| Criteria | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus and Organization | • contains no or an irrelevant introduction. • states an unclear argument. • demonstrates an unclear organizational structure; ideas are hard to follow most of the time. • fails to clarify relationships among claim(s), reasons, evidence, and counterclaim(s); concepts are unclear and/or there is a lack of focus. • contains no or an irrelevant concluding statement or section. |
• contains a limited introduction. • states a weak argument. • demonstrates an attempt to use organizational strategies to sequence claim(s), counterclaim(s), reasons, and evidence, but ideas may be hard to follow at times. • clarifies some relationships among claim(s), reasons, evidence, and counterclaim(s), but there are lapses in focus. • contains a limited concluding statement or section. |
• contains a relevant introduction. • states a precise claim and maintains a clear argument. • utilizes adequate organizational strategies to logically sequence claim(s), counterclaim(s),reasons, and evidence to create a mostly unified whole. • clarifies most relationships among claim(s), reasons, evidence, and counterclaim(s), but there may be some gaps in cohesion. • contains a relevant concluding statement or section |
• contains an effective and relevant introduction. • states a precise claim and maintains a sophisticated argument. • utilizes effective organizational strategies to logically sequence claim(s), counterclaim(s),reasons, and evidence to create a unified whole. • effectively clarifies relationships among claim(s), reasons, evidence, and counterclaim(s) to create cohesion. • contains an effective and relevant concluding statement or section. |
| Development | • utilizes mostly irrelevant or no evidence from the stimuli, or mostly/only personal knowledge to adequately support claim(s) and counterclaim(s). Evidence is inaccurate or repetitive. •inadequately or inaccurately explains the evidence provided; evidence, claim(s), and counterclaim(s) appear disconnected, demonstrating little understanding of the topic, task, and stimuli. |
• utilizes mostly relevant but insufficient evidence from the stimuli to partially support claim(s) and counterclaim(s). Some evidence may be inaccurate or repetitive. • explains some of the evidence provided, connecting some of the evidence to claim(s) and counterclaim(s) and demonstrating only a partial understanding of the topic, task, and stimuli. There may be some level of inaccuracy in the explanation. |
• utilizes relevant and sufficient evidence from the stimuli to adequately support claim(s) and counterclaim(s), while acknowledging strengths and limitations of both. • adequately and accurately explains and elaborates on the evidence provided, connecting the evidence to claim(s) and counterclaim(s) and demonstrating a sufficient understanding of the topic, task, and stimuli. |
utilizes well-chosen, relevant, and sufficient evidence from the stimuli to thoroughly and insightfully support logical claim(s) and counterclaim(s), while acknowledging strengths and limitations of both. • thoroughly and accurately explains and elaborates on the evidence provided, connecting the evidence to claim(s) and counterclaim(s) and demonstrating a clear, insightful understanding of the topic, task, and stimuli. |
| Language | • illustrates little to no use of precise language and domain-specific vocabulary. • illustrates little to no syntactic variety. • utilizes no or few transitional words and phrases. • does not establish or maintain a formal style and an objective tone. |
• illustrates inconsistent command of precise language and domain-specific vocabulary.• illustrates inconsistent command of syntactic variety. • utilizes basic or repetitive transitional words and phrases. • establishes but inconsistently maintains a formal style and an objective tone. |
• illustrates consistent command of precise language and domain-specific vocabulary appropriate to the task. • illustrates consistent command of syntactic variety for meaning and reader interest. • utilizes appropriate and varied transitional words and phrases. • establishes and maintains a formal style and an objective tone. |
• illustrates consistent and sophisticated command of precise language and domain-specific vocabulary appropriate to the task. • illustrates sophisticated command of syntactic variety for meaning and reader interest. • utilizes sophisticated and varied transitional words and phrases. • effectively establishes and maintains a formal style and an objective tone. |
| Conventions | • demonstrates limited command of grade-level conventions of standard written English. • contains numerous and repeated errors that seriously impede meaning. |
• demonstrates inconsistent command of grade-level conventions of standard written English. • contains frequent errors that may significantly interfere with meaning. |
• demonstrates consistent command of grade-level conventions of standard written English. • contains occasional minor and/or major errors, but the errors do not significantly interfere with meaning. |
• demonstrates consistent command of grade-level conventions of standard written English. • contains occasional minor and/or major errors, but the errors do not significantly interfere with meaning. |