Notation:   Student did not include a valid claim.  Text details were confused between pens and jellybeans. Score Point 0

Notation:  

Student had a solid claim that included a valid inference and responded directly to the prompt. Student included three pieces of evidence in a cited manner.  Student provided clear analysis and had a good understanding of the task.  Solid conventions.    Score Point 2

Notation:  

Weak claim and usage of evidence.  Cited one piece of evidence from the text.  No analysis. Limited understanding of writing task.  Score Point 1

Notation:  

Student provided no claim.  There was no analysis of the text or reflection.  The evidence provided did not contribute to the writing prompt and/or task.  Score Point 0

No claim was made and student stated “curiosity can be good and bad”. No use of evidence from text to support their claim “good and bad”. One continuous sentence for the response. Score Point 0

Weak claim statement. Student provided some textual evidence and lacked analysis. Student referenced “pandora effect” to support claim, “This text is about “the studys of curiosity and how it can make people do different things.” Score Point 1

Valid inference or claim from the text - “The text, “Curiosity can drive people to try yucky things” is all about people doing things out of curiosity” is clear and answers the prompt. Student used evidence to reflect and analyze the text “even though the people knew people would get shocked, most of them chose to click the yellow pens.”  Another example of evidence from the text is “this study shows that curiosity might drive behavior even when bad results are expected.  Score Point 2

Includes one relevant detail: people are curious which pens shock them and which pens don’t. Student responds partially to the prompt and repeats the same idea in response.  Score Point 1

Claim loosely based on text: The main idea of this artical is people want to try things what ever they are. Literal recounting of details and response is partially inaccurate: Thats why I think people try anything because those are gross jelly beans and try to make themselves sick.              Score Point 1

Valid claim from the text: The central idea of the text is that sometimes people’s curiosity can get the best of them.  Directly responds to the prompt. Relevant and sufficient text evidence: Includes direct quote and a paraphrased reference to the study completed.  Score Point 2

Notation: 

Includes relevant and sufficient textual evidence to develop a response that meets the requirements. The first example of this is when the author’s son bought a box of jelly beans with disgusting flavors and ended up trying them. In the text it states, “Instead he began tasting them himself, knowing that he was going to sample some disgusting flavors.”  Score Point 2

Notation: Includes some relevant facts, definitions, concrete details, or other info from the text. A mostly literal recounting of events or details from the text “I know because I was curious too, and my reward was the flavor of boogers in my mouth” but no explanation of this quote. “Despite the higher risk for unpleasant results, participants clicked more pens in the uncertain outcome condition (51%) than in the certain outcome condition (30%)” but no explanation of this quote.  Score Point 1

Notation: Does not address any of the requirements of the prompt or is totally inaccurate. Also there is no textual evidence.  There is many reasons curiosity is good this is one of them. Also roller coasters if someone didn’t ride in a cart down a hill we wouldn’t have rollercoaster.  Score Point 0

Notation:  Valid claim- stated including text evidence: us humans are curious enough to be “motivated to willingly experience pain without any gain”.  Clear central idea: humans are risk-takers. Evidence clearly supports claim including layers of evidence. Student fully develops analysis. Conventions are used effectively and include some skillful sentence variety.

Notation:  Valid claim it shows that humans try things just to satisfy thier courasity as stated in paragraph 4. Uses some relevant evidence specifically from the text in paragraph 8, ¨is is possible that the higher….¨ alluding to other relevant evidence paragraph 3. Analysis is brief and literal in nature. Here we can see how people would sample the good and bad effect for the answer in their curiosity and their experience on the outcome. Convention errors do not impact readability, however, penmanship and lack of capitalization do make reading difficult at times.

Notation:  Claim is valid: Most people try these things strictly out of curiosity even if the things are Harmful, crazy or dangerous. Evidence is minimal and summarizes text.  Analysis is not present.  Minimal writing makes assessing conventions challenging.

Claim is loosely based on the text, although written in a confusing manner. It turns out trying unpleasent is just human nature is based on the fact that curosity mankind to do anything. Student attempts to use relevant text evidence. Including two direct quotations and a summarized detail. Analysis is minimal. Secondly, that human will pick the uncertain choice over the certain choice. Some sentence errors and awkwardness do impact readability. 

The statement of claim is valid. It is posed in a question/answer format. The central idea of this text is why would anyone knowingly put themselves up to something unpleasant? Because people are naturally curious which either ends with a good or bad result. Students evidence is mostly an unrelated lengthy summarization of the jelly beans and the flavors they come in. The analysis is minimal and restates an idea that was already stated in the text. Convention errors do not impact readability.

Thoughtfully articulated claim. ...a recurring idea of curiosity is evident. As an accepted part of human nature, curiosity is quite powerful and can motivate people to do unpleasant activities. Evidence is relevant, sufficient and layered throughout the response in support of the claim. Analysis is full and thoughtfully developed to show through reflection of the text. Conventions are used effectively.

Notation:  Student identifies 1 Central Idea: “...it talks about how people are very curious about things when they don’t know what they are going to get.”

Notation:  Inferences and claims are loosely based on text / responds partially to the prompt “Most about something bad and they need to know and then resolve their questions.”  Weak analysis “Curiosity is very similar.  People are curious about many things the may see or hear about.”  Some evidence “...account for the fact that participants clicked more pens in the uncertain outcome than the certain-outcome condition (pg. 3, par 7).

Notation:  Includes valid inferences or claims from the text “Two central ideas in the text are the desire to resolve uncertainty and subjecting oneself to unpleasant outcomes simply based on curiousity.”  Includes evidence of analysis “The men based their research on an experiment they casted to test if people would click certain types of pens…”  Includes relevant and sufficient textual evidence “...participants clicked 42 percent of the pens in the uncertain condition, and only 14 percent of the pens in the certain condition.”