|
Criterion
|
4
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
|
STRUCTURE & ORGANIZATION (logical organization of the writing sample)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Organized in a logical, interesting and clear manner.
|
Organized in a way that can be followed, but lacks needed clarity.
|
Made some attempt to organize the narrative, but the author jumped around.
|
A total lack of organization. The information is very difficult to follow.
|
No Score
|
|
CONTENT KNOWLEDGE (Knowledge and support of the content)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demonstrated a clear understanding of the content. Used numerous supporting sentences that related back to the main idea.
|
Demonstrated comfort with the content. Used some supporting sentences that related back to the main idea.
|
Demonstrated a lack of comfort with the content. Occasionally used supporting sentences to reinforce the main idea.
|
Did not grasp the subject matter or content. Did not reinforce the main idea with elaborating or supporting sentences.
|
No Score
|
|
MECHANICS, GRAMMAR & SPELLING (Grammar, punctuation and spelling)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No errors in basic punctuation, grammar and spelling.
|
Punctuation and spelling are generally correct, however some sentences appear awkward.
|
Contains some punctuation, spelling and grammatical errors, but is readable.
|
Contains numerous errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. The paper is difficult to follow.
|
No Score
|
|
NEATNESS & LEGIBILITY (Neatness, conciseness, and readability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neatly done, clear, concise and easy to read. Written at an age-appropriate level.
|
Work was sloppy in one area, but appears neat and clear overall. Written at the appropriate level.
|
Work has one or two areas that appear sloppy, but was legible. Written at a level lower than was expected.
|
Work was illegible, lacked any level of neatness or was sloppy. Written at an inappropriate level.
|
No Score
|