Grade 8

Argumentative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

Penny

Conventions

Evidence/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

Paragraph 3 contains a very long incomplete sentence: &#8220;This being the time it takes someone to whup out thirty pennies instead of six nickels, this could cost people time away from their jobs.&#8221;

There are several punctuation errors (e.g., the missing period at the end of paragraph 3). There are missing commas between compound independent clauses in paragraph 4 (&#8220;One major issue…is that it causes prices to be rounded up and then costumers will have to pay more&#8221;) and paragraph 5 ( &#8220;…the currency in this country are very iconic peices of history and to retire the penny would be sad&#8221;). There is an unnecessary comma in the final sentence (“so” is used to introduce a dependent clause [“so that…”] rather than a coordinating conjunction). There should be a comma, rather than a semi-colon, before “which” in paragraph 3. However, note that semi-colons in general are not grade 8 errors, so the incorrectly used semi-colon in paragraph 4 does not “count” as an error. There are several missing apostrophes to form contractions (e.g., &#8220;dont&#8221;), and countries wealth (paragraph 6) should be possessive: &#8220;country’s wealth.&#8221;

There are no capitalization errors.

There are several grammar usage errors (e.g., &#8220;Which may not sound like much, but it can add up when you think about it&#8221; should be &#8220;This may not sound like much&#8230;&#8221;). There are subject/verb agreement errors in paragraphs 4 and 5 (&#8220;…it cause…&#8221;; &#8220;the currency in this country are…&#8221;), and the use of the plural noun wages in paragraph 3 is incorrect (either &#8220;average wages amounts&#8221; should be singular or &#8220;wages&#8221; should be the possessive &#8220;wage’s&#8221;). Although there are some minor shifts in verb tense (e.g., paragraph 5: &#8220;…end of something that has been&#8221; followed by &#8220;the penny had more uses&#8221;) they do not cause significant confusion. In addition, there is occasional confusion with unclear references (e.g., &#8220;Cost of the metals used in making pennies being worth more than the penny itself.&#8221; “The cost of metals” doesn’t make sense with “being worth more,” which is the grammatical referent).

This response has a few spelling errors [“dont,” “costumers,” “peices,” “havn’t,” and “a” should be “at” (third sentence second paragraph)].

The response includes specific details, nicely paraphrasing and integrating information from a variety of the source materials. As one example, in paragraph 2, the writer states: &#8220;It is not only the cost of the metals in pennies that costs our country, but the fact that nobody actually uses pennies much in their everyday life. All the pennies people get in their transactions a[t] stores just end up at the bottom of their couch.&#8221; This integration of [pilot] material from source #2 (cost of metal) and source #1 (pennies are discarded/forgotten) is effective.

Although multiple sources are used, the use of source material is unattributed.

The previous example (&#8220;It is not only…but…nobody actually uses pennies…&#8221;) is extended with a conclusion about the economic consequences that goes beyond the obvious: &#8220;This does not help the overall finances of this country.&#8221; There is also some elaboration via inference and speculation (e.g., &#8220;this could mean&#8221;; &#8220;Maybe they haven’t thought….[this] could save many people money&#8221;). The response then develops an effective address of the opposing point of view by considering possible, if simplistic, solutions (e.g., &#8220;figure out a way to reimburse people who still own pennies after they were abolished&#8221;). Overall, the integration and subsequent development of source materials reflect the kind of development that is typical of the score point 4 category.

The language/vocabulary is generally precise (e.g., &#8220;iconic,&#8221; &#8220;fiddling with pennies at store counters&#8221;).

The response evidences some effective style including parallelism (e.g., &#8220;the country would save hundreds of millions of dollars,&#8221; and &#8220;save the general public tens of dollars…&#8221;) and effective use of cause/effect (e.g., &#8220;It is not only….but…&#8221;; &#8220;…don’t only affect…but…&#8221;).

The claim is stated up front (&#8220;the penny should be abolished due to the hassles involved in using it&#8221;), and the response stays focused on explaining the “hassles.”

The transitions are varied throughout, ranging from simple words (e.g., &#8220;Well,&#8221; &#8220;Also,&#8221; &#8220;but&#8221;) to subtle phrases that establish clear relationships (e.g., &#8220;It is not only….but…&#8221;; &#8220;…don’t only affect…but…&#8221;).

The introduction is adequate, providing a clear claim, followed by a roadmap that provides forthcoming supporting reasons. That roadmap begins with the formulaic phrase &#8220;I have three reasons as to why….&#8221; The conclusion is stronger than the introduction. The perfunctory return to restating &#8220;the reasons I have for wanting the penny gone&#8221; is less distracting, in part because it is couched as part of a general call to action (&#8220;[so] we can get something done about this issue&#8221;).

The response progresses logically, building the argument by explaining each of the “hassles” to support the claim that the penny should be abolished (&#8220;costs more to make than it is worth&#8221;; &#8220;takes up a lot of people’s time&#8221;; &#8220;abolishing the penny could actually save people money&#8221;). The body of the response leads to an acknowledgement of the opposing point of view before concluding the argument.

The fourth body paragraph (paragraph 5) acknowledges the opposing point of view and then presents a possible address of that concern (&#8220;…maybe we could figure out a way to reimburse people…&#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.

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 8: Argumentative – Penny - ID: 4231

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy