Individual Research
 Complete analysis of the tactics used in your specific focus areaThorough analysis of the tactics used.
 Quality discussion of obvious tactics, but fails to analyze completely.
Analysis somewhat addresses the topic but lacks enough information.
Little to no analysis on the tactics used in your focus area.
Explanation of the consequences that were felt because of your focus area's results.
Careful explanation of the consequences.
Good analysis but failed to take into account long term consequences.
Valiant effort, but failed to recognize the complete consequences.
 Poor analysis of the consequences that occurred.
Strong analysis on how your focus area would approach the situation of your class.
Well written plan with great attention paid to the tactics of your focus area.
Strong analysis that lacks the attention to tactics of your focus area.Analysis is good but fails to sufficiently use focus area.
Weak analysis with little attention paid to the facts.
 Analysis of whether or not your focus area's proposed plan would be successful for yoursituation.
An insightful analysis of whether or not this plan will work.
Answered the question but did not support the assertions made.
Attempted to answer the question but failed to make a statement. Did not answer the question completely.
Little to no regard to the question.
Overall Mechanics
 An error-free essay. Smooth transistions with no grammatical errors.
Few grammatical errors with no spelling errors. 
Some grammatical errors with very few misspelled words.
An essay filled with grammatical and spelling errors.
 Group Work
 3 2 1
Organization: Was the group able to work together? Is their essay well organized? Organization was perfect. The paper was well thought out.
The majority of the paper is well organized.
Portions of the paper are organized. Seems to lack overall cohesiveness. 
Poorly organized paper, jumps from topic to topic.
 Is the plan of attack well thought out? Does it use the roles that were given?
A well-thought out plan that has a great deal of detail.
Plan is mostly thought out. There are good ideas but it lacks in overall depth.
Plan is somewhat thought out but uses few details. 
 Plan does not use theroles that were provided. It is not well thought out and lacks detail.
Does the group provide support for their decisions? Do they tell the teacher why they chose the elements of their plan?
A paper with support for every one of their decisions. It shows exactly the thought processes and how they made their decisions.
Group gives support for most things and tells why  they chose some elements of their plan.
Group gives support for some things, but leaves out vital information on others. No support at all, the decisions made in the plan are not mentioned at all in the support section.
Overall Presentation of the group paper: Are there grammatical and spelling mistakes? Error-free paper that was very well written. No spelling or grammatical errors.
A solid paper with 3-4  grammatial and/or spelling errors.
A paper with 5-6 grammatical and/or spelling errors.
A paper filled with 7 or more grammatical and/or spelling errors.
Overall group efficiency: Did the group work well together?
 The group worked great together. All members were involved and they got the task done in a timely fashion. The group worked well at most points. All members were actively involved. The group had difficulty staying on task, and some members had to be reminded of their responsibilities. Group did not work well with each other. Work was not evenly distributed and members were often off task.