* Details seem to fit where they're placed; sequencing is

logical and effective.

* An inviting introduction draws the reader in; a satisfying

conclusion leaves the reader with a sense of resolution.

* Pacing is well controlled; the writer knows when to slow down

and elaborate, and when to pick up the pace and move on.

* Thoughtful transitions clearly show how ideas connect.

* Organization flows so smoothly the reader hardly thinks about it.

*Organization fits the audience and purpose

{entertain (story, joke, etc.), inform (report, essay), persuade (letter, editorial, etc.), express (report, essay)}

{introduction, body, conclusion}

{setting & characters, problem, solution/conclusion}

* The paper has a recognizable introduction and conclusion. The

introduction may not create a strong sense of anticipation;

the conclusion may not tie up all loose ends.

* Sequencing is usually logical, but may sometimes be so

predictable that the structure takes attention away from the

content.

* Pacing is fairly well controlled, though the writer sometimes

spurts ahead too quickly or spends too much time on details

that do not matter.

* Transitions often work well; at other times, connections

between ideas are fuzzy.

* The organization sometimes supports the main point or

storyline; at other times, the reader feels an urge to slip in a transition or move things around.

* Organization meets audience and purpose (see 3 & 4), but needs improvement in some of those organizational areas

* Sequencing needs work.

* There is no real lead to set up what follows, no real

conclusion to wrap things up.

* Pacing feels awkward; the writer slows to a crawl when the

reader wants to get on with it, and vice versa.

* Connections between ideas are confusing or missing.

* Problems with organization make it hard for the reader to get

a grip on the main point or storyline.

* The reader feels a strong interaction with the writer,

sensing the person behind the words.

* The tone and voice give flavor to the message and seem

appropriate for the purpose and audience.

* Narrative writing seems honest, appealing, and written from

the heart.

* Expository or persuasive writing reflects a strong commitment

to the topic, and an effort to bring the topic to life by

anticipating the reader's questions, and showing why the

reader should care or want to know more.

*Reader can imagine "mind movies" from the carefully crafted imagery

* The writing communicates in an earnest, pleasing manner.

Moments here and there surprise, amuse or move the reader.

* Voice may emerge strongly on occasion, then retreat behind

general, dispassionate language.

* The writing hides as much of the writer as it reveals.

* The writer seems aware of an audience, but often to weigh

words carefully or discard personal insights in favor of safe

generalities.

* It is hard to sense the writer behind the words. The writer

does not seem to reach out to an audience, or to anticipate

their interests and questions.

* The writer speaks in a kind of monotone that flattens all

potential highs or lows of the message.

* The writing may communicate on a functional level, but it

does not move or involve the reader.

* The writer does not seem sufficiently at home with the topic

to take risks, share personal insights or make the

topic/story personal and real for the reader.

Word Choice

4-- wowser!--excels in all areas below:   

3-on target!--meets all criteria- minor improvements only in areas below:

Words convey the intended message in a precise, interesting and natural way.

* Words are specific and accurate; it is easy to understand

just what the writer means.

* The language is natural and never overdone; phrasing is

highly individual.

* Lively verbs energize the writing. Precise nouns and

modifiers create pictures in the reader's mind.

* Striking words and phrases often catch the reader's eye--and

linger in the reader's mind.

* Clichäs and jargon are used sparingly, only for effect.

* Words include imagery, metaphor, simile, alliteration, or technical details to create pictures in the reader's mind.

2--partially meets criteria; needs improvement in several areas below:

The language is functional, even if it lacks punch; it is easy to figure out the writer's meaning on a general level.

* Words are almost always correct and adequate; they simply

lack flair.

* Familiar words and phrases communicate, but rarely capture

the reader's imagination. Still, the paper may have one or

two fine moments.

* Attempts at colorful language come close to the mark, but

sometimes seem overdone.

* Energetic verbs or picturesque phrases liven things up now

and then; the reader longs for more.

* Words include some instances of imagery, metaphor, simile, alliteration, or technical details to create some pictures in the reader's mind.

1--undeveloped; needs major improvements in most areas below:

The writer struggles with a limited vocabulary, searching for words to convey meaning. The writing reflects more than one of these problems:

* Language is so vague (e.g., It was a fun time, She was neat,

It was nice, We did lots of stuff) that only the most general

message comes through.

* Persistent redundancy distracts the reader.

* Jargon or cliche*s serve as a crutch.

* Words are used incorrectly, sometimes making the message hard

to decipher.

* Problems with language leave the reader wondering what the

writer is trying to say.

Sentence Fluency

4-- wowser!--excels in all areas below:   

3-on target!--meets all criteria- minor improvements only in areas below:

The writing has an easy flow and rhythm when read aloud. Sentences are well built, with strong and varied structure that invites expressive oral reading.

* Sentences are constructed in a way that helps make meaning

clear.

* Purposeful sentence beginnings show how each sentence relates

to and builds upon the one before it.

* The writing has cadence, as if the writer has thought about

the sound of the words as well as the meaning.

* Sentences vary in length as well as structure.

* Fragments, if used, add style.

* Dialogue, if used, sounds natural.

2--partially meets criteria; needs improvement in several areas below:

The text hums along with a steady beat, but tends to be more pleasant or businesslike than musical, more mechanical than fluid.

* Sentences may not seem artfully crafted or musical, but they

are usually grammatical. They hang together. They get the job

done.

* There is at least some variation in sentence length and

structure. Sentence beginnings are NOT all alike.

* The reader sometimes has to hunt for clues (e.g., connecting

words and phrases like however, therefore, naturally, after a

while, on the other hand, to be specific, for example, next,

first of all, later, but as it turned out, although, etc.)

that show how sentences interrelate.

* Parts of the text invite expressive oral reading; others may

be stiff, awkward, choppy or gangly. Overall though, it is

pretty easy to read the paper aloud with a little practice.

1--undeveloped; needs major improvements in most areas below:

The reader has to practice quite a bit in order to give this paper

a fair interpretive reading. The writing reflects more than one of

the following problems:

* Sentences are choppy, incomplete, rambling or awkward; they

need work.

* Phrasing does not sound natural, the way someone might speak.

The reader must sometimes pause or read over to get the

meaning.

* Many sentences begin the same way--and may follow the same

patterns (e.g., subject-verb-object) in a monotonous pattern.

* Endless connectives (and, and so, but then, because, and

then, etc.) create a massive jumble of language in which

clear sentence beginnings and endings get swallowed up.

* The text does not invite expressive oral reading.

 

 

Conventions

4-- wowser!--excels in all areas below:   

3-on target!--meets all criteria- minor improvements only in areas below:

The writer demonstrates a good grasp of standard writing conventions (e.g., grammar, capitalization, punctuation, usage, spelling, paragraphing) and uses conventions effectively to enhance readability. Errors tend to be so few and so minor that the reader can easily overlook them unless hunting for them specifically.

* Paragraphing tends to be sound and to reinforce the

organizational structure.

* Grammar and usage are correct and contribute to clarity and

style.

* Punctuation is accurate and guides the reader through the

text.

* Spelling is generally correct, even on more difficult words.

* The writer may manipulate conventions--especially grammar and

spelling--for stylistic effect.

* The writing is sufficiently long and complex to allow the writer to show skill in using a wide range of conventions.

* Only light editing would be required to polish the text for

publication.

2--partially meets criteria; needs improvement in several areas below:

The writer shows reasonable control over a limited range of standard writing conventions. Conventions are sometimes handled well and enhance readability; at other times, errors are distracting and impair readability.

* Paragraphing is attempted. Paragraphs sometimes run together

or begin in the wrong places.

* Problems with grammar or usage are not serious enough to

distort meaning.

* Terminal (end-of sentence) punctuation is usually correct;

internal punctuation (commas, apostrophes, semicolons,

dashes, colons, parentheses) is sometimes missing or wrong.

* Spelling is usually correct or reasonably phonetic on common

words.

* Moderate editing would be required to polish the text for

publication.

1--undeveloped; needs major improvements in most areas below:

Errors in spelling, punctuation, usage and grammar, capitalization, and/or paragraphing repeatedly distract the reader and make the text difficult to read. The writing reflects more than one of these problems:

* Paragraphing is missing, irregular, or so frequent (e.g.,

every sentence) that it has no relationship to the

organizational structure of the text.

* Errors in grammar or usage are very noticeable, and may

affect meaning.

* Punctuation (including terminal punctuation) is often missing

or incorrect.

* Spelling errors are frequent, even on common words.

* The reader must read once to decode, then again for meaning.

* Extensive editing would be required to polish the text for

publication.

 

*Adapted from:

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory

101 SW Main, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97204

Telephone (503) 275-9500

Assessment & Evaluation: Six-Trait Writing Model