The six traits (plus one) of powerful writing are:

Click the trait for an individual rubric for each trait.

Ideas and Content--	the heart of the writing; the main idea or story line
Organization-------	the internal structure--the form and flow (poetry form, essay form, paragraphing, story form)
Voice---------------	evidence of the writer; style and personality or excitement and sincerity; the author is committed, compelling, and credible
Word Choice-------	vocabulary or terminology; NIFTY NOUNS; VIVID VERBS; simile, metaphor, alliteration, mind movies, powerful descriptions, imagery, sensory images, technical vocabulary
Sentence Fluency--	rhythm, flow, sound; short and long sentences; differeing sentence beginnings
Conventions-------	penmanship, spelling, capitals, paragraphs, punctuation, grammar
Text Presentation--	the overall professional look of the paper

For general scoring rubric, click here.

 

Scoring Guide (Rubric)

General scoring definitions for each trait:

--STRONG: wowser!--excels in all areas; shows control of language throughout piece 

--COMPETENT: on target!--meets all criteria- the strengths outweigh the weaknesses; a small amount of revision is needed

--DEVELOPING: strengths and need for revision are about equal; about half-way home

--EMERGING: need for revision outweighs strengths; isolated moments hint at what the writer has in mind; undeveloped;

--needs major improvements in most areas

--NOT YET: a bare beginning; writer not yet showing any control

 

Ideas and Content (Development)

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

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

This paper is clear and focused. It holds the reader's attention.
Relevant anecdotes and details enrich the central theme or storyline.

* Ideas are fresh and original.
* The writer seems to be writing from knowledge or experience
and shows insight: an understanding of life and a knack for
picking out what is significant.
* Relevant, telling, quality details give the reader important
information that goes beyond the obvious or predictable and tells the reader something new.
* The writer develops the topic in an enlightening, purposeful
way that makes a point or tells a story.
* Every piece adds something to the whole.

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

The writer is beginning to define the topic, even though development is still basic or general.

* It is pretty easy to see where the writer is headed, though
more information is needed to "fill in the blanks."
* The writer seems to be drawing on knowledge or experience,
but has difficulty going from general observations to
specifics.
* Ideas are reasonably clear, though they may not be detailed,
personalized, or expanded enough to show in-depth
understanding or a strong sense of purpose.
* Support is attempted, but doesn't go far enough yet in
fleshing out the main point or storyline.
* Details often blend the original with the predictable--
*reader can guess--not enough new ideas provided

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

As yet, the paper has no clear sense of purpose or central theme. To extract meaning from the text, the reader must make inferences based on sketchy details. The writing reflects more than one of these problems:

* The writer is still in search of a topic, or has not begun to
define the topic in a meaningful, personal way.
* Information is very limited or unclear.
* The text may be repetitious, or may read like a collection of
disconnected, random thoughts.
* Everything seems as important as everything else; the reader
has a hard time sifting out what's critical.

 

Organization

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

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

The organization enhances and showcases the central idea or storyline. The order, structure or presentation of information is compelling and moves the reader through the text.

* 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}

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

The organizational structure is strong enough to move the reader through the text without undue confusion.

* 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

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

The writing lacks a clear sense of direction. Ideas, details or events seem strung together in a loose or random fashion--or else there is no identifiable internal structure. The writing reflects more than one of these problems:

* 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.

Voice

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

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

The writer speaks directly to the reader in a way that is individualistic, expressive and engaging. Clearly, the writer is involved in the text, is sensitive to the needs of an audience, and is writing to be read.

* 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

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

The writer seems sincere, but not fully engaged or involved. The result is pleasant or even personable, but not compelling.

* 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.

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

The writer seems indifferent, uninvolved or distanced from the topic and/or the audience. As a result, the writing is lifeless or mechanical; depending on the topic, it may be overly technical or jargonistic. The paper reflects more than one of the following problems:

* 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