VASD Trait Writing Rubric
Note: This rubric is intended for teacher reference.
|
Word Choice: The use of rich, colorful, precise language that moves and enlightens the reader. |
Sentence Fluency: The rhythm and flow of the language, the sound of word patterns, the way in which the writing plays to the ear, not just to the eye. |
Conventions: The mechanical correctness of the piece; spelling, grammar and usage, paragraphing, use of capitals and punctuation. |
|
4 - Precise, natural, colorful language defines concepts clearly and paints vivid pictures.
q Phrasing is original, yet language is never overdone. q Word choice is fresh and distinctive, even when everyday words are used. q Strong verbs dominate. q Each word is clear and defined, directly or in context. q The writer writes to clarify. q Colorful language paints vivid picture. q The writer writes to create mood.
|
4 - Text is fluent, varied, and easy to read aloud with expression.
q Almost every sentence begins differently – repetition used only for dramatic emphasis. q Sentences vary in structure and length. q Fragments, if used, enhance style. q Dialogue, if used, is natural and effective. |
4 – The writer demonstrates control over a wide range of standard writing conventions (e.g., spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, usage, paragraphing). Conventions enhance readability. Errors are so few that just minor touch-ups would get this piece ready to publish. q Spelling correct, even on difficult words. q Punctuation is accurate, creative, and guides reader through the text. q Capitalization skills show sophisticated understanding and are consistently applied. q Paragraphing is sound and reinforces the organizational structure. q Grammar and usage correct and contribute to clarity, style. q The piece is very close to being ready to publish.
|
|
3 - Reasonably clear language communicates the writer’s message.
q Words are used correctly. A few phrases may be original. (No thesaurus overload.) q Distinctive phrasing is evident, though the piece may include some clichés, wordiness, jargon, or redundancy. q Strong verbs are present. q Meaning is generally clear. |
3 - The text is more fluent than mechanical, and is quite easy to read aloud.
q Many sentences begin differently, though some repetition may be used for stylistic effect. q Some variation in sentence length and style is also evident. q Fragments, if used, do not disrupt the flow. q Dialogue, if used, is reasonably natural. |
3 - The writer shows reasonable control over a range of standard writing conventions. Conventions usually enhance readability. At other times, errors are distracting and impair readability. q Spelling usually correct / reasonably phonetic on common words; more difficult words have errors. q End punctuation is correct; internal punctuation (commas, apostrophes, semicolons, dashes, colons, parentheses) is usually correct. q Most words capitalized correctly; sophisticated capitalization skills spotty. q Paragraphing sound but some may run together or begin in the wrong places. q Problems with grammar /usage don't distort meaning but not always correct q Moderate editing required to publish.
|
|
2 - Vague or misused words obscure the message – but general meaning is understood.
q Words may not always be used correctly. General or overused words outweigh original choices or show some thesaurus overload. q Clichés, vague phrases, wordiness, and jargon or redundancy are likely to be problems. q Strong verbs are overshadowed by is, are, was, were. q Words are not always clear, and rarely convey more than general meanings.
|
2 - The text leans more toward the mechanical than the fluent. It can be read aloud with some rehearsal.
q Some sentences begin differently. Repetition seems more accidental than purposeful. q Sentences tend to be similar in length; variety is rare. q Fragments are not purposeful, and may disrupt the flow. q Dialogue, if used, may be unnatural and may block the flow. It tends not to enhance the flow. |
2 - The writer shows limited control over a range of standard writing conventions. Errors are occasionally distracting and impair readability. q Spelling is excessively phonetic; many errors present in difficult words. q Periods, question marks may be there; other punctuation frequently wrong or missing. q Only the easiest rules of capitalization show awareness of correct use. q Paragraphing attempted but some run together or begin in wrong places. q Heavy reliance on nonstandard or improper usage q Errors in grammar occasionally disrupt meaning. q Much editing required to publish. |
|
1 - The message does not come through.
q Words may be used incorrectly or the writer relies on general, vague language. q Clichés, vague phrasing, wordiness, jargon, or redundancy are common problems and block meaning. q Strong verbs are almost absent. q Word choice obscures meanings. q The writer may be writing to impress or may simply not find the right words to express his/her thoughts.
|
1 - The text is difficult to read aloud, even with rehearsal.
q Sentences tend to begin the same way, with little or no variety. q Sentences are similar in length. q Fragments disrupt meaning. q Dialogue, if used, is unnatural and blocks the flow. |
1 - Errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, usage and grammar and/or paragraphing repeatedly distract the reader and make the text difficult to read. The writing reflects more than one of these problems: q Spelling errors frequent, even on common words. q Punctuation predominantly missing or incorrect. q Random capitalization or none. q Paragraphing missing, irregular, or so frequent (every sentence) that it has no relationship to the organizational structure of the text. q Errors in grammar are very noticeable, frequent, and affect meaning. q Errors in usage are very noticeable, frequent & affect meaning q Extensive editing required for clarification and for publication.
|
Updated on 9/8/05
VASD Trait Writing Rubric
Note: This rubric is intended for teacher reference.
|
Ideas: The heart of the message, the content of the piece, the main theme with details that enrich and develop the theme. |
Organization: The internal structure, the thread of central meaning, the logical and sometimes intriguing pattern of the ideas. |
Voice: The unique perspective of the writer coming through in the piece through honesty, conviction, integrity and believability. |
|
4 - The writing is clear, well developed, and focused. q A strong main idea, story line, thesis, or argument dominates the piece. q Each portion of the writing is clear and contributes to the reader’s interest in or understanding of the piece. q Clear, well-selected details support the main idea. q Each detail is significant; there is no “filler.” |
4 - The order, presentation and internal structure of the piece are compelling. q An inviting lead draws the reader in. A satisfying conclusion wraps things up. q Ideas are connected to one another with carefully crafted transitions. q All elements seem to fit where they are placed; nothing feels out of order.
|
4 - The voice is individual, expressive, and engaging.
q This piece is highly sharable and engages readers/listeners. q The voice is totally appropriate for the purpose, topic, and audience. q The writer seems to know his/her audience well, and to speak right to them. |
|
3 - Main idea or concept is solid but needs expansion. q The main idea, story line, thesis, or argument is recognizable. q Details help expand the main idea. The reader may have some questions. q A few specific examples, anecdotes, etc. blend with generalities. |
3 - The order, presentation and internal structure of the piece are functional and do not confuse the reader. q Lead and conclusion work reasonably well, one or both could use refinement. q Ideas are connected for the most part. Some transitions may be predictable or missing. q Most elements fit where they are placed, though some re-ordering could help the flow. |
3 - The writing has expressive moments – even if the voice is not consistently engaging.
q Moments throughout the piece are memorable or highly sharable. q The voice seems sincere and sometimes energetic. q Voice is reasonably appropriate for the purpose, topic, and audience. q The writer seems mindful of the audience, and writes to meet their needs.
|
|
2 - Main idea not consistently clear; writing lacks focus and detail. q Details rely too much on common knowledge to be helpful. q Details are missing. q Details off topic. q Generalities or filler leave the reader with numerous questions. q Skimpy support or description. |
2 - The order, presentation and internal structure confuse the reader. q A lead and/or conclusion may be present, but formulaic, predictable, or apparently unrelated to the rest of the piece. q The lead or conclusion is ineffective to guide the readers. q The reader must link ideas where the writer has not made connections clear. q Some elements do NOT fit where they are placed; the reader has a definite urge to re-order things.
|
2 - The voice is often distant, encyclopedic, OR too informal.
q The reader must search for moments to share aloud. q The voice lacks sincerity and energy. q Voice may be missing or inappropriate for audience and purpose. q More often than not, the writer seems unaware of the audience, or unable/unwilling to “speak” to that audience. |
|
1 - The main idea or story line is unclear, even to the writer. q This piece does not seem to have a central message. q The writing is a list of undeveloped ideas. q Specifics are missing. q The piece is dominated by repetition and filler. |
1 - The piece does not yet have an identifiable pattern or internal structure. q No lead or conclusion evident. q Missing or unclear transitions make it very difficult to connect ideas. q Sequencing feels random, not purposeful or planned.
|
1 - The voice is missing or inappropriate.
q This is not a piece the reader would likely share aloud. q The voice doesn’t hold reader’s attention. q Voice is not evident. |
Updated on 9/8/2005