"One of the best known analytic rubrics used for writing assessment in the field of English as a second language (ESL) was developed by Hughey et al. (1983, p. 140). This rubric has five categories—content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. Drawing heavily upon characteristics of the Hughey et al. scale, Tedick and Klee developed an analytic rubric for use in scoring essays written for an immersion quarter for undergraduates studying Spanish (Klee, Tedick, & Cohen, 1995, p. 35)."

Analytic Writing Scale for the Spanish Foreign Language Immersion Program
University of Minnesota, Revised July, 1996

CONTENT — 30 Points Possible
Score Range Criteria Comments
30 - 27 Excellent to Very Good — addresses all aspects of the prompt, provides good support for and development of all ideas with range of detail, substantive
  
26 - 22 Good to Average — prompt adequately addressed, ideas not fully developed or supported with detail, though main ideas are clear, less substance  
21 - 17 Fair — prompt may not be fully addressed (writer may appear to skirt aspects of prompt, ideas not supported well, main ideas lack detailed development, little substance  
16 - 13 Poor — doesn’t adequately address prompt, little to no support or development of ideas, non-substantive  
ORGANIZATION — 20 Points Possible
Score Range Criteria Comments
  20 - 18 Excellent to Very Good — well-framed and organized (with clear introduction, conclusion), coherent , succinct, cohesive (excellent use of connective words)  
  17 - 14 Good to Average — adequate, but loose organization with introduction and conclusion (though they may be limited or one of the two may be missing), somewhat coherent, more wordy rather than succinct, somewhat cohesive (good use of connective words)  
  13 - 10 Fair — lacks good organization (no evidence of introduction, conclusion), ideas may be disconnected, confused, lacks coherence, wordy and repetitive , lacks consistent use of cohesive elements  
  9 - 7 Poor — confusing, disconnected organization, lacks coherence, so much so that writing is difficult to follow, lacks cohesion  
LANGUAGE USE/GRAMMAR/MORPHOLOGY — 25 Points Possible
Score Range Criteria Comments
  25 - 22 Excellent to Very Good — great variety of grammatical forms (e.g., range of indicative verb forms; use of subjunctive) , complex sentence structure (e.g., compound sentences, embedded clauses), evidence of "Spanish-like" construction, mastery of agreement (subj/verb; number/gender), very few errors (if any) overall with none that obscure meaning  
  21 - 18 Good to Average — some variety of grammatical forms (e.g., attempts, though not always accurate, of range of verb forms, use of subjunctive), attempts, though not always accurate, at complex sentence structure (e.g., compound sentences, embedded clauses), little evidence of "Spanish-like" construction, though without clear translations from English, occasional errors with agreement, some errors (minor) that don’t obscure meaning  
  17 - 11 Fair — less variety of grammatical forms (e.g., little range of verb forms; inaccurate, if any, attempts at subjunctive), simplistic sentence structure, evidence of "English-like" construction (e.g., some direct translation of phrases), consistent errors (e.g., with agreement), but few of which may obscure meaning  
  10 - 5 Poor — very little variety of grammatical forms, simplistic sentence structure that contains consistent errors, especially with basic aspects such as agreement, evidence of translation from English, frequent and consistent errors that may obscure meaning  
VOCABULARY/WORD USAGE — 20 Points Possible
Score Range Criteria Comments
  20 - 18 Excellent to Very Good — sophisticated, academic range , extensive variety of words , effective and appropriate word/idiom choice and usage, appropriate register  
  17 - 14 Good to Average — good, but not extensive (less academic), range or variety, occasional errors of word/idiom choice or usage (some evidence of invention of "false" cognates), but very few or none that obscure meaning, appropriate register  
  13 - 10 Fair — limited and "non-academic" range (frequent repetition of words) , more consistent errors with word/idiom choice or usage (frequent evidence of translation; invention of "false" cognates) that may (though seldom) obscure meaning, some evidence of inappropriate register
  
  9 - 7 Poor — very limited range of words, consistent and frequent errors with word/idiom choice or usage (ample evidence of translation), meaning frequently obscured, evidence of inappropriate register  
MECHANICS — 5 Points Possible
Score Range Criteria Comments
  5 Excellent to Very Good — demonstrates mastery of conventions , few errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents  
  4 Good to Average — occasional errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents, but meaning is not obscured  
  3 Fair — frequent errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents that at times confuses or obscures meaning  
  2 Poor — no mastery of conventions, dominated by errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and use of accents  
Total Score_____


COMMENTS:

 

 

Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA) • 140 University International Center • 331 - 17th Ave SE • Minneapolis, MN 55414