Grade 7

Argumentative

Writing Extended Response

Compose Full Texts

Second Language Learning

Conventions

Evidence/Elaboration

Organization/Purpose

The errors with sentence structure are prolific and distracting: see, as examples, sentences 2 and 3 in paragraph 1, the final sentence in paragraph 2, and the sentence 3 in paragraph 5. In these cases, the writer creates sentence fragments with stand-alone dependent clauses (“And how&#8221;; &#8220;Because&#8221;). There are other incomplete sentences (see the last sentence in paragraph 3). Also apparent are many run-on sentences such as the first sentence of the letter and the first sentences of paragraphs 2 – 5. Although many other sentences are not grammatically incorrect, the numerous sentences that begin with conjunctions (“And” and “But”) interfere with fluency.

Many of the sentence structure errors could be corrected with punctuation, and there are errors with the comma in the salutation (“Dear, Pinesville” instead of “Dear Pinesville,”). There is also a punctuation error with a missing apostrophe (“that’s”).

There are errors with below-grade level capitalization rules (“americans&#8221;; &#8220;chinese&#8221;; &#8220;sincerely”).

There are grammar usage errors with frequently confused words (“your” instead of “you’re”; “there” instead of “they’re”). There are two unclear or misleading pronoun references (“In China they estimated&#8230;”; “Most schools spend our budget money&#8230;”).

There are a few misspellings (“payed&#8221;; &#8220;alot&#8221;; &#8220;sincerely”).

This response provides some general supporting evidence for the argumentative claim, warranting a score in the lower 2 category. There are attempts to use evidence from source materials, but the evidence selected is not accurately paraphrased or interpreted (e.g., the writer states, “In China they estimated that 2 million students study English.&#8221; But the source actually notes that “It is estimated that 200 million school-aged students in China study English”).

Use of elaborative techniques is minimal, as development is primarily a vague—and, again, sometimes misinterpreted—source summary.

Vocabulary is repetitive and vague (“And a child&#8221;; &#8220;And he thinks&#8221;; &#8220;Because most kids”).

Although more than one source is referenced, the use of citations is general (source #1, source #2).

There is a weak attempt to create a style, which is somewhat inappropriate for the audience (e.g., “to confront you”).

This response does provide a claim but essentially summarizes the sources to support that claim without connecting ideas in order to build an argument.

The introduction alludes to a claim about foreign language (“most of the time needed&#8221; along with an opinion &#8220;students would like to know different languages”). However, the conclusion does state the claim more explicitly (“schools should have a foreign language class”) and is followed by some generalities about the benefits (&#8220;what they need to know&#8221;; &#8220;it can help them with a lot more”).

The transitions are very weak, relying on stock phrases (“the first source”) and the words &#8220;and,&#8221; &#8220;but,&#8221; and &#8220;because,&#8221; all failing to clarify relationships or make connections meaningfully.

The progression of ideas is by default; that is, there is a brief summary of each source. Therefore, there is no real “building” of an argument. For example, the counter claim (“foreign language classes cost too much money”) is summarized but not addressed or connected to the stated position; therefore, calling attention to the unaddressed opposing point of view does not serve to advance the argument.

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 7: Argumentative – Second Language Learning - ID: 972

More Resources for Teachers

Connect

Policy