Grade 6

Narrative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

Robots

Conventions

Development/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

There are no sentence formation errors.

There are a few punctuation errors (missing commas before dialog, missing apostrophes in contractions, etc), but not enough to impede comprehension. And it must be noted that although students are not assessed on typing skills, it is evident that some errors may be due to the student&#8217;s lack of proficient typing skills.

There are a few capitalization errors with proper nouns and in the dialog.

There are no grammar usage errors.

This response has some spelling errors.

The experience is unevenly developed. The narrator’s character is adequately developed, as is the setting and the context for the robot project. However, unexplained key details (e.g., why the robot didn’t work or how it got fixed) keep the overall experience from being adequately developed.

Other than a vague reference to the robot talking and having an on/off switch, there are no connections to information from source materials.

Narrative techniques are used unevenly. There is some dialogue (e.g., &#8220;Is there anything in particular we have to do? &#8220;Yes actually you have to use your imagination!&#8221;).
The use of dialogue is somewhat effective in developing the relationship between Danny and Flynn, but there is no real reason for Danny to be in the story other than to compare his mediocre science “trick” with Flynn’s robot.
The use of description is also uneven. For example, there are details to describe the Chinese restaurant (its name, the wishing well, the fortune cookies), but there is little use of descriptive details to illustrate more important details/events/experiences, leaving the reader with questions about exactly what the robot was like, why it didn’t work, how it got fixed, etc.

Although there is little sensory or figurative language, overall the language is adequate (&#8220;Answes popped up everywhere but Flynn only stuck with one&#8221;), except at the end when it gets very general (&#8220;everybody loved it and asked him to make him talk and ms Flowers gave him and A and he went off happy…&#8221;).

There is an occasional sense of style especially with the dialogue (“Yes actually you have to use your imagination”; “Wow how are you going to pull that off”).

The response unevenly attempts to establish a plot. The initial events (the planning for the product, followed by the building of the robot) are adequate. However, the parts of the story that deal with the actual conflict (the robot doesn’t work) are weak. In addition, some details (Danny’s project) resurface throughout the response, but serve no real purpose.

Characters, including the narrator, are adequately established, although some of the characters serve no vital role in the events (e.g., Danny). There is, however, adequate information about the setting and context (school assignment, Chinese restaurant).

The use of transitions is uneven. There are some nice transitional words and phrases that work well to show the sequence of events (e.g., &#8220;Suddenly…&#8221;; &#8220;A while later…&#8221;; &#8220;With that&#8230;&#8221;; &#8220;Once he got the materials…&#8221;). However, the transition word &#8220;when&#8221; is repeated so frequently in the second half of the narrative that it becomes distracting, reinforcing the feeling that the ending is rushed.

The sequence of events is uneven. The planning and building stages are logically presented, but there is some irrelevant (as presented) information (e.g., &#8220;Danny&#8217;s idea for his science project is putting a needle through the a balloon without it popping&#8221;). There is also a significant narrative gap: readers never know what the “problem” with the robot was, only that the narrator tossed a coin in the wishing well, wishing that the robot “would work,” and the “fix” was then mysteriously predicted by the fortune cookie. From there, the events quickly lead to a general ending (&#8220;…he showed everyone his robot. Everyone loved it….&#8221;).

The beginning is adequate, using dialogue to establish the narrative elements. The ending is rushed and somewhat general (&#8220;[Flynn] showed everyone his robot. They loved it….Mrs. Flowers gave him an A and he went off happy with his robot forever&#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: 4163

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy