Six Traits Persuasive Rubric

5
Exemplary

4
Strong

3
Proficient

2
Developing

1
Emerging

Ideas &
Content

- Position and all ideas are

clear, focused, and
compelling
- Details are selectively
chosen and highly
effective in supporting the
argument and providing
insight to the main idea
- Argument is convincing
and alternate viewpoints
are presented and
addressed effectively
- Argument is authentic,
and feels unique

- Main ideas are

unclear/out of
focus
- May have lists of
minor details or
facts but not true
support
Argument is not
convincing; and
alternate viewpoints
are not presented
- Generalities and
predictable personal
opinions

- Introduction effectively
hooks the reader, and
includes clear context
- Thesis statement takes a
clear position and sets up
the paper well.
- Body paragraphs are
compelling, and guide
readers purposefully
through the text with clear
connections back to
thesis, a sophisticated use
of claims and evidence,
and transition smoothly
- Writing concludes
strongly
- Writing is engaging, and
the voice expresses
interest and complete
understanding of the topic
- Creates an effective
mood appropriate for the
topic and purpose with a
and has a strong sense of
audience
- Both common and
uncommon words used
- Specialized vocabulary is
sufficiently explained
- Powerful words and
vivid imagery, rich fresh,
and appealing
- Eloquent and effortless
- Sentences are well built
and skillfully crafted;
reflect logic and sense
- Consistently strong and
varies sentences
- Solid control over
grammar and punctuation
- Few errors, almost
always correct.
- Piece needs light editing
to be ready for publication

- Position and most

ideas are identifiable, but
could be clearer
- Information that is
provided is well
developed, but needs
more detail and support
in several places.
- Argument is partially
convincing with some
facts, and alternate
viewpoints are
mentioned be not
addressed
- Generally predictable
- Weak hook, and
introduction has most
necessary context
- Thesis statement takes
a position but lacks a
clear sets up.
- Body paragraphs are
conventional. Ideas
connect back to thesis,
but might be better
arranged. Some points
linger too long; others
are skimmed over. Weak
transitions.
- The conclusion wraps
it up, but needs more.
- Writing sounds sincere,
but not genuinely
involved and committed
to topic.
- Generally appropriate
tone for purpose and
topic, but does not fully
engage the audience

- Position is vague,
and unfocused
- Missing details and
support require
readers to fill in
many blanks
- Argument is not
convincing; and
mostly unsupported
opinions; alternate
viewpoints are not
presented in an
adequate manner
- Entirely predictable

Organization

- Position and most ideas

are clear, focused, and
generally compelling
- Most details are good, but
needs additional details in
one or two places to
expand support and
provide insight
- Argument is largely
convincing and alternate
viewpoints are presented
but not always effectively
addressed
- Argument is more
original than predictable
- Apparent hook, with
necessary context
- Thesis statement takes a
position and sets up the
paper.
- Body paragraphs are
effective but formulaic.
Ideas connect back to
thesis, but need a better
balance of claims and
evidence and stronger
relationship between ideas.
Apparent transitions.
- Writing concludes
appropriately

- Introduction
missing hook and
most context
- Thesis is unclear
- Body is beginning
to take shape, but
not yet functional;
feels more random
than purposeful,
paragraphs are not
effective, and
supporting detail
skips around and
includes irrelevant
information.
- Weak conclusion.
- Writing is mostly
sincere, but feels
distant from topic.
- Tone is ineffective
for purpose and
topic, with little
awareness of
audience.

- No introduction
or it is unclear with
no real thesis
statement.
- Thesis is unclear
- Body is haphazard
and disjointed;
severely inhibits
readers
comprehension of
ideas; paragraphing
is not attempted or
appears to be done
at random
- No real
conclusion.
- Writing is
disengaged and
shows confusion.
- Tone is
inappropriate for
purpose and topic,
with no awareness
of audience.

- Words are usually

correct, but not always
- Specialized vocabulary
is not explained
- Word choice is
functional, but little
originality
- Reads more
mechanically than
smoothly
- Formulaic structure,
generally lacks variety in
length and structure
- Fair control over
grammar and
punctuation
- Numerous or serious
enough to be distracting,
but still readable
- Thorough editing
needed

- Words are
frequently incorrect,
superficial, or
inadequate
- Functional and
repetitive, does not
capture reader
- Reads awkwardly
- Some control over
simple structure but
little variety

- Word choice
makes the essay
hard to understand
- Slang is distracting
and inappropriate

- Weak control over

grammar and
punctuation
- Numerous or
serious enough to
make it confusing
- Serious editing
needed

- Little or no
control over
grammar and
punctuation
-Extensive editing
needed to be
readable

Main ideas
Development
Persuasiveness
Originality

Structure
Pacing and
Sequence
Intro and
Conclusion
Transitions

Voice
Energy and
Passion
Tone
Writers
involvement
Audience
awareness

Word Choice
Accuracy
Descriptiveness
Appeal

Sentence
Fluency

Reading ease
Structure
Variety

Conventions
Grammar
Punctuation
Publication
readiness

- Writing sounds natural,

and the voice expresses
interest and understanding
of the topic.
- Uses an appropriate tone
for purpose and topic, and
generally understands
audience experience
- Words capture meaning,
some uncommon words
- Specialized vocabulary is
mostly explained
- Generally good word
choice, but readers want
more, may be overdone
- Generally reads smoothly
- Sentences are logical but
not skillfully crafted
- Good variety in length
and structure
- Moderate control over
grammar and punctuation
- Few errors, but
occasionally serious
enough to be distracting
- Editing is needed, but
generally light

- Choppy and
confusing
- Frequent run-ons
or repetitive
patterns