Score Level 1 Anchor Paper

This response includes a few specific details about the decision to get a family dog (everyone in my family had allergies; finally decided to get an outside dog). However, the response is too brief to demonstrate an organizational pattern or to provide for more than minimal development.

Score Level 1 Anchor Paper

This response minimally addresses the prompt through a few details about a choice between an X-Box 360 and a guitar amplifier. Although the response is focused, it is too brief to demonstrate an organizational pattern or to allow for the development of the writer’s ideas.

Score Level 2 Anchor Paper

This brief and oversimplified response describes a choice between a concert and a friend’s “sweet sixteen” birthday party. The use of simple transitional devices and a reasonable progression of ideas demonstrate an attempt to use an organizational structure. The writer provides enough development of the decision-making process (I was completely torn; both events were once-in-a-lifetime events. My friend really wanted me to come; sweet sixteens are usually very special; I’m glad I did) for this response to receive a score of “2.”

Score Level 2 Anchor Paper

This oversimplified essay recounts an anecdote about a family’s decision to leave Russia and come to America. The opening paragraph lacks specificity as an introduction to the essay. The remainder of the response shows an attempted chronological organization, but the events are rushed – phone call, invitation, decision, call back - with few pauses for development. The writer needs to include more specific details and elaborate more completely to receive a higher score.

Score Level 3 Anchor Paper

This complete and organized essay describes an attempt to choose the correct answer during a driver’s license test. Clear word choice (I narrowed it down; I wanted my learners permit; I should have chosen with my first thought) and specific details (I got all the way through nineteen of the twenty questions; So here I am sitting in a chair reading the question to myself. ‘When are the roads more dangerous’) provide adequate support and elaboration of the writer’s decision-making process. Further development and more purposeful word choice would strengthen the response.

Score Level 3 Anchor Paper

In this complete essay, the writer describes a decision to save a life. The use of various transitional devices and the chronological sequence of events create an organizational structure that supports the writing purpose. Word choice is clear and, occasionally, purposeful (became limp; I had just gotten my lifesaving certification; first steps of CPR). Support and elaboration are provided through a mixture of general and specific detail (a swim-at-your-own-risk type of thing; I swim to shore as fast as my exhausted body can swim; they sit up 10 minutes later and slowly come back to themselves). Although the writer frequently pauses for elaboration in the first paragraph’s description of the attempted rescue, the latter events (begin breathing on their own; sit up; asked the victim where they live; took them home) move too quickly through time. To receive a higher score, the writer not only needs to pause and further develop the ideas, but also provide more consistent, purposeful word choice.

Score Level 4 Anchor Paper

This response is an organized and well-developed essay about a mother’s decision to have a potentially dangerous cancer treatment. Purposeful word choice (inaudible; uttered; inevitable) and relevant details (on a crisp fall day; a single tear falling down her face) are used to fulfill the writing purpose and illustrate the writer’s premise that “sometimes, what seems to lead us closer to death can save our lives.” Frequent pauses for explanation demonstrate attention to the audience’s understanding and interest.

Score Level 4 Anchor Paper

In this fluent and insightful response, the writer explores the decision to try out for a baseball “travel team,” despite not having made the squad the previous season. Complete and relevant support and elaboration are provided through purposeful word choice (top of the food chain; a choppy grounder), vivid descriptions (‘Smack!’ The ball smashed into my nose and pain seared through me as I fell to my knees), and specific, carefully chosen details (so I would have to settle for in-house ball, the less competitive, easier version of baseball). These elements are interwoven into a cohesive essay that brings the events to life and effectively illustrates the complex relationship between the writer and a beloved, but demanding, father. (But the words spoken over the phone by coach Steve, ‘Sorry bud, but you didn’t make the squad,’ still stung in the back of my mind. As did the disapointment in my father’s face. I just wanted him to be proud of me.) The result is a thoroughly developed response that fulfills the writing purpose.