NYS ELA REGENTS
EXAMINATION
(COMMON CORE)
SCORING TRAINING
Denise Pawlewicz
Phyllis Litzenberger
Six Shifts in ELA Assessments
Shift 1:
Pre-K-5, Balancing Informational &
Literary Texts
Passages will be authentic, and will be balanced
between informational and literary texts.
Shift 2:
6-12, Knowledge in the Disciplines
Assessments will contain knowledge-based questions about
the informational text; students will not need outside
knowledge to respond.
Shift 3:
Staircase of Complexity
Passage selection will be based on text complexity that is
appropriate to grade level per Common Core.
Shift 4:
Text-based Answers
Shift 5:
Writing from Sources
Questions will require students to marshal evidence from
the text, including from paired passages.
Shift 6:
Academic Vocabulary
Students will be tested directly on the meaning of pivotal,
common terms, the definition of which can be discerned
from the text. Academic vocabulary will also be tested
indirectly through general comprehension of the text.
PART 1 – READING
COMPREHENSION
SCORER TRAINING
Part 1: Reading Comprehension
Overview
• Suggested completion time is 1 hour
• Students will . . .
• close read three texts—one from literature, one
poem, and one informational text—totaling
approximately 2,600 words
• answer 24 multiple-choice questions
Part 1: Reading Comprehension
Multiple Choice Analysis
PART 2 – WRITING
FROM SOURCES:
ARGUMENT
SCORER TRAINING
Training Protocol
1. Analyze Task
2. Analyze Rubric
3. Read Texts
4. Read Anchor Papers Against the Rubric
5. Discuss the Annotations for Each Anchor Paper
6. Practice Scoring Sample Papers Using the
Rubric
7. Discuss the Annotations for Each Practice Paper
Materials for Training
Part 2 Teacher’s Packet includes:
•
•
•
•
•
Task
Exam Texts
Rubric
Anchor Set Papers with Annotations
Practice Set Papers with Annotations
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Overview
• Suggested completion time is 90 minutes
• Student will . . .
• close read four informational texts, which may
include graphics, totaling approximately 2,600
words
• write a source-based argument
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Task Analysis
• Read the task for . . .
• Student tasks
• Topic
• Criteria
• Guidelines
• Texts
Please refer to page 2 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Text Analysis
• Read the four texts
Text 1
• A Word About Social Networking
closely for . . .
• evidence to support a
for or against
argument based on
the given topic
Please refer to pages 3-9 of
your Teacher’s Packet.
Text 2
Text 3
Text 4
• Impact of Social Media on
Adolescent Behavioral Health in
California
• The Flight from Conversation
• Solitude and Leadership
Holistic Scoring Overview
• evaluate the paper based on its overall quality as
specified by the rubric criteria
• consider the paper as a total work where the whole is
greater than the sum of its parts
• do not consider one criteria contributing more weight
to the score than another
• read the entire response before determining a score,
and then promptly assign a score
• read supportively, looking for and rewarding those
things done well in the paper
• do not focus on identification of weakness or errors in
the paper but rather focus on overall quality
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Rubric Analysis
• Rate argument
•
•
•
•
essays holistically
using the six-point
scale and the
following criteria:
Content and Analysis
Command of
Evidence
Coherence,
Organization, and
Style
Control of
Conventions
Please refer to page 10 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Condition Codes
• An essay that addresses fewer texts than required by
the task can be scored no higher than a 3.
• An essay that is a personal response and makes little or
no reference to the task or texts can be scored no higher
than a 1.
• An essay that is totally copied from the task and/or texts
with no original student writing must be scored a 0.
• An essay that is totally unrelated to the task, illegible,
incoherent, blank, or unrecognizable as English must
be scored as a 0.
Part 2: Content and Analysis: Rubric Levels
Criteria
Content and
Analysis:
the extent to
which the essay
conveys complex
ideas and
information
clearly and
accurately in
order to support
claims in an
analysis of the
texts
6
Essays at
this Level:
5
Essays at this
Level:
- introduce a
precise and
insightful
claim, as
directed by the
task
- introduce a
precise and
thoughtful
claim, as
directed by the
task
- demonstrate
in-depth and
insightful
analysis of the
texts, as
necessary to
support the
claim and to
distinguish
the claim from
alternate or
opposing
claims
- demonstrate
thorough
analysis of the
texts, as
necessary to
support the
claim and to
distinguish the
claim from
alternate or
opposing claims
4
Essays at this
Level:
- introduce a
precise claim,
as directed by the
task
- demonstrate
appropriate and
accurate
analysis of the
texts, as
necessary to
support the
claim and to
distinguish the
claim from
alternate or
opposing claims
3
Essays at this
Level:
- introduce a
reasonable
claim, as
directed by the
task
- demonstrate
some analysis
of the texts, but
insufficiently
distinguish the
claim from
alternate or
opposing claims
2
Essays at this
Level:
1
Essays at this
Level:
- introduce a
claim
- do not
introduce a
claim
- demonstrate
confused or
unclear analysis
of the texts,
failing to
distinguish the
claim from
alternate or
opposing claims
- do not
demonstrate
analysis of the
texts
Part 2: Command of Evidence: Rubric Levels
Criteria
Command of
Evidence:
the extent to which
the essay presents
evidence from the
provided texts to
support analysis
6
Essays at this
Level:
5
Essays at this
Level:
4
Essays at this
Level:
3
Essays at
this Level:
2
Essays at this
Level:
1
Essays at this
Level:
- present ideas
fully and
thoughtfully,
making highly
effective use of
a wide range of
specific and
relevant
evidence to
support analysis
- present ideas
clearly and
accurately,
making effective
use of specific
and relevant
evidence to
support analysis
- present ideas
sufficiently,
making
adequate use of
specific and
relevant
evidence to
support analysis
- present ideas
briefly, making
use of some
specific and
relevant
evidence to
support
analysis
- present ideas
inconsistently
and/or
inaccurately, in
an attempt to
support analysis,
making use of
some evidence
that may be
irrelevant
- present little or
no evidence
from the texts
- demonstrate
proper citation
of sources to
avoid plagiarism
when dealing
with direct
quotes and
paraphrased
material
- demonstrate
inconsistent
citation of
sources to
avoid
plagiarism
when dealing
with direct
quotes and
paraphrased
material
- demonstrate
little use of
citations to avoid
plagiarism when
dealing with direct
quotes and
paraphrased
material
- do not make
use of citations
- demonstrate
proper citation
of sources to
avoid plagiarism
when dealing
with direct
quotes and
paraphrased
material
- demonstrate
proper citation
of sources to
avoid plagiarism
when dealing
with direct
quotes and
paraphrased
material
Part 2: Coherence, Organization, and Style: Rubric Levels
Criteria
Coherence,
Organization, and
Style:
the extent to which
the essay logically
organizes complex
ideas, concepts,
and information
using formal style
and precise
language
6
Essays at this
Level:
5
Essays at this
Level:
4
Essays at this
Level:
3
Essays at this
Level:
2
Essays at this
Level:
1
Essays at this
Level:
- exhibit skillful
organization of
ideas and
information to
create a
cohesive and
coherent essay
- exhibit logical
organization of
ideas and
information to
create a
cohesive and
coherent essay
- exhibit
acceptable
organization of
ideas and
information to
create a
coherent essay
- exhibit some
organization of
ideas and
information to
create a mostly
coherent essay
- exhibit
inconsistent
organization of
ideas and
information,
failing to create
a coherent
essay
- exhibit little
organization of
ideas and
information
- establish and
maintain a
formal style,
using
sophisticated
language and
structure
- establish and
maintain a
formal style,
using fluent
and precise
language and
sound
structure
- establish and
maintain a
formal style,
using precise
and
appropriate
language and
structure
- establish but
fail to maintain
a formal style,
using primarily
basic language
and structure
- lack a formal
style, using
some language
that is
inappropriate
or imprecise
- use language
that is
predominantly
incoherent,
inappropriate,
or copied
directly from
the task or
texts
- are minimal,
making
assessment
unreliable
Part 2: Control of Conventions: Rubric Levels
Criteria
Control of
Conventions:
the extent to
which the essay
demonstrates
command of
conventions
of standard
English
grammar, usage,
capitalization,
punctuation, and
spelling
6
Essays at
this Level:
- demonstrate
control of
conventions
with essentially
no errors,
even with
sophisticated
language
5
Essays at
this Level:
4
Essays at this
Level:
3
Essays at this
Level:
- demonstrate
control of
conventions,
exhibiting
occasional
errors only
when using
sophisticated
language
- demonstrate
partial control,
exhibiting
occasional
errors that do
not hinder
comprehension
- demonstrate
emerging control,
exhibiting
occasional
errors that
hinder
comprehension
2
Essays at this
Level:
- demonstrate a
lack of control,
exhibiting
frequent errors
that make
comprehension
difficult
1
Essays at this
Level:
- are minimal,
making
assessment of
conventions
unreliable
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Anchor and Practice Papers
• Review each Anchor Paper,
one at a time along with its
accompanying annotation
• When review of the Anchor
Papers is completed, score
each of the 5 Practice
Papers
• Compare your scores with
the Practice Paper
annotations
• Anchor papers are examples of
student essays at particular
score points.
• Practice papers are used to
confirm that scorers understand
the rubric and scoring rationale.
• Annotations are commentaries
that explain the holistically
assigned score point.
PART 2:
ANCHOR PAPERS
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 6 – A
Please refer to pages 11-13 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 6 – A
Annotation
Please refer to page 14 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 6 – B
Please refer to pages 15-17 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 6 – B
Annotation
Please refer to page 18 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – A
Please refer to pages 19-20 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – A
Annotation
Please refer to page 22 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – B
Please refer to pages 23-25 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – B
Annotation
Please refer to page 26 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – C
Please refer to pages 27-28 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 5 – C
Annotation
Please refer to page 29 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – A
Please refer to pages 30-31 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – A
Annotation
Please refer to page 32 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – B
Please refer to pages 33-34 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – B
Annotation
Please refer to page 35 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – C
Please refer to pages 36-37 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 4 – C
Annotation
Please refer to page 38 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – A
Please refer to pages 39-40 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – A
Annotation
Please refer to page 41 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – B
Please refer to page 42 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – B
Annotation
Please refer to page 43 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – C
Please refer to pages 44-45 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 3 – C
Annotation
Please refer to page 46 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – A
Please refer to page 47 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – A
Annotation
Please refer to page 48 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – B
Please refer to page 49 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – B
Annotation
Please refer to page 50 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – C
Please refer to pages 51-52 of your Teacher’s Packet
Anchor Paper – Part 2 – Level 2 – C
Annotation
Please refer to page 53 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
PART 2:
PRACTICE PAPERS
AND ANNOTATIONS
Part 2: Writing from Sources—Argument
Scoring Considerations
• Spend time analyzing the task criteria and
guidelines
• Spend time close reading texts and discussions of
the evidence for both sides of the argument
• Double score each argument
• Note the differences between a 5-4 and a 4-3 on the
rubric
• Reiterate holistic grading
• Reinforce what the state accepts as quality work is
different from what we might expect in our
classroom
PART 3 – TEXT
ANALYSIS: EXPOSITION
SCORER TRAINING
Training Protocol
1. Analyze Task
2. Analyze Rubric
3. Read Texts
4. Read Anchor Papers Against the Rubric
5. Discuss the Annotations for Each Anchor Paper
6. Practice Scoring Sample Papers Using the
Rubric
7. Discuss the Annotations for Each Practice Paper
Materials for Training
Part 3 Teacher’s Packet includes:
•
•
•
•
•
Task
Exam Texts
Rubric
Anchor Set Papers with Annotations
Practice Set Papers with Annotations
Part 3: Text Analysis—Exposition
Overview
• Suggested completion time is 30 minutes
• Student will . . .
• Close read a text, it may be literary or
information, totaling approximately 1,000
• Write a two- to three- paragraph response
Part 3: Text Analysis—Exposition
Task Analysis
• Read the task for . . .
• Student tasks
• Topic
• Criteria
• Guidelines
• Texts
• Note a response is not
an essay—it does not
require introduction or
conclusion paragraphs
Please refer to page 2 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Part 3: Text Analysis—Exposition
Text Analysis
• Read the text John F.
Kennedy Inaugural
Address independently
• As you read, note
possible central ideas
and writing strategies
Please refer to pages 3-6 of
your Teacher’s Packet.
Part 3: Text Analysis—Exposition
Rubric Analysis
• Rate responses
•
•
•
•
holistically using the fourpoint scale and the
following criteria:
Content and Analysis
Command of Evidence
Coherence,
Organization, and Style
Control of Conventions
• .
Please refer to page 7 of your
Teacher’s Packet.
Part 3- Rubric Condition Codes
• A response that is a personal response and makes little or
no reference to the task or text can be scored no higher
than a 1.
• A response that is totally copied from the text with no
original writing must me given a 0.
• A response that is totally unrelated to the task, illegible,
incoherent, blank, or unrecognizable as English must be
scored as a 0.
Part 3- Text Analysis: Exposition
Rubric Levels: Content and Analysis
Criteria
Content and Analysis:
the extent to which the
response conveys
complex ideas and
information clearly and
accurately in order to
respond to the task
and support an
analysis of the text
4
Responses at this
Level:
3
Responses at this
Level:
2
Responses at this
Level:
1
Responses at this
Level:
-introduce a wellreasoned central idea
and a writing strategy
that clearly establish
the criteria for analysis
-introduce a clear
central idea and a
writing strategy that
establish the criteria
for analysis
-introduce a central idea
and/or a writing strategy
-introduce a confused
or incomplete central
idea or writing strategy
and/or
-demonstrate a
thoughtful analysis of
the author’s use of the
writing strategy to
develop the central idea
-demonstrate an
appropriate analysis of
the author’s use of the
writing strategy to
develop the central idea
-demonstrate a
superficial analysis of
the author’s use of the
writing strategy to
develop the central idea
-demonstrate a minimal
analysis of the author’s
use of the writing
strategy to develop the
central idea
Part 3- Text Analysis: Exposition
Rubric Levels: Command of Evidence
Criteria
4
Responses at this
Level:
3
Responses at this
Level:
2
Responses at this
Level:
1
Responses at this
Level:
Command of
Evidence: the extend
to which the response
presents evidence
from the provided text
to support analysis
-present ideas clearly
and consistently,
making effective use of
specific and relevant
evidence to support
analysis
-present ideas
sufficiently, making
adequate use of
relevant evidence to
support analysis
-present ideas
inconsistently,
inadequately, and/or
inaccurately in an
attempt to support
analysis, making use of
some evidence that
may be irrelevant
-present little or no
evidence from the text
Part 3- Text Analysis: Exposition
Rubric Levels: Coherence, Organization, and Style
Criteria
Coherence,
Organization, and
Style: the extent to
which the response
logically organizes
complex ideas,
concepts, and
information using
formal style and
precise language
4
Responses at this
Level:
3
Responses at this
Level:
2
Responses at this
Level:
1
Responses at this
Level:
-exhibit logical
organization of ideas
and information to
create a cohesive and
coherent response
-exhibit acceptable
organization of ideas
and information to
create a coherent
response
-exhibit inconsistent
organization of ideas
and information, failing
to create a coherent
response
-exhibit little
organization of ideas
and information
-establish and
maintain a formal style,
using precise language
and sound structure
-establish and
maintain a formal style,
using appropriate
language and
structure
-lack a formal style,
using language that is
basic, inappropriate,
or imprecise
-use language that is
predominantly
incoherent,
inappropriate, or
copied directly from
the task or text
-are minimal, making
assessment unreliable
Part 3- Text Analysis: Exposition
Rubric Levels: Control of Conventions
Criteria
Control of
Conventions: the
extent to which the
response
demonstrates
command of
conventions of
standard English
grammar, usage,
capitalization,
punctuation, and
spelling
4
Responses at this
Level:
3
Responses at this
Level:
2
Responses at this
Level:
1
Responses at this
Level:
-demonstrate control of
the conventions with
infrequent errors
-demonstrate partial
control of conventions
with occasional errors
that do not hinder
comprehension
-demonstrate emerging
control of conventions
with some errors that
hinder comprehension
-demonstrate a lack of
control of conventions
with frequent errors
that make
comprehension
difficult
-are minimal, making
assessment of
conventions unreliable
Directions for Reviewing Anchor and
Practice Papers
• Review each Anchor Paper
one at a time along with its
accompanying annotation
• When review of the Anchor
Papers is completed, score
each of the 5 Practice Papers
• Compare your scores with the
Practice Paper Annotations
• Anchor papers are
examples of student
responses at particular
score points.
• Practice papers are used
to confirm that scorers
understand the rubric and
scoring rationale.
• Annotations are
commentaries that explain
the holistically assigned
score point.
PART 3:
ANCHOR PAPERS
Please refer to page 8 of your Teacher’s Packet
PART 3:
PRACTICE PAPERS
AND ANNOTATIONS
Weighting of Test Parts
• Each part has a
raw score, which
is converted into
a weighted score
credit using
weighting factors
• These weighting
factors are
based on
anticipated time
on task, content
coverage, and
psychometric
properties of the
test and given a
weighting factor.
Maximum Raw Weighting
Score Credits
Factor
Maximum
Weighted
Score
Credits
1
24
1
24
2
6
4
24
3
4
2
8
Test
Part
TOTAL
56