The Sacco and Vanzetti case, which ended with the executions of the two Italian immigrants in 1927, is a powerful episode in Only Yesterday. It raises questions about evidence, prejudice, and the justice system that many students find compelling. Essays on the case can be passionate, and the challenge for graders is to reward careful weighing of evidence over strong conviction. A well structured assignment makes that goal clear.

Students often leap to a verdict, declaring the men innocent or guilty without examining the evidence. A stronger essay distinguishes between what the evidence showed, what the public believed, and how the political climate influenced the outcome. Allen presents the case as part of the postwar atmosphere of fear toward radicals and foreigners, which provides context. The student must still decide how far that context explains the verdict.

A useful question for grading is whether the essay can state the strongest argument against its own conclusion. If a student believes the trial was unfair, can they explain what the prosecution's case relied on? If they believe the verdict was justified, can they address the claims of prejudice? Essays that confront the opposing view are generally better reasoned.

Evidence Versus Atmosphere

A key analytical distinction is between direct evidence about the crime and the surrounding social atmosphere. Students may argue that bias affected the jury even if they cannot determine guilt. This is a more modest and defensible claim than certainty about innocence. Reward the precision of such claims over bold assertions that the evidence cannot support.

• Separates evidence about the crime from the political climate
• Presents the prosecution and defense arguments fairly
• Makes a claim that matches the strength of the evidence
• Connects the case to postwar fear of radicals and immigrants
• Acknowledges what remains uncertain

Teaching Intellectual Humility

The case offers a chance to teach students that historians often must reason under uncertainty. Essays that acknowledge what cannot be known, and still make a reasoned claim, demonstrate maturity. Encourage phrases that reflect appropriate confidence, such as the evidence suggests, rather than absolute statements. This is a skill that generalizes across disciplines.

Feedback can ask students to rate their own confidence and explain what additional evidence would change their minds. This reflective question promotes careful thinking. It also reveals whether students understand the limits of their sources. Graders may find that the best essays naturally include such reflection.

Grading Emotional Writing

Because the case involves injustice and execution, student writing may be emotional. Emotion is not a flaw, but it should be channeled into argument. Note where emotive language substitutes for evidence, and ask the student to supply the support. A balanced comment acknowledges the passion while directing it toward analysis.

Setting expectations about tone in the rubric helps students calibrate. Academic writing favors precise and measured language, even for dramatic subjects. Provide a sample paragraph that conveys seriousness without exaggeration. Students then have a model for how to write about difficult events.

Efficient Feedback Practices

Essays on this case tend to share predictable weaknesses, such as premature verdicts and one sided evidence. A comment bank aligned to the rubric speeds up response while maintaining quality. Teachers can adapt each comment to the student's specific passage. Specificity remains essential, since generic notes do little to improve writing.

AI assisted feedback tools can draft rubric aligned comments and highlight passages that need attention. The teacher then reviews and personalizes them before returning the essays. This workflow helps manage large class sets without sacrificing quality. Prompt feedback lets students revise while the case is still fresh in their minds.