To successfully complete this assessment, students must consider the strengths and limitations of Haldeman’s testimony as evidence of Nixon’s involvement in the Watergate break-in. For Question 1, students should explain that Haldeman was in a position to know about Nixon’s involvement and that he was offering this testimony under oath, so he faced potentially severe penalties for lying. For Question 2, students should explain that he had a reason to lie if Nixon was involved in the break-in. He and his boss could have faced severe punishment if they were involved in the break-in or its cover-up. (Note – Haldeman’s testimony was false and he spent time in prison for perjury for this testimony after White House tapes revealed that he and President Nixon were involved in covering up the break-in.)
Level: Proficient
Question 1: Student identifies relevant source information and explains why it might lead them to trust Haldeman’s testimony.
Question 2: Student identifies relevant source information and explains why it might call the reliability of the document into question.
Level: Emergent
Question 1: Student identifies source information that might lead them to trust Haldeman’s testimony but does not provide a complete explanation.
Question 2: Student identifies source information that might call the reliability of the document into question but does not provide a complete explanation.
Level: Basic
Question 1: Student does not identify source information that might lead them to trust Haldeman’s testimony.
Question 2: Student does not identify source information that might call the reliability of the document into question.
