Reporting Category: Row A
Thesis (0-1 points)

0 points
For any of the following:

There is no defensible thesis.
The intended thesis only restates the prompt.
The intended thesis provides a summary of the issue with no apparent or coherent claim.
There is a thesis, but it does not respond to the prompt.
Responses that do not earn this point:

Only restate the prompt.
Do not take a position, or the position is vague or must be inferred.
Equivocate or summarize others’ arguments but not the student’s (e.g., some people say it’s good, some people say it’s bad).
State an obvious fact rather than making a claim that requires a defense.
Examples that do not earn this point:
Restate the prompt

“Having started in Europe, urban rewilding is becoming popular in the United States too.”
Address the topic of the prompt but do not take a position

“Many experts favor urban rewilding, while others worry about the safety and health issues that might arise.”
Address the topic of the prompt but state an obvious fact as a claim

“Urban rewilding will allow certain portions of some cities to regain the wildlife that once lived in the area.”
1 point
Responds to the prompt with a thesis that presents a defensible position.

Responses that earn this point:

Respond to the prompt by developing a position on the extent to which rewilding initiatives are worthwhile for urban communities to pursue, rather than restating or rephrasing the prompt. Clearly take a position rather than just stating there are pros/cons.
Examples that earn this point:
Present a defensible position that responds to the prompt

“Urban rewilding will cause serious problems in many cities.”
“Building new spaces for people in cities to interact with nature is an audacious project that will take careful weighing of the pros and cons. Ultimately, this is an idea worth pursuing.”
“The next step in the evolution of cities is to allow residents opportunities to interact with wildlife in their daily lives. This transformation is crucial to keep our cities livable.”
Additional Notes:

The thesis may be more than one sentence, provided the sentences are in close proximity.
The thesis may be anywhere within the response.
For a thesis to be defensible, the sources must include at least minimal evidence that could be used to support that thesis; however, the student need not cite that evidence to earn the thesis point.
The thesis may establish a line of reasoning that structures the essay, but it needn’t do so to earn the thesis point.
A thesis that meets the criteria can be awarded the point whether or not the rest of the response successfully supports that line of reasoning.

---------------------

Reporting Category: Row B
Evidence AND Commentary (0–4 points)

0 points
Simply restates thesis (if present), repeats provided information, or references fewer than two of the provided sources.

Typical responses that earn 0 points:

Are incoherent or do not address the prompt.
May be just opinion with no textual references or references that are irrelevant.
1 point
EVIDENCE:
Provides evidence from or references at least two of the provided sources.

AND

COMMENTARY:
Summarizes the evidence but does not explain how the evidence supports the student’s argument.

Typical responses that earn 1 point:

Tend to focus on summary or description of sources rather than specific details.
2 points
EVIDENCE:
Provides evidence from or references at least three of the provided sources.

AND

COMMENTARY:
Explains how some of the evidence relates to the student’s argument, but no line of reasoning is established, or the line of reasoning is faulty.

Decision Rules and Scoring Notes
Typical responses that earn 2 points:

Consist of a mix of specific evidence and broad generalities.
May contain some simplistic, inaccurate, or repetitive explanations that don’t strengthen the argument.
May make one point well but either do not make multiple supporting claims or do not adequately support more than one claim.
Do not explain the connections or progression between the student’s claims, so a line of reasoning is not clearly established.
3 points
EVIDENCE:
Provides specific evidence from at least three of the provided sources to support all claims in a line of reasoning.

AND

COMMENTARY:
Explains how some of the evidence supports a line of reasoning.

Typical responses that earn 3 points:

Uniformly offer evidence to support claims.
Focus on the importance of specific words and details from the sources to build an argument.
Organize an argument as a line of reasoning composed of multiple supporting claims.
Commentary may fail to integrate some evidence or fail to support a key claim.
4 points
EVIDENCE:
Provides specific evidence from at least three of the provided sources to support all claims in a line of reasoning.

AND

COMMENTARY:
Consistently explains how the evidence supports a line of reasoning.

Typical responses that earn 4 points:

Uniformly offer evidence to support claims.
Focus on the importance of specific words and details from the sources to build an argument.
Organize and support an argument as a line of reasoning composed of multiple supporting claims, with adequate evidence that is clearly explained.
Additional Notes:

Writing that suffers from grammatical and/or mechanical errors that interfere with communication cannot earn the fourth point in this row.

------------------------

Reporting Category: Row C
Sophistication (0–1 points)

0 points
Does not meet the criteria for one point.

Responses that do not earn this point:

Attempt to contextualize their argument, but such attempts consist predominantly of sweeping generalizations (“In a world where…” OR “Since the beginning of time…”).
Only hint at or suggest other arguments (“While some may argue that…” OR “Some people say…”).
Use complicated or complex sentences or language that is ineffective because it does not enhance the argument.
1 point
Demonstrates sophistication of thought and/or a complex understanding of the rhetorical situation.

Scoring Criteria
Responses that earn this point may demonstrate sophistication of thought and/or a complex understanding of the rhetorical situation by doing any of the following:

Crafting a nuanced argument by consistently identifying and exploring complexities or tensions across the sources.
Articulating the implications or limitations of an argument (either the student’s argument or arguments conveyed in the sources) by situating it within a broader context.
Making effective rhetorical choices that consistently strengthen the force and impact of the student’s argument throughout the response.
Employing a style that is consistently vivid and persuasive.
Additional Notes:

This point should be awarded only if the sophistication of thought or complex understanding is part of the student’s argument, not merely a phrase or reference.