• Part A: Multiple Choice
• Part B: Short Answers
• Free Response: DBQ
• Free Response: LEQ
• SAQ Example 1
• SAQ Example 2
• SAQ Example 3
• SAQ Example 4
• DBQ Example 1
• LEQ Example 1
• LEQ Example 2
• LEQ Example 3

• Unit Practice Tests

AP US History Free Response: DBQ Example

Once you have answered our APUSH Document-Based Question, scroll down to read a sample response. This APUSH DBQ example will give you a good sense of what it takes to earn a perfect score on this portion of the exam. We have also included a detailed breakdown of the scoring.

Evaluate the extent to which the rise of industrial capitalism contributed to the increase in labor unrest in the United States from 1865 to 1900.

Sample Perfect Essay:

Following the end of the Civil War in 1865, the U.S. economy became dominated by industrial capitalism as the United States government pursued policies to promote economic growth, including protectionist tariffs, opposition to organized labor, and open immigration policies supposedly based on the philosophies of Social Darwinism and laissez-faire economic policy. In reality, the government was actively engaged in promoting large corporations at the expense of workers and consumers to such an extent that it caused labor unrest and a dramatic increase in income inequality. These policies, while fostering industrial expansion, entrenched economic disparities and provoked widespread resistance among laborers, leading to conflicts such as the Homestead Strike and the Pullman Strike.

The late 19th century, derisively called the Gilded Age by Mark Twain, was a period of rapid industrialization, urbanization, and economic transformation in the United States (as demonstrated in Document 2), which benefitted from pro-growth government policies. Following the Civil War, many people wanted the role of the federal government to shrink back closer to its antebellum size and level of regulation. Many citizens were strong adherents of social Darwinism and “self-reliance” and felt that the government should stay out of the economy through more laissez-faire economic policy. In contrast to this desire for less government regulation, however, many big businesses were lobbying the U.S. government for subsidies to build railroads, like the Transcontinental Railroad completed in 1869, and for protective tariffs, like the McKinley Tariff. When the increased revenue from government subsidies and protectionist policies was not passed on to workers through higher wages, it served to increase the gap between the rich and the poor and provide strong motivation for workers to form labor unions, including the Knights of Labor, American Federation of Labor, and American Railway Union. These groups gathered in order to strike for higher wages—like the workers did in the Pullman Strike described in Document 5. It is important to recognize that this source, Harper’s Weekly, was well-known for being supportive of the Republican Party, so it is not surprising that the publication was critical of the striking workers and calling for action to be taken against them.

Some may argue that the protectionist tariffs and government subsidies were necessary to help American industries develop, but by the end of the 19th century, America was the leading industrial country and workers’ wages had not increased at the same pace as corporate profits. Even with all of the efforts of the workers to organize labor unions and engage in collective action like strikes, the workers were often unable to bargain for wage increases that kept pace with the profits of firms like Standard Oil and the House of Morgan.

During the Gilded Age, a few large corporations, including the Standard Oil Company (profiled in Document 1), Carnegie Steel Company, and the House of Morgan (discussed in Document 2), came to dominate their industries through corporate takeovers and new forms of business organization like pools, trusts, and combinations. Nevertheless, the U.S. government did little to regulate them or regulate the markets to make them competitive. These companies used the new business structures described in Document 2 in order to collude to set prices, limit production, and suppress wages in direct violation of the Interstate Commerce Act and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act of 1890. When attempts were made to get the government to regulate markets and promote competition, the government was often unwilling to do so. In the E.C. Knight case (Document 4), for example, the Supreme Court acknowledged that the company was, in fact, a monopoly, but they ruled that the Sherman Anti-Trust Act only applied to commerce, not manufacturing. This severely limited the law’s ability to promote fair competition. In Document 3, the U.S. Attorney General clearly explains that the power of the Interstate Commerce Commission had been severely limited by the courts and that it only engaged in minimal supervision of anti-competitive business behavior. It’s important to note that Olney was retained as an attorney for Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad, which explains why he was communicating with the railroad and which gave him an incentive to advocate a pro-business perspective. In fact, he advises his client not to oppose the Interstate Commerce Commission because it was not engaged in meaningful regulation of the railroads and, if it were abolished, it might be replaced with an institution that would. This document shows that high-ranking government officials were actively working with big business to avoid government regulation in opposition to the ideas of self-reliance and pure competition.

At the same time that the government was often unwilling to regulate anti-competitive practices by businesses, it regularly intervened in labor disputes on the side of the business owners to end strikes, taking away the power of the workers and labor unions (as described in Document 5). In the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, the Homestead Strike, and the Pullman Strike, the government sent in state militia and/or the National Guard to put down the strikes and give the upper hand to the companies.

During the Gilded Age, the U.S. had few restrictions on immigration, meaning there was a ready supply of foreign labor willing to take the jobs of American workers for lower wages and worse working conditions, as Document 6 explains. The workers were often forced to accept wage cuts, and members of labor unions were often blacklisted. Instead of pursuing a laissez-faire economic policy, the government was actively intervening to the benefit of big business and the detriment of labor unions.

The income inequality and the labor unrest of the Gilded Age were not simply the result of ruthless competition and laissez-faire economic policy, where the fittest competitors emerged as the winners. They were actually the result of a government that supported protectionist tariffs, intervened in labor disputes by using the military to end strikes, and pursued an open immigration policy while usually being unwilling to take meaningful action against anti-competitive business practices.

How the Essay Earns a Perfect Score:

The Advanced Placement U.S. History Exam has specific standards and criteria for grading the Document-Based Question (DBQ). Let’s analyze how the provided essay meets these standards.

In conclusion, this sample essay would earn a total of 7 points based on the APUSH DBQ scoring rubric. It meets all the criteria by presenting a clear thesis, providing relevant historical context, supporting arguments with specific evidence, and demonstrating a deep and complex understanding of the topic.