Grade 6

Narrative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

Robots

Conventions

Development/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

There are no grade-relevant errors with sentence construction.

There are frequent errors with punctuation conventions: there are many comma errors, including a missing comma/conjunction (&#8220;…Frank and I were going to get some groceries and when we came home, we both took a nap&#8221;) and several missing commas after introductory elements (&#8220;When I woke up i couldn’t find him&#8221;; and at the end of paragraph 2, &#8220;…as soon as I walked in he said…&#8221;). There are commas missing from the list in the final paragraph (&#8220;I suddenly screamed ran out of the house moved to…&#8221;). The dialogue in paragraph 2 is not properly punctuated, with a period instead of a comma after &#8220;said&#8221; and an unnecessary period after the exclamation/quotation mark (&#8220;Jacob!”.). Finally, apostrophes are missing for contractions (&#8220;dont,&#8221; &#8220;thats,&#8221; &#8220;doesnt&#8221;).

There are two errors with capital letters: a missing capital to begin the last sentence in paragraph 2 and a failure to capitalize the personal pronoun “I.” Although not really an error, the use of capital letters for emphasis in paragraph 1 (LOT) is unnecessary. Further, “tv” is usually capitalized.

In the first sentence of the response, there are two grammar usage errors: the use of “awesome” as an adverb would not be considered a serious error at this grade level, but there is also a more serious error with the lack of agreement (&#8220;…thing are going awesome&#8221;).

There are few spelling errors (&#8220;controled,&#8221; &#8220;couln’t&#8221;).

There is no description of the robot other than that it can carry a lot and is tiny at first but then magically becomes ginormous. This lack of development and the random setting may cause confusion for the reader.

Other than mentioning that the robot can carry a lot, there are no real connections to the source materials.

There are a few descriptive details (e.g., &#8220;tiny remote controled robot…&#8221;; &#8220;…he can carry a lot&#8221;), but overall they are insufficient to illustrate the experience. The reader is left with more questions than answers (Why was Frank the robot taking a nap? How did it become “ginormous”? Why was Jacob so frightened? Why Bruce, Wisconsin and a name change?). The brief attempt at dialogue (“Hi Jacob!”) does little to advance the story.

The language is very vague and general (&#8220;stuff,&#8221; &#8220;a lot&#8221;).

There is little if any awareness of style elements that might enhance the story.

The brief, basic plot is little more than a series of events that are not necessarily logically related (went to get groceries, took nap, Frank mysteriously grows, narrator moves to Wisconsin), and there is no real conflict (presumably, Frank, the now “ginormous” robot, scared Jacob).

Although the narrator briefly introduces himself, telling us he has few friends, other narrative elements are not clearly relevant (e.g., Albany, New York, and Bruce, Wisconsin seem like extraneous details). The narrator also introduces the robot (“he doesn’t do much stuff, but he can carry a lot”) but gives no justification for why he has this cool robot.

There are some general transitions to connect the few details (&#8220;one day…&#8221;; &#8220;when…&#8221;; &#8220;as soon as…&#8221;).

The sequence of events is confusing, mostly due to the gaps in the story (most notably, how and why Frank became &#8220;ginormous&#8221;).

The response has a clear if very general beginning that sets up a narrative, but the ending does not offer a satisfying closure (&#8220;changed my name to Connor. I never saw Frank again&#8221;).

Content Explorer

Sample Items Website

Tools for Teachers

Smarter Reporting

Remote Teaching and Learning

More Resources for Teachers

Privacy

Diversity, Inclusion & Equity

Web Accessibility Statement

Policy

Instagram

YouTube

Pinterest

Twitter

Facebook

Connect

An annotation is the educator’s explanation of how a portion of the student’s response relates to the rubric and contributes to that trait’s score. For example, the educator might explain how the response meets the expectations of a specific score point. An annotation can also describe aspects of a student response that relate to multiple score points on the rubric to demonstrate nuance when determining a score.

Annotation

One of three traits scored for the ELA performance task full write, this trait measures a student’s ability to demonstrate command of grade-level conventions of standard English: grammar usage (including sentence formation), capitalization, punctuation, and spelling.

This trait measures students’ ability to select and integrate details that support, explain, illustrate, or develop ideas. Students should elaborate these details—that is, explain and connect them, guided by the writing purpose and audience needs.
For informative/explanatory and opinion/argumentative writing purposes, these details come from source materials.
For narrative writing, this trait is called Development/Elaboration, and students are expected to integrate and develop grade-appropriate story elements such as descriptive details and dialogue. For these tasks, events and experiences are inspired by source materials.

Evidence/Elaboration

This trait measures students’ ability to establish and sustain a focus for the writing. This focus should be consistent with the task’s designated purpose and the intended audience. Strong introductions and conclusions (or, for narrative writing, beginnings and endings) and transitions help to create coherence.

Performance tasks measure a student’s ability to demonstrate critical-thinking and problem-solving skills by challenging students to apply their knowledge and skills to complex, real-world problems. In the performance task, students are presented with a collection of questions and activities connected to a single theme or scenario. These activities ask students to demonstrate capacities such as depth of understanding, writing and research skills, and complex analysis, which cannot be adequately assessed with traditional assessment questions. Performance tasks are taken on a computer (but are not computer adaptive) and take students one to two class periods to complete.

Performance Task

The prompt is the text provided to the student that requests their response. It includes some contextual information, but also includes a specific task that students complete in their writing response.

Prompt

For a deeper dive into the content behind this student response, navigate to the Sample Items Website to access the writing prompt or visit the Content Explorer to learn more about this content area.

Prompt & Target

“Purpose” is the context for a piece of writing, or what the writer intends to accomplish. Students write texts with the following purposes:
<ul>
<li>Narrative (grades 3–8): tell a story</li>
<li>Informational (grades 3–5): present facts or data using source material</li>
<li>Explanatory (grades 6–11): explain a topic or concept by analyzing source materials</li>
<li>Opinion (grades 3–5): present and defend a position</li>
<li>Argumentative (grades 6–11): present an argument using research to form and support claims</li>
</ul>
Purposes have subtle differences depending on grade, and each writing purpose has its own scoring rubric.

Purpose

This text was written by a student in response to a Performance Task writing prompt.

Response

A rubric is a set framework for scorers to reference when determining the quality of student writing. Each trait has its own rubric, and every point value is defined in detail with examples of what to expect from student writing at each level.

Rubric

Donec sed odio dui. Aenean eu leo quam. Pellentesque ornare sem lacinia quam venenatis vestibulum. Nulla vitae elit libero, a pharetra augue. Nullam id dolor id nibh ultricies vehicula ut id elit. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

Sample Term One

Sample Term Two

Traits are different dimensions of a student response that educators evaluate when scoring. For example, an educator will assess grammar and spelling as part of the Conventions trait (maximum of two score points) but not take grammar or spelling into account when assessing the other traits. This approach ensures that scorers evaluate student writing from multiple angles.

Example for Grade 6: Narrative – Robots - ID: 4122

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy