What this rubric measures
The KAP MDPT Argument Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8 is the official scoring guide used to evaluate student writing on Kansas Assessment Program assessments. It is an Analytic rubric that scores responses across 4 distinct criteria, allowing teachers to give precise, targeted feedback on each area of writing.
All 4 scoring criteria
Click any criterion to expand its score level descriptors. The language below is taken verbatim from the official Kansas State Department of Education Assessment Program scoring guide.
1 Focus/Argument
Student's response:
- States a clear argument related to the resources and prompt, and maintains it throughout the work
Student's response:
- States a clear argument related to resources and prompt and mostly maintains it throughout the work
Student's response:
- States a somewhat clear argument, which may lose focus sporadically throughout the work
Student's response:
- Does not state a clear argument, or stated argument is unrelated to resources or prompt
At Grades 6-8 the rubric language shifts from Opinion to Argument. Focus/Argument measures whether the response states a clear argument and maintains it across the work.
2 Evidence
Student's response:
- Uses relevant and accurate details/evidence from two or more resources to support argument
Student's response:
- Uses mostly relevant and accurate details/evidence from two or more resources to support argument
Student's response:
- Uses some relevant and accurate details/evidence from one or more resources to support argument
Student's response:
- Does not use relevant and accurate details or evidence from resources to support argument
At Grades 6-8 the Evidence trait requires details from TWO or more resources at PL 4, an explicit step up from the Grades 3-5 rubric's one or more requirement.
3 Argument
Student's response:
- Consistently uses grade-appropriate strategies to clarify relationships between and among ideas, and to connect evidence to argument
- Consistently and accurately uses domain-specific words to develop and support argument
Student's response:
- Adequately uses grade-appropriate strategies to clarify relationships between and among ideas and to connect evidence to argument
- Adequately uses domain-specific words to develop and support argument
Student's response:
- Inconsistently uses grade-appropriate strategies to clarify relationships between and among ideas and to connect evidence to argument
- Inconsistently uses domain-specific words to develop and support argument
Student's response:
- Shows little or no attempt to clarify relationships between and among ideas or connect evidence to argument
- Uses few or no domain-specific words to develop and support argument
The Argument trait at Grades 6-8 has TWO scored sub-elements: (1) strategies that clarify relationships between ideas and connect evidence to argument, and (2) consistent and accurate use of domain-specific words. Both are evaluated together to assign one PL.
4 Conventions
Student's response:
- Is readable with most grade-level conventions used correctly and may use them creatively to enhance the message; minor mistakes do not impede the reader's ability to understand the writer's meaning
Student's response:
- Is readable with most grade-level conventions used correctly; mistakes do not affect the reader's ability to understand the writer's meaning
Student's response:
- Is readable but some errors in grade-level conventions negatively impact the reader's ability to understand the writer's meaning
Student's response:
- Is nearly unreadable due to pervasive errors in grade-level conventions
The Conventions trait reads the same across all KAP MDPT rubrics from Grades 3-5 through High School. Readability and the effect of errors on meaning drive the score.
How to score with the KAP MDPT Argument Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8.
A practical guide for teachers and norming teams. How to apply each descriptor consistently, the pitfalls that hurt inter-rater reliability, and a workflow for calibrating with colleagues.
Four traits, scored independently
- Score Focus/Argument, Evidence, Argument, and Conventions independently. Each trait is on a PL 1 to 4 scale.
- The Argument trait has two sub-elements (connection strategies and domain vocabulary). Both must be present at a PL to award that PL on the trait.
- There is no overall composite score in the rubric. Per-trait PL scores are the rubric output.
Two-resource minimum at PL 4 for Evidence
- Evidence at Grades 6-8 explicitly requires two or more resources at PL 4 and PL 3. A response using only one resource caps at PL 2 on Evidence regardless of accuracy.
- Accuracy of source evidence also matters; misrepresented or inaccurate evidence typically caps at PL 2.
- Quantity alone does not earn PL 4. The rubric language is relevant and accurate, so volume without relevance does not move the score up.
Domain-specific vocabulary is a scored element
- The Argument trait's second bullet, consistent and accurate use of domain-specific words, is one of the most commonly missed sub-elements.
- Domain vocabulary depends on task subject. Science tasks expect scientific terms; Social Studies expects historical or civic terms; ELA expects literary terms.
- A response with strong connecting strategies but generic vocabulary typically scores PL 3 on the Argument trait, not PL 4.
Tips for norming with your team
- Anchor with 3 to 5 sample responses scored by your most experienced grader before the session.
- Score the first 5 silently, then compare. Discuss any trait where graders are more than one PL apart.
- Re-norm halfway through a long batch. Drift is real.
Notes for the KAP MDPT Argument Rubric, Grades 6–8
At Grades 6-8 the genre label shifts from Opinion to Argument, and the rubric language follows. Argument is a stronger expectation than opinion: it implies reasoning, evidence connections, and (at PL 4 of the Argument trait) consistent use of domain-specific vocabulary.
The Evidence trait raises the resource minimum to two or more for PL 3 and PL 4. A Grades 6-8 response that uses only one resource cannot earn PL 3 or PL 4 on Evidence, even if that single resource is used accurately.
Alternate or opposing arguments are NOT a scored expectation at Grades 6-8. That distinction first appears at High School. A Grades 6-8 response that addresses the other side adds reading rigor but is not specifically rewarded at this grade band.
Introduction and Conclusion is also not a separate trait at Grades 6-8. It first appears as its own trait at High School. At Grades 6-8 the structural quality of opening and closing is folded into the broader Argument trait.
See this rubric in action.
EnlightenAI scores student writing on this exact rubric, with per-criterion feedback that mirrors how you grade by hand. The sample response below shows how the rubric applies to a real piece of student writing, scored against every criterion.
Why our state should prioritize a wind-and-solar combination
The article and infographic both showed that wind and solar are growing fast, but each has weaknesses on its own. Our state should prioritize a combination of wind and solar over the next ten years because the two sources complement each other across daily and seasonal cycles, both have falling costs per kilowatt-hour, and a mixed portfolio reduces grid intermittency.
Wind and solar complement each other
The infographic shows that solar generation peaks at midday while wind generation is strongest in the evening and overnight. Pairing them produces a more consistent supply across a 24-hour cycle. The article explains that states that rely on only one source often have to import electricity at peak times. A combined portfolio reduces this dependence.
Both technologies are getting cheaper
The article cites a Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory finding that the levelized cost of energy for both wind and solar has fallen more than 70 percent since 2010. This means that the economic argument for either is strong, and the case for combining them is even stronger because installation costs decline as supply chains scale. Our state can lock in low prices by committing to both.
A mix reduces intermittency
Intermittency is the term for variable supply from renewables. The infographic shows that intermittency is the single biggest barrier to a fully renewable grid. The article describes how Texas has used a wind-and-solar mix to keep its grid stable even during winter weather events. A diversified portfolio protects against shortages when one source underperforms.
Conclusion
Wind and solar are stronger together than apart. They complement each other across the day, they are both economically attractive, and together they reduce the intermittency that limits a single-source grid. Our state should commit to both.
Clear argument with evidence from both resources
Argument (prioritize wind-and-solar combination) is stated in the intro and maintained across all body paragraphs and conclusion. Evidence is drawn from both the article (LBNL cost, Texas example) and the infographic (peak times, intermittency). Satisfies PL 4 on Evidence.
Strong reasoning with domain-specific terms
Reasoning explicitly connects evidence to argument in each paragraph. Domain-specific vocabulary (levelized cost, intermittency, portfolio, kilowatt-hour) is used accurately. Matches PL 4 on Argument, which requires both connection strategies and domain words.
Strong sentence variety, conventions used correctly
Sentence structure varies in length and type. Capitalization, punctuation, and grammar are used correctly throughout. Some constructions use parallelism (stronger together, complement each other) that contribute to readability. Matches PL 4 on Conventions.
Score this rubric consistently, with the feedback students actually use
EnlightenAI is trained on your standards and your exemplars, then scores at the speed of your classroom.
Trained on your rubric
Upload this rubric, or any custom one, and the AI learns your exact criteria, descriptor language, and score level boundaries.
Per-criterion feedback
Students receive specific, actionable comments tied to each criterion, exactly the way you'd grade by hand.
Built for K–12 schools
Roster sync, FERPA-aligned data handling, and per-school configuration so every campus uses the same standards.
About the KAP MDPT Argument Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8
What is the KAP Grades 6-8 Argument writing rubric?
Do Grades 6-8 KAP responses need to address counterarguments?
Why does Grades 6-8 require two or more resources where Grades 3-5 required one or more?
What counts as domain-specific vocabulary?
How is the Argument trait scored when one sub-element is strong and the other is weak?
Is this rubric the official version from KSDE?
Where can I find the source document?
Can EnlightenAI score student writing using this rubric?
Use this rubric in EnlightenAI
Train EnlightenAI on the KAP MDPT Argument Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8 and start scoring student writing, with consistent per-trait feedback, in a single class period.