Grade 6

Argumentative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

Clean Communities

Conventions

Evidence/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

There are no errors with sentence formation.

There are no grade-specific punctuation errors. Note that the colon is not a grade 6 convention.

There are no errors with capital letters.

There are no grade-specific errors with grammar usage.

Given the amount of information available in the source materials, the integration of text details is too uneven for a higher score.

There are specific references to some, but not all, source materials used. The ideas in paragraph two are attributed; those in paragraph three are not.

Paragraph two primarily summarizes information, although the final sentence in that paragraph is a self-evident if logical inference (“If we send our recycled computers to a company that responsibly recycles them, we can be a part of saving the environment”). Paragraph three, however, shows uneven development. The idea that cleaning up a highway affects only a small proportion of the litter problem is an adequately developed and a logical inference based on the source materials. However, this idea is followed with the self-evident, undeveloped, and general “we could recycle a lot of computers that would otherwise be a danger….” Overall, given the relative brevity of the response and given the available information in the source materials, the development is too uneven for a higher score.

Although there is some nice wording (e.g., “otherwise be a danger…”), the response is overall too brief to validate anything more than adequate language use.

There is some evidence of an awareness of style, with a rhetorical question that effectively introduces a paragraph and an effort to include the audience in the issue (“..we can..”; “we could…”). Although the short sentences produce some choppiness, the overall evidence of style is adequate.

The focus is clear and mostly sustained, although it’s not entirely clear in paragraph 3 that e-recycling will have a bigger impact (e.g., “a lot of computers”) than adopting a single highway (e.g., “small portion”). While this only mildly interferes with the cohesion of that paragraph, given the brevity of the response, the loose connection is notable.

Overall, transitions are evident but somewhat weak (e.g., “And,” “But,” “So,” “Well,” “All in all”). Further, the connection between the two ideas in paragraph 3 lacks clarity.

The first sentence of the response, which attempts to establish the background for the task, is vague (“current time circumstances”). However, the set-up or rationale for the actual claim is effective: &#8220;The superior choice is likely the most environmentally helpful one.” The conclusion is less effective, as it seems to emphasize specifics used in paragraph 2 with only a vague reference to the ideas in paragraph 3. But overall, the introduction and conclusion are more adequate than weak.

The response initially establishes the problem (the need to help the environment) and the solution (“&#8230;send our recycled computers to a company that responsibly recycles them&#8230;”). This is followed by addressing the counterclaim, which is not required at grade 6 but is effective in developing the rationale for why tech recycling is the “superior choice.” Despite some loose connections in paragraph 3, the progression is adequate.

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 6: Argumentative – Clean Communities - ID: 5143

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy