🎯 : DWSBA #3 : Informative Writing

  • Due No Due Date
  • Points 0

Using textual evidence from two of the multiple sources provided, write a 2-3 paragraph expository essay answering the following prompt:

What caused the black death and how did it affect society in Europe?

Guidelines:

  • You will have 90 minutes to read, plan, and write your response. (More time will be provided if you don't finish.)
  • Write 2-3 well-organized paragraphs that directly respond to the question.
  • Use evidence from the sources provided and be sure to cite them.
  • Use scratch paper to take notes and outline your response.

Sources:

Play media comment.

Download "The Black Death" by Martha Deeringer

Play media comment.

Download "Effects of the Black Death" by Molly Edmonds

Download "Spread of the Bubonic Plague" by Encyclopaedia Britannica

0

Rubric

6th Grade ELA Informational Rubric (1) (2)
6th Grade ELA Informational Rubric (1) (2)
Criteria Ratings Pts
Informative: Statement of Purpose/Focus

The response is consistently and purposely focused. Controlling idea is clearly stated and strongly maintained, as well as introduced and communicated clearly within the purpose, audience, and task.

threshold: 3.0 pts
Edit criterion description
4 pts Exceeds Expectations: The response is consistently and purposely focused. Controlling idea is clearly stated and strongly maintained, as well as introduced and communicated clearly within the purpose, audience, and task.
3 pts Meets Expectations: The response is adequately sustained and generally focused. Focus is clear and for the most part maintained, though some loosely related material may be present. Some context for the controlling idea is adequate within the purpose, audience, and task.
2 pts Approaching: The response is somewhat sustained and may have a minor drift in focus. The focus may be insufficiently sustained or the controlling idea may be unclear and somewhat unfocused.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: The response may be related to the topic but may provide little or no focus because it is very brief and/or has a major drift. The focus may be confusing or ambiguous.
0 pts Unscorable
pts
4 pts
--
Additional Comments
Organization

The response has an evident organizational structure and a sense of completeness, though there may be minor flaws and some ideas may be loosely connected. The response includes adequate use of transitional strategies with some variety; adequate progression of ideas; adequate introduction and conclusion; and adequate, if slightly inconsistent, connection among ideas

threshold: 3.0 pts
Edit criterion description
4 pts Exceeds Expectations: The response has a clear and effective organizational structure creating unity and completeness. This includes an effective and consistent use of transitions; a logical progression of ideas; an effective introduction and conclusion for audience and purpose; and strong connections among ideas with some syntactic variety.
3 pts Meets Expectations: The response has an evident organizational structure and a sense of completeness, though there may be minor flaws and some ideas may be loosely connected. The response includes adequate use of transitional strategies with some variety; adequate progression of ideas; adequate introduction and conclusion; and adequate, if slightly inconsistent, connection among ideas.
2 pts Approaching: The response has an inconsistent organizational structure. Evident flaws may include inconsistent use of transitional strategies and little variety; uneven progression of ideas; conclusion and introduction, if present, are weak; and there is a weak connection among ideas.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: The response has little or no discernible organizational structure. Few or no transitional strategies are evident and frequent extraneous ideas may intrude.
0 pts Unscorable
pts
4 pts
--
Additional Comments
Evidence

The response provides adequate evidence for the writer's claim that includes use of sources, facts, and details. Some of the evidence from sources is integrated, though citations may be general or imprecise.

threshold: 3.0 pts
Edit criterion description
4 pts Exceeds Expectations: The response provides thorough and convincing evidence for the writer's claim that includes the effective use of sources, facts, and details. The response achieves substantial depth that is specific and relevant through use of evidence from sources that is cited, smoothly integrated, comprehensive, and concrete.
3 pts Meets Expectations: The response provides adequate evidence for the writer's claim that includes use of sources, facts, and details. Some of the evidence from sources is integrated, though citations may be general or imprecise.
2 pts Approaching: The response provides uneven, cursory evidence for the writer's claim that includes partial or uneven use of sources, facts, and details. The evidence is weakly integrated, and citations, if present, are uneven.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: The response provides minimal evidence for the writer's claim and includes little or no use of sources, facts, and details. The use of evidence from sources is minimal, absent, in error, or irrelevant.
0 pts Unscorable
pts
4 pts
--
Additional Comments
Elaboration

Response adequately uses some elaborative techniques. Provides some context and explanation for the reader, without drifting into embellishment. May rely on only one elaborative technique and briefly analyzes the evidence to further support the thesis.

threshold: 3.0 pts
Edit criterion description
4 pts Exceeds Expectations: Response effectively uses a variety of elaborative techniques. Provides necessary context and explanation for the reader, without drifting into embellishment. Analyzes the evidence to further support the thesis.
3 pts Meets Expectations: Response adequately uses some elaborative techniques. Provides some context and explanation for the reader, without drifting into embellishment. May rely on only one elaborative technique and briefly analyzes the evidence to further support the thesis.
2 pts Approaching: Response weakly or unevenly uses elaborative techniques. May drift into embellishment and over-relies on the writer's background knowledge. Lacking analysis of evidence, or, if present, is off-topic or incorrect.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: Use of elaborative techniques is absent, in error, or irrelevant. May lack elaboration completely, or what is present is off-topic or incorrect. No analysis of evidence provided.
0 pts Unscorable
pts
4 pts
--
Additional Comments
Precision of Language

The response adequately expresses ideas, employing a mix of precise with more general language. The use of domain-specific vocabulary is generally appropriate for the audience and purpose.

threshold: 3.0 pts
Edit criterion description
4 pts Exceeds Expectations: The response clearly and effectively expresses ideas using precise language. The use of academic and domain-specific vocabulary is clearly appropriate for the audience and purpose.
3 pts Meets Expectations: The response adequately expresses ideas, employing a mix of precise with more general language. The use of domain-specific vocabulary is generally appropriate for the audience and purpose.
2 pts Approaching: The response expresses ideas unevenly, using simplistic language. The use of domain-specific vocabulary may at times be inappropriate for the audience and purpose.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: The response's expression of ideas is vague, lacks clarity, or is confusing. There is limited use of language or domain-specific vocabulary, and/or there is little sense of audience and purpose.
0 pts Unscorable
pts
4 pts
--
Additional Comments
Conventions/Editing

The response demonstrates an adequate command of conventions. There are some errors in usage and sentence formation, but no systematic pattern of errors is displayed. The use of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling is adequate.

threshold: 2.0 pts
Edit criterion description
2 pts Meets Expectations: The response demonstrates an adequate command of conventions. There are some errors in usage and sentence formation, but no systematic pattern of errors is displayed. The use of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling is adequate.
1 pts Does Not Meet Expectations: The response demonstrates a partial command of conventions. Errors in usage may obscure meaning, and punctuation, capitalization, and spelling are inconsistent.
0 pts Lack of Conventions: Response demonstrates a lack of command of conventions.
pts
2 pts
--
Additional Comments
Total Points: 22 out of 22