<p>My AP Lang class was going through released sample responses (and the corresponding grades that went with them) and we were shocked at how much completely false outside/historical information that was brought in was labeled as “good insight”, etc. by the College Board reviewers and consequentially given high scores (8/9).</p>
<p>One example was an open-ended topic on muckraking with an essay bringing in an extended discussion of yellow journalism (which is not muckraking) that didn’t really make historical sense. The essay got a 9. Another referred to investigative journalist Ida Tarbell as “Rockefeller’s personal secretary” which is not at all accurate. The essay got a high score as well.</p>
<p>Do CB readers for English exams really know/care about historical references or do they just eat up whatever you throw at them?</p>
<p>You have to remember that the graders aren’t historians; they won’t always be able to verify the validity of your arguments. As long as the argument exists and is backed up by something that sounds plausible, I’m guessing they don’t notice.</p>
<p>Well, how did the essayist use yellow journalism in the context of muckraking? Were they arguing that yellow journalism was more made up and sensationalized and muckraking was legitimate and promted social reform? Or did the person refer to the two styles as the same?</p>
<p>I’m confused becuase CB wouldn’t give an essay a 9 that had blaring historical inaccuracies. I remember reading an essay from CB that got a 4, and the grader said what caused it to get a low score was becuase it claimed that W. Wilson was president during WW2.</p>
<p>@Mysticalkites </p>
<p>Well there are vague inaccuracies and absolutely terrible ones. Not many non-history buffs would know who Ida Tarbell was, but I’m pretty sure anyone could tell you Woodrow was not the pres in WWII.</p>
<p>How were the vague inaccuracies? Is there anyway we can see this essay on the collegeboard site based on year?</p>