Mastering STAAR
Reading-Writing Short Answer
Short Answer Question
• Do you think Jaime Teevan in “2009 Young
Innovators…” and Barry Bingham in “Digital
Dad vs. the Dinosaurs…” have something in
common? Explain and give evidence from the
articles.
• Jaime Teevan invents Bing for Microsoft; Barry
Bingham predicts the end of print newspapers
and the birth of electronic media.
Insufficient Answer
Score: 0
• Teevan and Bingham both invented a new
kind of technology. Teevan made a search
engine called Research which makes the user’s
past searches to determine which items are
more relevant to them. Bingham made an
electronic newspaper that would arrive, via
cable, satellite or telephone lines.
Why the score is “0.”
• This student did not read the articles well to
have a command of the facts.
• The frame is nonexistent in that the thesis and
conclusion are not done well at all.
• There are no quotes to supply evidence.
• Vocabulary is not academic.
• There is no depth of details; writer stays stuck
in generalities.
Partially Sufficient
Score: 1
• Both stories are very similar in many ways
such as they both are searching, and or found
ways to advance technology, but are still
searching for more ways to help everyone for
their own personal uses. The college student,
Jaime, has already helped others find what
they have search for but she knows not the
same results work for everybody. Therefore,
she continues to search for more advanced
ways to help.
Why the score is “1.”
• The writer at least knows the articles are about
technology, but the thesis rambles with three
conjunctions.
• There is no mention of the Bing search engine or
electronic newspapers; both major topics in
these articles.
• There are no quotes given as evidence.
• Mentions only one article and not the other.
• No conclusion leaves frame incomplete.
Sufficient
Score: 2
• They both are trying to evolve and make their companies
better. Jaime developed a “new search engine” for Microsoft
called Bing. Barry’s dad knew that everything would change
and “most of what we will read will be transmitted into our
home or offices electronically.”
Why the score is “2.”
• The writer has a good thesis.
• Quotes support thesis and both articles are
addressed.
• There is no conclusion; therefore, frame is
incomplete.
• Vocabulary is not academic; no sentence
variety is evident in response.
Sufficient
Score: 2
• Both demonstrate commitment on what they do. Jaime
“single-handedly created” Bing. Barry also showed this
attribute because his “grandfather bought the courier during
World War I, and ran the newspaper from 1971 to 1986.”
Why the score is “2.”
• The writer has a good thesis.
• Quotes support thesis and both articles are
addressed.
• There is no conclusion; therefore, frame is
incomplete.
• Vocabulary is not very academic; no sentence
variety is evident in response.
Exemplary
Score: 3
• Both share a passion for modernizing technology so more people can
access information quicker. When Emily writes about Barry, she explains,
"information was his passion, and his goal was to offer as much of it to as
many people as possible.” Jaime Teevan “studies the ways people
navigate the flood of information available in the digital age and builds
tools to help them handle it.” Both writers worked for information
distribution systems, and they both were constantly exploring new
modern ways to distribute information.
Why the score is “3.”
• The writer has a good thesis and a good
conclusion; thus a complete frame.
• Quotes support thesis and both articles are
addressed.
• Rich Academic Vocabulary ( modernizing,
access, distribution systems) to support
thesis and conclusion.
• Good use of compound and complex
sentences to add variety & style to piece.
Exemplary
Score: 3
• Jaime Teevan and Barry Bingham were both
bright people that had technology in common.
Teevan “came up with some ideas for judging
link quality… and wrote the code to
implement the changes.” [In a similar
manner]Bingham believed in being modern so
“he began replacing typewriters with word
processors.” They both made technological
changes that have contributed to the
advancement of technology.
Why the score is “3.”
• The writer has a good thesis and a good
conclusion; thus a complete frame.
• Quotes support thesis and both articles are
addressed.
• Rich Academic Vocabulary ( technology, link
quality, implement, word processors ) to
support thesis and conclusion.
• Good use of active verbs (judging, implement,
replacing, contributed) and phrasing ( that had
technology, that have contributed) to add
variety and style.