Rubrics | AP Seminar Course Hub

Row	2 points	4 points	6 points
1. Understand and Analyze Context (/6)	The report identifies an overly broad or simplistic area of investigation and/or shows little evidence of research. A simplistic connection or no connection is made to the overall problem or issue.	The report identifies an adequately focused area of investigation in the research and shows some variety in source selection. It makes some reference to the overall problem or issue.	The report situates the student's investigation of the complexities of a problem or issue in research that draws upon a wide variety of appropriate sources. It makes clear the significance to a larger context.
2. Understand and Analyze Argument (/6)	The report restates or misstates information from sources. It doesn't address reasoning in the sources or it does so in a very simplistic way.	The report summarizes information and in places offers effective explanation of the reasoning within the sources' argument (but does so inconsistently).	The report demonstrates an understanding of the reasoning and validity of the sources' arguments. This can be evidenced by direct explanation or through purposeful use of the reasoning and conclusions.
3. Evaluate Sources and Evidence (/6)	The report identifies evidence from chosen sources. It makes very simplistic, illogical, or no reference to the credibility of sources and evidence, and their relevance to the inquiry.	The report in places offers some effective explanation of the chosen sources and evidence in terms of their credibility and relevance to the inquiry (but does so inconsistently).	The report demonstrates evaluation of credibility of the sources and selection of relevant evidence from the sources. Both can be evidenced by direct explanation or through purposeful use.
4. Understand and Analyze Perspective (/6)	The report identifies few and/or oversimplified perspectives from sources.	The report identifies multiple perspectives from sources, making some general connections among those perspectives.	The report discusses a range of perspectives and draws explicit and relevant connections among those perspectives.
5. Apply Conventions: Citations (/3)	(1 pt) The report includes many errors in attribution and citation OR the bibliography is inconsistent in style and format and/or incomplete.	(2 pts) The report attributes or cites sources used but not always accurately. The bibliography references sources using a consistent style.	(3 pts) The report attributes and accurately cites the sources used. The bibliography accurately references sources using a consistent style.
6. Apply Conventions: Grammar and Style (/3)	(1 pt) The report contains many flaws in grammar that often interfere with communication to the reader. The written style is not appropriate for an academic audience.	(2 pts) The report is generally clear but contains some flaws in grammar that occasionally interfere with communication to the reader. The written style is inconsistent and not always appropriate for an academic audience.	(3 pts) The report communicates clearly to the reader (although may not be free of errors in grammar and style). The written style is consistently appropriate for an academic audience.

A row scores 0 when the response falls below the 2-point (or 1-point) level, and rows 1 to 4 score 0 if there is no evidence of any research. The student language version is one click away, at the top of this window.

Where each rubric row shows up in your actual paper, and what it is worth.

Row	What It Measures	Often Found In	Points
1. Understand & Analyze Context	Your investigation of a complex problem draws on a wide variety of appropriate sources and makes the significance to a larger context clear.	The introduction, the type and amount of sources you use, and how your observation contributes to the importance of the issue overall. Can be shown in your reasoning throughout the report.	/6
2. Understand & Analyze Argument	You show you understand the reasoning and validity of your sources' arguments, through direct explanation or purposeful use of their reasoning and conclusions.	The way you explain and use the evidence you have included.	/6
3. Evaluate Sources & Evidence	You evaluate the credibility of sources and select relevant evidence from them, through direct explanation or purposeful use.	How you make the credentials and credibility of your sources clear. Often visible in your evidence setup, mentioning authors or publications.	/6
4. Understand & Analyze Perspective	You discuss a range of perspectives and draw explicit, relevant connections among them.	How you incorporate and name perspectives, and the transition words that show their relation to one another.	/6
5 & 6. Apply Conventions	You attribute and accurately cite sources with a consistent bibliography style, and you communicate clearly in a style appropriate for an academic audience.	How you follow grammar and mechanics rules and citation rules.	/3 + /3

Row 1, Context: Is the area of investigation focused and narrow in scope, with the who, what, where, and when clear? Does it answer why it matters using academic sources? Is there a wide variety of sources, including academic ones? Look at titles, first paragraphs, and the Works Cited.

Row 2, Argument: Does the report demonstrate an understanding of the reasoning and validity of arguments from the sources, through direct explanation or purposeful use? Look at the ends of paragraphs and the commentary immediately following citations.

Row 3, Sources and Evidence: Is the evidence well selected and well used, consistently relevant and credible? Look wherever evidence is presented; credibility may also be established by source selection in the References.

Row 4, Perspective: Are there at least 2 to 3 perspectives representing differing arguments? Are they clearly connected and in conversation? Look at how paragraphs are organized, since grouping perspectives is the most common structure. Remember: a perspective is a point of view conveyed through an argument.

Rows 5 and 6, Conventions: Check the Works Cited for consistent style, check internal citations for clarity and accuracy, and confirm every internal citation matches the bibliography. Then read for grammar and an academic style throughout.

Row	Low score	Middle score	Top score
1. Establish Argument (/6)	(2) The presentation describes the existence of a problem or reports on a problem, but does not argue for a team solution or resolution.	(4) The presentation conveys the argument for the team's solution or resolution using evidence that is not well selected for the situation.	(6) The presentation conveys the convincing argument for the team's solution or resolution through strategic selection of supporting evidence.
2. Understand and Analyze Context (Evaluate Solutions) (/4)	(0) The presentation does not identify or only minimally identifies solutions, either the team's or others'.	(2) The presentation describes pros and/or cons of potential options related to the topic, OR describes limitations or implications of the team's solution in an inconsistent, illogical, overly broad, or otherwise unconvincing manner.	(4) The presentation explains the pros and/or cons of potential options and situates the team's proposed solution in conversation with them, AND evaluates the solution proposed by the team by thoroughly explaining its limitations or implications.
3. Engage Audience (Performance) (/6)	(2) All or all but one of the presenters make little or no use of techniques to engage the audience.	(4) At times, some presenters effectively engage the audience. As a team the presenters demonstrate uneven delivery or performance techniques.	(6) All presenters effectively engage the audience through strategic intentional use of performance techniques most of the time.
4. Engage Audience (Design) (/4)	(0) The presentation demonstrates no design or minimal design with significant errors.	(2) The presentation's design demonstrates an understanding of media and design elements but does not enhance the team's message, or does so inconsistently.	(4) Overall, the design clearly guides viewers through the presentation and demonstrates strategic selection of media and design elements that help clarify the argument for the team's solution.
5. Collaborate Reflect (/4)	(0) All or all but one member of the team offer generic responses that could apply to any collaborative project. Or the answers by all or all but one of the team may be unacceptably brief.	(2) Two or more of the responses in the oral defense support their answers with some relevant evidence specific to the team's project.	(4) All responses in the oral defense articulate detailed answers to the question asked and support those answers with relevant evidence specific to collaboration on this project. AND the answers in the oral defense taken together with the presentation demonstrate roughly equal participation from all team members.

Engaging performance techniques per the rubric: eye contact, vocal variety to emphasize important information, a controlled rate of speech, support materials that do not compromise connection with the audience, energy, and gestures that emphasize key points. Total: 24 points.

Row	What you actually need to do	Points
1. Establish Argument	One clear, complex team argument for one team solution, built from strategically chosen evidence, fitting the time limit, with every speaker logically connected. Not four mini-reports stapled together.	/6
2. Evaluate Solutions (Understand and Analyze Context)	Show the other options people have proposed, weigh their pros and cons, put your team's solution in conversation with them, and honestly explain your solution's limits and implications.	/4
3. Performance (Engage Audience)	Every speaker, most of the time: eye contact, vocal variety, steady pace, energy, purposeful movement. Notes are fine; reading off them is not.	/6
4. Design (Engage Audience)	Slides that guide the audience: big headings, few words, visuals that advance the argument instead of decorating it, one consistent style across every speaker. The 3-second read test.	/4
5. Collaborate Reflect	When you get your oral defense question, give a detailed answer with evidence from this project, not something that could describe any group ever. The whole team needs to look like it carried roughly equal weight, in the presentation and the answers.	/4

Row	What you actually need to do
Row 1, Understand and Analyze Context (0 or 5)	At least one stimulus text does real work in your argument, as context for the question or evidence for a claim. If you could delete it without weakening the argument, it does not count.
Row 2, Understand and Analyze Context (0 or 5)	You explain why the question matters by placing it in a larger context: a specific who, what, when, where, and why now, not 'this is important.'
Row 3, Understand and Analyze Perspective (0, 6, or 9)	More than one perspective, each in its strongest form, and you evaluate how they agree, disagree, and complicate each other by putting them in dialogue, not just noting that they differ.
Row 4, Establish Argument (0, 8, or 12)	One clear argument stated early, claims that build on each other, commentary that explains how each piece of evidence supports its claim, and a conclusion or solution that answers the research question with its limitations and implications named.
Row 5, Select and Use Evidence (0, 6, or 9)	Relevant, credible, and sufficient evidence, most of it scholarly, analyzed rather than cited and left. Encyclopedias and dictionaries do not count as well-vetted sources.
Row 6, Apply Conventions, citations (0, 3, or 5)	Every source cited in the text and in the bibliography, in one consistent style, with author, title, publication, and date present. Any style works; it has to match end to end.
Row 7, Apply Conventions, writing (0, 2, or 3)	Clear sentences, precise word choice, and an academic register, judged on your own sentences rather than the quoted ones. A few errors do not cost the 3.

The official IWA rubric uses the same row families as the IRR (Context, Argument, Evidence, Perspective, Conventions) applied to argument instead of reporting. The full IWA Outline Planner on the Tools page walks every requirement.

Row	Points
1. Understand and Analyze Context (stimulus source doing real work)	/5
2. Understand and Analyze Context (why this question is worth asking)	/5
3. Understand and Analyze Perspective	/9
4. Establish Argument	/12
5. Select and Use Evidence	/9
6. Apply Conventions (citations and bibliography)	/5
7. Apply Conventions (writing and conventions)	/3

Rows and points from College Board's 2026 AP Seminar Performance Task 2 Scoring Guidelines.

College Board's full wording for each row is in the official PT2 scoring guidelines.

Row	What you actually need to do
1. Understand and Analyze Context	Specific, significant context (no "everyone knows that...") connected to at least two stimulus materials with in-text citations, plus your research question clearly presented.
2. Establish Argument	State your argument early, organize clearly with heading slides, discuss your evidence instead of just presenting it, and address limitations and implications before the 8-minute mark.
3. Select and Use Evidence	Relevant and credible evidence, 2 to 3 pieces per perspective, multiple perspectives in conversation: explain how ideas support or contradict each other.
4. The Solution	A realistic solution that directly answers your research question. Test it: say your question, then your solution. Do they match?
5. Design	Readable, uncrowded slides; images that add; simple clear graphs; consistent spelling and capitalization; nothing out of place.
6. Performance	Row 6 scores how you select and execute delivery techniques; College Board's examples are eye contact, vocal variety, movement, and energy, and none of them is weighted above the others. The 6 goes to a careful selection of those techniques with a dynamic execution that strongly supports the argument. Add vocal variety, movement, and note cards you barely need.
Oral Defense	Two questions, scored on specificity: detailed answers with evidence from your project. Generic answers that could come from anyone score lowest. The full question bank is on the Oral Defense page.

Individual Multimedia Presentation

Row	Points
1. Understand and Analyze Context	/6
2. Establish Argument (linking evidence to claims)	/6
3. Select and Use Evidence	/6
4. Establish Argument (your conclusion or solution)	/6
5. Engage Audience (Design)	/6
6. Engage Audience (Performance)	/6

Oral Defense

Row	Points
1. Reflect	/6
2. Establish Argument	/6

Rows and points from College Board's 2026 AP Seminar Performance Task 2 Scoring Guidelines. College Board scores the presentation and the oral defense separately.

College Board's full wording for each row is in the official PT2 scoring guidelines.

Row	0 points	Low score	Middle score	Top score
A1. Argument, main idea, or thesis (/3) Row 1, Understand and Analyze Argument	(0) Does not meet the criteria for one point.	(1) The response misstates the author's argument, main idea, or thesis.	(2) The response identifies, in part and with some accuracy, the author's argument, main idea, or thesis.	(3) The response accurately identifies the author's argument, main idea, or thesis.
A2. Explain line of reasoning (/6) Row 2, Understand and Analyze Argument	(0) Does not meet the criteria for two points.	(2) The response correctly identifies at least one of the author's claims.	(4) The response provides a limited explanation of the author's line of reasoning by accurately identifying some of the claims AND identifying the connections or acknowledging a relationship among them.	(6) The response provides a thorough explanation of the author's line of reasoning by identifying relevant claims and clearly explaining connections among them.
A3. Evaluate effectiveness of the evidence (/6) Row 3, Evaluate Sources and Evidence	(0) Does not meet the criteria for two points.	(2) The response identifies little evidence. It makes a superficial reference to relevance and/or credibility but lacks explanation.	(4) The response explains various pieces of evidence in terms of credibility and relevance, but may do so inconsistently or unevenly.	(6) The response evaluates the relevance and credibility of the evidence and thoroughly evaluates how well the evidence is used to support the author's argument.

Scoring criteria word for word from College Board's 2026 AP Seminar End-of-Course Exam Scoring Guidelines, Part A, 15 points (the official EOC scoring guidelines). Except where otherwise noted, each row is scored independently. A response may evaluate sources and evidence in the second part (Row 2), and/or analyze the argument in the third part (Row 3). Credit should be awarded for this. Responses that solely evaluate sources of information and not specific pieces of evidence presented from those sources cannot score 6 for Row 3.

Question	What you actually need to do	Points
Q1: Identify the argument	Capture every part of the author's argument, and only what the author actually says: the WHAT (main claim), the WHY (the author's own because), and the SO WHAT (what the author says should happen). College Board counts the parts. Evidence is never a part.	/3
Q2: Explain the line of reasoning	Explain how the author's claims connect, in order, Name each claim, say its job, and show what it makes possible, every time you move from one claim to the next. Job words (sets up, builds on this by, backs it with, widens the problem by, raises the stakes) earn the 6. Order words alone (then, next, after that, finally) cap at a 4. The 6 needs most of the claims and the connections explained.	/6
Q3: Evaluate the evidence	Evaluate at least three pieces of evidence for credibility and relevance, applying RAVEN instead of naming it, tying each evaluation to the claim it supports, and naming at least one specific limitation. Evaluate the evidence, not just the people behind it: a response that only judges sources cannot score a 6.	/6

Each question is scored independently, 15 points total. The College Board version, word for word, is one click away, at the top of this window.

Row	0 points	2 points	4 points	6 points
1. Establish Argument (/6) (theme and perspective)	Does not meet the criteria for 2 points.	Misstates or overlooks a theme or issue that connects the sources. The response's perspective is unclear or unrelated to the sources.	Identifies a theme or issue that connects the sources. The response derives its perspective from only one of the sources.	The response identifies a theme or issue connecting the provided sources and presents a perspective that is not represented in one of the sources OR brings a particularly insightful approach to one of the perspectives OR makes a strong thematic connection among perspectives.
2. Establish Argument (/6) (line of reasoning)	Does not meet the criteria for 2 points.	The line of reasoning is disorganized and/or illogical. The response lacks commentary, or the commentary incorrectly or tangentially explains the links between evidence and claims.	The argument is mostly clear and organized, but the logic may be faulty OR the reasoning may be logical but not well organized. The commentary explains the links between evidence and claims.	The line of reasoning is logically organized and well-developed. The commentary explains evidence and connects it to claims to clearly and convincingly establish an argument.
3. Select and Use Evidence (/6)	Uses one or none of the provided sources.	Repeats or misinterprets information from at least two of the provided sources, or the information lacks relevance thereby providing little support for an argument.	Accurately uses relevant information from at least two of the provided sources to support an argument.	Appropriately synthesizes relevant information drawn from at least two of the provided sources to develop and support a compelling argument.
4. Apply Conventions (/6)	Does not meet the criteria for 2 points.	Contains many flaws in grammar and style that often interfere with communication to the reader OR the response incorrectly or ineffectively attributes knowledge and ideas from sources.	Is generally clear but contains some flaws in grammar and style that occasionally interfere with communication to the reader. The response accurately attributes knowledge and ideas from sources.	Communicates clearly to the reader (although may not be free of errors in grammar and style) AND the response effectively integrates material from sources into the argument (e.g., it is clearly introduced, integrated, or embedded into the text) and accurately attributes knowledge and ideas.

Scoring criteria word for word from College Board's 2026 AP Seminar End-of-Course Exam Scoring Guidelines, Part B, 24 points (the official EOC scoring guidelines). Each row is scored independently. A score of 0 is assigned to a single row of the rubric when the response displays a below-minimum level of quality as identified in that row of the rubric.

Row	What you actually need to do	Points
1. Establish Argument	Stake a debatable perspective that is not already represented in the sources, stated early, with "because." A thesis that announces the topic or repeats what the sources already say caps this row.	/6
2. Line of Reasoning	Build the staircase: each claim sets up the next and everything leads to your conclusion. If your paragraphs could be shuffled without breaking anything, you are listing, not reasoning.	/6
3. Select and Use Evidence	Synthesize at least 2 of the 4 sources and put them in conversation: one source clarifies, complicates, or pushes back on another. Walking through sources one at a time caps this row. Your commentary is what makes the evidence work.	/6
4. Apply Conventions	Attribute every source clearly, write for an academic audience, and proofread. Clear, controlled writing that a reader never has to untangle.	/6

Each row is scored separately, never holistically: a response can earn a 6 on Row 1 and a 2 on Row 3. 24 points total. The College Board version, word for word, is one click away, at the top of this window.

IRR Purpose: Explore the complexity of an issue by examining it through different perspectives and connecting it to the larger context.

Thesis here means your framing statement: it names your lens, the issue, and the perspectives your body paragraphs cover. The IRR does not take a side.

Introduction

Your name Period

Context: Why is this topic relevant today? Why is it important? How does it connect to the world or a larger community? What necessary information does your audience need about the issue? Introduce the range of perspectives: Address multiple perspectives or stakeholders for each lens. Ensure each stakeholder conveys a point of view through a specific argument. Acknowledge the limitations: Recognize any limits or gaps in the research. Thesis (your framing statement): Present the complexity of the problem, explain its significance in a larger context, and preview the patterns you found, which become the body paragraphs.

Body paragraph 1

Topic sentence: Identify the main issue or conversation. What question are experts or stakeholders trying to answer?

Expert 1 (with credentials)