The rubric, in plain English
Every point, what earns it, what loses it.
The official rubrics for every free-response task, translated into the language classrooms actually use: the full point ladders, the known zero-earners, the formulas teachers drill, and worked examples. Print any sheet and tape it above your desk.
AP Gov — Concept Application (FRQ 1)
3 POINTS · ~20 MINUTES · 12.5% OF YOUR EXAM
A short scenario (a news-style story about a political actor), then three parts. Each part is one point, earned independently, all-or-nothing. The whole question is won on a careful reading of the scenario.
Part (a) — usually "Describe…"1 pt
✓Accurately describe the institution, process, or behavior at issue in this scenario, with its relevant characteristics, grounded in the scenario's specifics.
Zero-earners: naming the concept without characteristics; describing a generic version untethered from the scenario; attributing the action to the wrong actor (the single most common miss: note the party, the chamber, the office).
routine: read the scenario TWICE: pass one for the story, pass two annotating who does what
Part (b) — usually "Explain how/why…"1 pt
✓Give an actual mechanism (a how or a why) connecting the element from part (a) to a political process, tied to the specific element in the scenario. When the part asks for a comparison, make it explicit.
Zero-earners: asserting an effect with no mechanism ("this increases polarization"); reciting a general pattern that never touches the scenario.
chain: action → immediate response → institutional outcome. Name the mechanism, not just the power.
EARNS
"Because the senator can extend debate indefinitely, the majority cannot reach a final vote, so the bill dies without ever being rejected on the merits."
DOESN'T
"The filibuster makes it harder to pass bills." (an effect, no mechanism)
Part (c) — link to a course concept1 pt
✓Correctly deploy the named course concept AND tie it to a specific element or action in the scenario. Both halves are required.
Zero-earners: defining the concept in the abstract without touching the scenario; name-dropping the term; misapplying it.
The task verbs are graded literally. Identify = name it, no elaboration needed. Describe = relevant characteristics, more than a mention. Explain how = the relationship or process. Explain why = the motivation or reason.
PACING · 2–3 sentences per part is the sweet spot. Points are all-or-nothing: a brilliant part (a) cannot rescue a missing part (c).
AP Gov — Quantitative Analysis (FRQ 2)
4 POINTS · ~20 MINUTES · 12.5% OF YOUR EXAM
A graph, table, or map, then four parts that climb a ladder of inference: read it, describe it, conclude from it, connect it. Each part is one point, and each demands strictly more thinking than the last.
Part (a) — identify1 pt
✓Pull the requested value or element straight off the graphic. No elaboration, no outside knowledge. Small reading tolerances are fine when the graphic requires estimating.
Zero-earners: reading the wrong series or the wrong year; answering a different element than the one asked.
Part (b) — describe a trend or pattern1 pt
✓One accurate sentence about a trend, pattern, similarity, or difference the data actually support. An overall trend or a sub-period trend both qualify.
Zero-earners: restating a single data point; describing a pattern the graphic doesn't show.
Part (c) — draw a conclusion1 pt
✓Connect the chain the prompt names: data → political actor → action or outcome. Say how the trend could actually be used or what it implies for the named actor.
Zero-earners: a generic statement that skips the connection ("polarization is rising"); a conclusion about a different actor than the one named.
chain: the data show ___ → so [the named actor] can/will ___ → which affects ___
Part (d) — connect to a course concept1 pt
✓Explain how the data relate to or demonstrate the named principle, institution, or behavior. The concept must be correctly deployed, not just named, and tied to the data.
Zero-earners: explaining the concept without touching the data; naming it without the mechanism.
PACING · Part (a) should take thirty seconds. Bank the time for (c) and (d), where the inference lives.
AP Gov — SCOTUS Comparison (FRQ 3)
4 POINTS · ~20 MINUTES · 12.5% OF YOUR EXAM
You get a summary of a case you have NOT studied, and must compare it with one of the required cases you have. Everything you need about the new case is in the stimulus; the points hang on what you know about the required case.
Part (a) — the shared constitutional provision1 pt
✓Identify the clause or provision common to both cases. Bare identification suffices: "Both cases address the Free Exercise Clause."
Zero-earners: a provision that isn't actually common to both; naming something that isn't a constitutional clause (a law, a doctrine, an amendment number that's wrong).
Part (b) — the required case + the comparison2 pts
1:Accurate facts or holding of the REQUIRED case. The provided case earns nothing on its own — its summary was handed to you.
2:Explain how the FACTS of the two cases led to their holdings: a real because-chain, not a restatement. This is the point most students miss.
Zero-earners: describing both holdings without linking facts to outcomes; restating part (a) in new words; getting the required case's facts wrong.
memorize each required case as one sentence: CLAUSE + FACTS + HOLDING + REASONING
EARNS THE 2ND POINT
"Because Tinker's armbands caused no disruption, the Court protected them; here the walkout emptied classrooms mid-exam, so the disruption standard cuts the other way."
DOESN'T
"Both cases are about student speech and the students won one and lost the other." (holdings without the facts-to-holding link)
Part (c) — holding ↔ course concept1 pt
✓Explain how the specified holding reflects the named course concept: show you understand the concept AND connect it to the decision.
Zero-earners: describing the holding and gesturing at the concept; misunderstanding the concept.
PACING · If you cannot place the required case, write its clause and any accurate fact you have; part (a) and the first point of (b) are still reachable. Drill the 14 required cases in your evidence bank.
AP Gov — Argument Essay (FRQ 4)
6 POINTS · ~40 MINUTES · 12.5% OF YOUR EXAM
The one real essay on the exam. The points chain: the evidence ladder's top rung requires the thesis point, and the rebuttal point requires it too. Lose the thesis and the ceiling drops to 3.
Claim / Thesis1 pt
✓A defensible claim that responds to the prompt and establishes a line of reasoning. It may sit anywhere in the essay, and it earns the point even if the rest of the essay fails to deliver on it.
Zero-earners: restating the prompt in different words; a claim nobody could dispute; listing both sides without taking one.
frame: "[claim] best achieves [criterion] because [reasoning]" · visible by sentence two, skip the hook
EARNS
"Lifetime tenure best preserves judicial independence because judges who never face reelection cannot be punished for unpopular rulings."
DOESN'T
"There are strong arguments on both sides of judicial tenure." (no side, no reasoning)
Evidence3 pts
1:One piece of evidence relevant to the topic, from a listed foundational document, another foundational document, or course knowledge. Does not require the thesis point.
2:One piece of SPECIFIC evidence actually used to support your claim, or two relevant pieces.
3:Two specific supporting pieces, at least one from a document listed in this prompt, plus the thesis point earned. Three conditions; miss any one and this is a 2.
Zero-earners: vague truisms; bare attributions ("as Madison said"); document-dumping, where several documents name-checked in one sentence do the work of none. One document actually explained beats three name-dropped.
rule: lead WITH the document: state its actual argument, then connect it to yours
Reasoning1 pt
✓Use reasoning (classification, process, causation, or comparison) to explain how or why your evidence supports the argument. One well-built chain from one specific piece is sufficient.
Zero-earners: evidence followed by the claim restated with no "because" between them; reasoning with no specific evidence beneath it (this point requires at least one specific piece).
Alternate perspective1 pt
✓Describe an opposing perspective accurately and fairly, then rebut or refute it. Requires the thesis point.
Zero-earners: concession without an answer (stopped counting in 2024); rebutting a strawman; rebutting a foundational document instead of a perspective; stating the opposite of your claim and moving on.
structure: give the rebuttal its own paragraph so the reader can find it. State their best version, then answer it
PACING · ~5 min plan, ~30 write, ~5 check the chain: thesis → listed doc explained → because-chain → rebuttal paragraph. Each point here is worth ≈2.5 composite points: see the math.
APUSH — Short Answer Question
3 POINTS EACH · ~13 MINUTES EACH · SAQs TOGETHER ARE 20% OF YOUR EXAM
Three parts, one point each, earned independently. Complete sentences required — an outline or bullet list earns nothing, no matter how right it is. Some SAQs open with a source; the source is context for your answer, not a substitute for it.
Each part (a, b, c)1 pt each
✓Answer exactly what the part asks, with historically defensible, accurate content that clears the task verb's bar, inside the period and scope the part specifies.
Zero-earners: an isolated term with no characteristics; an assertion with no how/why; accurate history from the wrong period or region; restating the stimulus back at the reader.
frame: ACE — Answer the part, Cite at least one proper noun, Explain the how/why
EARNS (an "explain" part)
"The Market Revolution drew young women into wage labor: the Lowell mills recruited farm daughters because water-powered looms needed cheap, disciplined workers, which moved production out of the household."
DOESN'T
"The Market Revolution changed work for many Americans, including women." (no specifics, no mechanism)
Reading the task verbs
·Identify = name it precisely; one sentence can earn it. Describe = the relevant characteristics of the thing, more than naming it. Explain = how or why a development happened or a relationship exists — a mechanism, not an assertion.
·With a source: "briefly describe ONE perspective expressed in the excerpt" means the author's view, in your words, with a signal you read it — then parts (b) and (c) usually pivot to outside knowledge.
PACING · 2–3 sentences per part; a page-long part (a) buys nothing and starves part (c). Suggested ~13 minutes per SAQ.
APUSH — Long Essay Question
6 POINTS · ~40 MINUTES · 15% OF YOUR EXAM
Choose one of three prompts spanning different periods. Except where noted, every point is earned independently: you can earn evidence points with no thesis. The prompt names a reasoning process (causation, comparison, or continuity & change); that process should organize your whole essay.
Thesis / Claim1 pt
✓A historically defensible claim that responds to the prompt and establishes a line of reasoning: it signals the reason for your claim or the categories of your argument. One or more sentences, in one place, intro or conclusion.
Zero-earners: restating or rephrasing the prompt; an overgeneralized claim; a claim with no reasoning or categories behind it.
frame: "Although X, because A and B, therefore Y" · X a real counterargument, A and B your two evidence categories
EARNS
"Although the New Deal preserved capitalism, because it created federal responsibility for welfare and reshaped labor relations, it fundamentally transformed the relationship between citizens and the state."
DOESN'T
"The New Deal changed America in many important ways." (restates the prompt, no categories)
Contextualization1 pt
✓Describe a broader historical development relevant to the prompt (before, during, or continuing after its window) and connect it to your argument. Must be a described development, more than a phrase or reference.
Zero-earners: a passing phrase ("after the Civil War…"); context on a different topic; context that never touches your argument.
move: "Previously on…" · zoom out 20–50 years, describe the development in 2–3 sentences, then connect it
Evidence2 pts
1:At least TWO specific, relevant pieces of evidence named, more specific than what contextualization credits, inside the prompt's period and region.
2:The evidence is USED to support an argument: you say how it backs your claim, not just that it happened. A multipart argument can split its two pieces across parts.
Zero-earners: one lonely example; evidence outside the period; repeating what the prompt itself told you; specifics that sit inside a narrative without doing argumentative work.
rule: Name it, Explain it, Connect it · a proper noun is not evidence until it's working for your claim
Analysis & Reasoning2 pts
1:The prompt's reasoning process (causation, comparison, or continuity & change) frames or structures the argument. Uneven is fine; a framework must be visible.
2:Complex understanding through sophisticated argumentation or effective evidence use: both sides of a cause/effect or change/continuity pair; insightful cross-period connections; four-plus specific pieces woven into a nuanced argument; or multiple themes/perspectives genuinely explored.
Zero-earners: evidence with no reasoning connecting it; announcing a reasoning process without using it. And the drilled "tack-it-on" complexity paragraph ("While it is true that…") bolted onto the end stopped working in 2023; complexity must run through the essay.
PACING · ~5 min to plan categories and pick evidence, ~30 to write, ~5 to check: is the reasoning process visibly organizing the body paragraphs? Each point ≈3 composite points.
APUSH — Document-Based Question
7 POINTS · ~60 MINUTES (15 READING) · 25% OF YOUR EXAM · THE BIGGEST SINGLE PRIZE
Seven documents, one prompt. Thesis and contextualization work exactly as in the LEQ; the new game is what you do WITH documents: use them, bring your own evidence, and source them. Maro doesn't grade DBQs yet; the sheet is here because you still have to write one in May.
Thesis / Claim1 pt
✓Same bar as the LEQ: historically defensible, responds to the prompt, establishes a line of reasoning, in one place.
Contextualization1 pt
✓Same bar as the LEQ: a described broader development connected to the prompt, more than a phrase.
Document evidence2 pts
1:Use the content of at least THREE documents to address the prompt.
2:Use at least FOUR documents to support your argument — their content deployed for your claim, not summarized in sequence.
Zero-earners: quoting without using; a document parade ("Document 1 says… Document 2 says…") that never argues.
rule: documents are witnesses for YOUR case: call them in your order, not theirs
Outside evidence1 pt
✓At least one additional specific piece of evidence beyond the documents, relevant to the argument, described (not a phrase) and different from your contextualization.
Sourcing (analysis)1 pt
✓For at least TWO documents, explain how or why the document's point of view, purpose, historical situation, or audience is relevant to your argument.
Zero-earners: the HIPP label with no argument attached ("this is biased because the author is a senator"); sourcing must say why that matters for YOUR claim.
drill: HIPP (Historical situation, Intended audience, Purpose, Point of view) then the extra sentence: "…which strengthens/complicates my argument because ___"
Complexity1 pt
✓Same standard as the LEQ's second analysis point: a complex understanding woven through the essay, or effective use of the documents to qualify and extend the argument (sourcing four-plus documents well is one recognized route).
PACING · Use the full 15-minute reading period: group the documents into your 2–3 argument categories BEFORE writing a word. The groups become your body paragraphs.
AP Lang — the analytic rubric (all three essays)
6 POINTS EACH · ~40 MINUTES EACH · THE ESSAYS ARE 55% OF YOUR EXAM
Rhetorical Analysis, Argument, and Synthesis are all scored on the same three rows: Thesis (0–1), Evidence & Commentary (0–4), Sophistication (0–1). What changes per essay is what counts as evidence: the passage's rhetorical choices, your own knowledge, or the provided sources.
Row A — Thesis0–1
✓A defensible position that responds to the prompt. For Rhetorical Analysis: a defensible claim about the writer's rhetorical choices. Not a restatement, not a summary of the issue.
Zero-earners: restating the prompt; summarizing the passage or sources without a position; a thesis about the topic instead of the task.
Row B — Evidence & Commentary0–4
0:Restates the thesis, or offers irrelevant evidence.
1:Mostly general evidence; summary instead of commentary.
2:Some specific relevant evidence, but the commentary doesn't build a line of reasoning, or the reasoning is faulty.
3:Specific evidence supporting all claims, with commentary that explains SOME of it, but unevenly.
4:Specific evidence for all claims in a line of reasoning, with commentary that consistently explains how the evidence supports it. Synthesis: at least three of the provided sources doing this work.
What separates 2 from 4: commentary. Quoting is not arguing; every piece of evidence needs a sentence that does work: how this choice, fact, or source advances the claim.
Rhetorical Analysis: choice → effect → purpose. Argument/Synthesis: evidence → because-chain → claim.
Row C — Sophistication0–1
✓Rhetorical Analysis: explain the significance of the writer's choices within the rhetorical situation. Argument/Synthesis: a nuanced argument exploring complexities or tensions, situating the argument in a broader context, acknowledging real limitations, or a consistently vivid and persuasive style.
Zero-earners: a single throwaway "however, some disagree" sentence; sophistication is a quality of the whole essay, not a move you bolt on.
PACING PER ESSAY · ~8 min reading and planning, ~28 writing, ~4 rereading your commentary: does every quote have a sentence that argues? Synthesis: cite at least three sources, and converse with them rather than stacking them.
Maro grades your practice against these exact rubrics, row by row, free.
Tested against 148 officially scored College Board essays: see the numbers · what each point is worth
Meet your reader