volstead Act is used to support
an argument about social reform and Jacob Riis’s work How the Other Half Lives is used to show how reformers
drew attention to city corruption.