NYS Regents Examination in English Language Arts — Part 2 Rubric: Writing from Sources (Argument Essay)
The NY NYS Regents Examination in English Language Arts — Part 2 Rubric: Writing from Sources (Argument Essay) scored out of 6 points across 4 criteria, for argumentative, writing from sources writing at grades 9-12. Published by New York State Education Department (NYSED), Office of State Assessment.
3 pages, US Letter, black and white. Free, no account, no email. Includes every performance level and a blank scoring sheet.
How it is scored
- Content and Analysis6 pts · 6 levels
- Command of Evidence6 pts · 6 levels
- Coherence, Organization, and Style6 pts · 6 levels
- Control of Conventions6 pts · 6 levels
Score an essay against this rubric in the grader. Free account, 20 essays a month.
The full rubric
Content and Analysis · 6 points
6 points
Essays exhibit: sophisticated claim; insightful source and topic analysis; insightful evaluation of a counterclaim.
5 points
Essays exhibit: thorough claim; thorough source and topic analysis; thorough evaluation of a counterclaim.
4 points
Essays exhibit: specific claim; appropriate source and topic analysis; appropriate evaluation of a counterclaim.
3 points
Essays exhibit: surface-level claim; emerging source and topic analysis; insufficient evaluation of a counterclaim.
2 points
Essays exhibit: limited claim; unclear or confused source and topic analysis; confused or no counterclaim.
1 point
Essays exhibit: unrelated or no claim; no source and/or topic analysis.
Command of Evidence · 6 points
6 points
Essays exhibit: sophisticated support using a wide range of strategically chosen, relevant evidence; consistent avoidance of plagiarism with acceptable citation format(s).
5 points
Essays exhibit: thorough and accurate support using effective and relevant evidence; consistent avoidance of plagiarism with acceptable citation format(s).
4 points
Essays exhibit: sufficient and adequate support using relevant evidence; consistent avoidance of plagiarism with acceptable citation format(s).
3 points
Essays exhibit: basic support using relevant and/or generalized evidence; partial avoidance of plagiarism with emerging citation format(s).
2 points
Essays exhibit: insufficient support using limited, inaccurate, or irrelevant evidence; insufficient avoidance of plagiarism.
1 point
Essays exhibit: provides no evidence; no use of citations.
Coherence, Organization, and Style · 6 points
6 points
Essays exhibit: strategic focus on task; strategic organization of ideas; sophisticated language and sentence structure.
5 points
Essays exhibit: clear and appropriate focus on task; thoughtful organization of ideas; precise language and sentence structure.
4 points
Essays exhibit: acceptable focus on task; logical organization of ideas; appropriate language and sentence structure.
3 points
Essays exhibit: emerging focus on task; emerging organization of ideas; basic language and sentence structure.
2 points
Essays exhibit: lack appropriate focus on task, but suggest organization of ideas — or — suggest a focus on task, but lack organization of ideas; imprecise language.
1 point
Essays exhibit: little to no focus on task; little to no organization of ideas; incoherent language — or — minimal writing, making assessment unreliable.
Control of Conventions · 6 points
6 points
Essays exhibit: exceptional control; virtually no errors when using sophisticated language.
5 points
Essays exhibit: considerable control; errors that do not hinder comprehension, even when using sophisticated language.
4 points
Essays exhibit: partial control; errors that do not hinder comprehension.
3 points
Essays exhibit: emerging control; errors that hinder comprehension.
2 points
Essays exhibit: lack of control; errors that make comprehension difficult.
1 point
Essays exhibit: significant lack of control; errors that severely interfere with comprehension — or — minimal writing, making assessment unreliable.
This rubric applied to a real essay
Below is a sample essay scored against the rubric above, shown the way it looks inside the grader. The marks, the scores and every comment are the grader’s own output, not written by hand for this page. It scored 16 out of 24.
The essay is written for this page, at roughly a B grade so both the strengths and the weaknesses are worth seeing. It is not a real student’s work.
The prompt
Should high schools require a semester of personal finance to graduate? Write an argumentative essay. Support your claim with specific reasons and evidence, and address a counterclaim.
Every high school in this state requires a semester of health and a year of a foreign language, but a student can graduate without ever being taught what an interest rate is. That should change. High schools should require a semester of personal finance to graduate, because students are making financial decisions before they leave1, because the consequences of those decisions last decades, and because no other class is teaching it2.
The decisions are already happening. In my own graduating class, more than half of us will sign a student loan promissory note within eight months of walking across the stage3. That document commits an eighteen-year-old to a repayment schedule that will still be running when they are thirty. When our economics teacher gave us a survey last fall, twenty-two out of twenty-nine students could not explain the difference between subsidized and unsubsidized loans4, and eleven thought the interest on a student loan only started after graduation in every case. These are not obscure details. They are the terms of the largest contract most of us will have ever signed.
The consequences also compound in a way that other mistakes do not. A student who misunderstands a chemistry unit forgets it. A student who carries a credit card balance at twenty-four percent through their twenties pays for that misunderstanding for years.5
Your whole class, marked like this
Upload a class set against this same rubric, typed or handwritten. Every paper comes back with the marks, the criterion scores and the comments you just read. You change any score before it goes back to the student.
Grade your class against this rubricFree account, 20 essays a month.
How it scored, criterion by criterion
The essay opens with a specific, well-framed claim and develops it through three distinct reasons (decisions are already happening, consequences compound, families can't fill the gap). The analysis of the student-loan scenario is concrete and grounded. However, the counterclaim is acknowledged but barely evaluated — 'a semester is eighteen weeks' is asserted without explaining what that means for scheduling trade-offs, and the third body point ('families cannot always fill this gap themselves') is a single undeveloped sentence. The essay does not reach the 'thorough' level because the counterclaim rebuttal and the third supporting point are too thin to constitute thorough analysis.
The essay's strongest evidence is the classroom survey data in paragraph two, which is specific and relevant. Beyond that, the support becomes generalized or asserted without sourcing: the credit-card-at-24% example is a hypothetical, the 'more than half of us will sign a loan' claim is unattributed, and the family-gap paragraph offers no evidence at all. The rubric requires citation of sources for scores of 4 and above; no citations appear anywhere in the essay, which caps the score at 3.
The essay maintains clear, consistent focus on the prompt throughout and moves logically from claim to supporting reasons to counterclaim to conclusion. Sentence structure is varied and controlled — the chemistry/credit-card contrast is particularly sharp — and word choice is precise and purposeful. The essay falls just short of 'strategic' because the organizational seams between the third body point and the counterclaim are abrupt, and the conclusion is compressed, but the overall coherence and style are clearly above the 'acceptable' threshold.
The essay is largely clean and readable, with no spelling errors and generally correct punctuation. The final sentence is a comma splice joining two independent clauses ('no matter what else we taught them, the requirement should be added'), which is a clear convention error. There are also a few minor pronoun-antecedent shifts (e.g., 'an eighteen-year-old… they'). These errors do not impede comprehension but are present enough to prevent a score of 5, placing the essay at the 'partial control' level.
What the student was told to fix
- Cite every statistic and data point with a source (required by the rubric for scores of 4+)
- Develop the 'families cannot fill the gap' paragraph with at least two sentences of evidence
- Extend the counterclaim rebuttal beyond one assertion — explain what trade-off is worth making and why
- Fix the comma splice in the final sentence and review for pronoun-antecedent consistency
Graded on 2026-08-12. A teacher can change any score before it goes back to the student.
Source
New York State Education Department (NYSED), Office of State Assessment. Official document. Rubrics are revised periodically, so check the source before using this for a graded assessment.
Score an essay against this rubric
This rubric is built into the essay grader. Upload an essay, typed or handwritten, and get a score on every criterion with the reasoning written out. You can change any score before it goes back to the student.
Grade an essay against this rubricFree account, 20 essays a month.
Related rubrics
- NJSLA-A Grades 6–8 Argumentative Rubric
- NJSLA-A Grades 6–8 Informative and Explanatory Rubric
- NJSLA-A Grades 6–8 Narrative Rubric
- NJSLA-A Grade 9 and NJGPA-A Argumentative Rubric
- STAAR Grades 6-8 Extended Constructed Response (ECR) — Argumentative/Opinion Writing Rubric
- Smarter Balanced Argumentative Performance Task Writing Rubric (Grades 6-11)