1. WRITING Oregon Revised Scoring Guide Training
Fall, Ken Hermens, Oregon Department of Education

2. Agenda Transition Timeline Background: History of the Revision
Why was there a revision?
What was the revision process?
How was the Scoring Guide “tested”?
Legacy and Revised Scoring Guides
What has remained the same?
What are the key differences?
Training on the Revised Scoring Guide
What place does the Revised Scoring Guide have in the regular classroom?

3. Why the revision?
Adoption of the Common Core State Standards in October of 2010; implementation in
Shift in standards dictated an alignment review of assessment tools used to measure instructional standards
Smarter Balanced ELA Assessments represent a new approach to writing assessment with a new vocabulary
Writing Scoring Guide retained as tool for Essential Skills Assessment

4. What was the revision process?
A panel of educators met for two days in May of 2014
The panel included teachers, TOSAs, ESD representatives, and writing scoring directors
Review materials included Common Core Standards for Writing,
Education Northwest
Rubrics, Smarter
Balanced Rubrics

5. What was the revision process?
Panelists identified key language and skills in the CCSS, observing how these were integrated into the EdNW and SBAC rubrics
Panelists composed a list of recommendations specifying changes to the guide that would not affect rigor
A contractor worked during
the summer and fall of 2014
to incorporate the
recommendations

6. What was the revision process?
Draft versions of the contractor’s work were distributed to the panelists for feedback and piloting in fall and winter,
After additional edits were made to address feedback from the pilot, draft versions of the scoring guide were posted for statewide review and use in spring, 2015

7. What has remained the same?
Remains the sole instrument approved by the State Board for scoring Essential Skills writing samples
6 + 1 Analytic Trait Scoring Guide
Four “counting” traits remain the same
Still a 6-point rubric
A score of “4” still
“meets the standard”

8. What has remained the same?
Expectations for the level of achievement to score a “4” or above remains the same
Papers that scored a “4” using the Official Scoring Guide should still earn a “4” using the Revised Scoring Guide.
Papers scored previous to using the Official Scoring Guide do NOT need to be re-scored using the revised scoring guide, even after the Official Scoring Guide is retired for
Writing based on source material is not required but is desirable to make students college and career ready.

9. What has remained the same?
Work Samples are one of three primary ways students can demonstrate proficiency in Writing for Essential Skills
Students produce two passing samples; one must be either expository or persuasive (Explanatory or Argumentative)
Minimum score of 4 in Ideas, Organization, Sentence Fluency, Conventions
Revision is an option

10. What is slightly different?
Oregon Modes align with Common Core Text Types & Purposes
Persuasive Opinion /Argumentative
Expository Informative/Explanatory
Narrative Narratives, real or imagined

11. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Two separate but correlated rubrics; one for Explanatory/Argumentative Writing and one for Narrative Writing
Of the “counting” traits, shifts in language occur primarily in the traits of Ideas and Content and Organization
The changes are primarily seen in the “higher” score points
Trait 7: “Citing Sources” has become “Use of Sources”

12. Six (plus one) Writing Traits:
* Ideas and Content
* Organization
* Sentence Fluency
* Conventions
Voice
Word Choice
Use of Sources

13. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Ideas and Content
Insertion of the word “claims” (“Main ideas and claims are particularly clear…”
Expectation in argumentative writing that counterclaims will be acknowledged/addressed (but this is just one bullet)
More verbiage surrounding the use of details beyond relevance: “…anticipate major knowledge, concerns, values, and possible biases of intended audience” and “…using facts, quotations, or other information/evidence…”
Use of resources addressed more extensively

14. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Organization
Specific references to “claims or arguments”; use of the term “perfunctory.”
Conclusion “supports the argument, claims, information or explanation presented; follows a logical progression in wrapping up the topic.”
Details “fit where placed to support the arguments, information, or explanations used.”
“Connections to source materials, where used, are integrated into the writing.”

15. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Sentence Fluency
At the high school level, Sentence Fluency is not explicitly addressed in the Common Core.
In the Smarter Balanced rubric, reference is made to “syntactic control is strong.” This phrase is used in the draft guide at the “6” level.

16. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Conventions
No changes were made
Grade level expectations for Conventions are explicitly stated in the Common Core

17. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Voice
In the bold: “…an objective tone and level of formality consistent with norms in the discipline.”
Same reference to objective tone and level of formality is repeated in bullets with reference to appropriateness to audience, purpose, and topic.

18. How has the Scoring Guide changed?
Word Choice
Domain-specific vocabulary is referenced at each score point.
Academic language is used accurately to convey information or make claims/counterclaims, arguments or explanations.
At the 5 and 6 levels, additional language specifies that language “is used accurately to convey information and clarify relationships among information, claims/counterclaims, reasons and evidence.”

19. Sample “4” Paper: Old vs. New
Opinion paper: A Field Trip to OMSI
Read the paper together
The paper receives scores of “4” in each of the traits under both the old Official Writing Scoring Guide and the Revised Writing Scoring Guide.
The changes in the commentary are minimal given that this paper does not go above the “4” level in any given trait.
Most of the changes relate to slight changes in vocabulary; the same concepts are being examined but using slightly different language.
There is no requirement for using outside resources; ignore resources bullets
Language relating to acknowledging counterclaims begins at the “5” level.

20. Ideas and Content:
Old commentary: “Writing is clear and focused…reader can easily understand the main ideas…Supporting details are relevant”
Revised commentary: “Writing purpose is clear and ideas focused…reader can easily understand the main ideas and reasoning…Supporting details are relevant”

21. Ideas and Content: Score of 4
Remember:
There is no requirement that sources be used but, if used, there are bullets that apply to them.
For Argumentative writing, there is a bullet starting at the “4” level that counterarguments or counterclaims be acknowledged/addressed; raters should keep in mind that this is just one bullet.

22. Organization:
Old commentary: “…clear sequencing and paragraph breaks…clear beginning…conclusion is developed…easy to follow with details that fit where placed…”
Revised commentary: “Sequencing and paragraph breaks are clear and contribute to the logic and sense of the piece…beginning is recognizable…conclusion supports the argument and claims presented and follows a logical progression…easy to follow details that fit where placed.”

23. Sentence Fluency:
No changes

24. Conventions:
No changes

25. Voice:
Old commentary: “The writer seems committed to the topic, and there is a sense of ‘writing to be read’…maintains an appropriate distance from the reader…”
Revised commentary: “The writer seems committed to the topic, and there is a sense of ‘writing to be read’…an appropriate level of style and tone that is generally consistent with topic and purpose.”

26. Word Choice:
Old commentary: “Words effectively convey the intended message….functional and generally appropriate…do not energize the writing…”
Revised commentary: “Words effectively convey the intended message…words are functional and appropriate to audience and purpose…”

27. Citing Sources
Is there evidence multiple sources were consulted to support the arguments?
Are there attributions present to acknowledge the source material?
How effectively was source material integrated into the paper?
Was the student successful at avoiding plagiarism by paraphrasing or using quotation marks?

28. Resources: ODE website: www.ode.state.or.us Scoring Guides:
Official Writing Scoring Guide
Student language versions of Writing Scoring Guide
Writing Scoring Guides in English and Spanish:
Scored student papers with commentaries and other related resources: