Grade 11

Argumentative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

3D Printers

Conventions

Evidence/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

The third sentence of the response is a run-on sentence (comma splice).

There is a missing comma after “In Source #4” in the second paragraph. There is a missing comma with a compound structure (“…content works well under the system and the system doesn&#8217;t have…”).

There are no capitalization errors.

Paragraph 2 has numerous errors with the articles “a” and “an” (e.g., before “innovation” and “new” in the second sentence, and before “potential” in the third sentence).
There is some inconsistent use of verb mood (e.g., the use of the subjunctive “could” and “should” versus “it is a good idea…”). The phrase “someone getting abusing the copyright” is confusing. It is unclear whether a word is missing or if this was meant to be a serial phrase.
In the second paragraph, “easy” should be “easily,” and in the final paragraph, “people that” should be “people who,” but most of these errors are relatively minor.

This response has one spelling error (“workout” in the second to the last sentence of the response should be two words: “work out”).

Few details from the available sources are used, and those that are used are weakly integrated, unexplained, and/or inaccurately used.

A single source is used and attributed.

The elaboration of evidence is especially weak, in part because there is so little evidence offered to support the claim, and some of that evidence is not accurately used. For example, source 4 concludes by warning against assuming that copyright problems are easily solved. This is not consistent with the unexplained statement in paragraph 1 that &#8220;the system doesn&#8217;t have any big problems.&#8221; This oversimplification of source information diminishes the credibility of the argument. Paragraph 4 briefly attempts to address the opposing point of view by suggesting a compromise (&#8220;If deciding yes on purchasing one for your library, consider charging people a fair amount of money…[and] have them sign a contract or waiver&#8221;). This information is appropriate but totally undeveloped.

The vocabulary is limited: general (&#8220;would workout&#8221;), repetitive (&#8220;new step,&#8221; &#8220;new style,&#8221; &#8220;new thing&#8221;; &#8220;great idea,&#8221; &#8220;good idea&#8221;), and/or confusing (&#8220;someone getting abusing the copyright clause&#8221;) word choices are ineffective for an argument.

The style is consistent but not convincing.

The claim is mildly confusing (&#8220;3-D printers should be purchased through public libraries&#8221;), although it is clarified in the conclusion (&#8220;…good idea to purchase 3-D printers for public libraries&#8221;). However, the body of the response solely addresses issues with copyrights and ignores the stated focus on potential benefits (a new step in learning such as a new style of art). This lack of unity diminishes the argument.

The very few transitions (&#8220;also,&#8221; &#8220;Although&#8221;) are inadequate to establish relationships between evidence that would build an argument.

Considered separately, the introduction and conclusion are adequate in structure; however, they do not reflect the topics covered in the body of the response. The introduction provides a claim and some vague context for the issue (&#8220;best new thing&#8221;). The introduction then refers to the educational potential of the 3D printer. The conclusion reiterates the claim and repeats the information about potential for new art and creations. This information is not addressed in the body of the response, which instead covers copyright issues. This weak progression of ideas interferes with overall unity.

Paragraph 4 briefly addresses the opposing point of view by proposing a general compromise (&#8220;consider charging people a fair amount of money&#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 11: Argumentative – 3D Printers - ID: 4261

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy