What this rubric measures
The Keystone Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric is the official scoring guide used to evaluate student writing on Pennsylvania Keystone English Composition assessments. It is an Analytic rubric that scores responses across 5 distinct criteria, allowing teachers to give precise, targeted feedback on each area of writing.
All 5 scoring criteria
Click any criterion to expand its score level descriptors. The language below is taken verbatim from the official Pennsylvania Department of Education Keystone English Composition scoring guide.
1 Thesis/Focus
At this score point, the writer:
- establishes and sustains a precise controlling idea/thesis
- displays a clear understanding of task, purpose, and audience
At this score point, the writer:
- establishes a controlling idea/thesis
- displays an understanding of task, purpose, and audience
At this score point, the writer:
- provides an inconsistent idea/thesis
- displays an inadequate understanding of task, purpose, and audience
At this score point, the writer:
- provides a vague or indistinct controlling idea
- displays a limited understanding of task, purpose, and audience
At this score point, the writer:
- provides no evidence of a controlling idea/thesis
- displays no understanding of task, purpose, and audience
- does not respond to prompt
Module 1 (Informative/Explanatory) Composition rubric. Evaluates whether the writer establishes and sustains a precise controlling idea/thesis and demonstrates understanding of task, purpose, and audience.
2 Organization
At this score point, the writer:
- chooses sophisticated organizational strategies appropriate for task, purpose, and audience
- includes a clear and well-defined introduction, body, and conclusion
At this score point, the writer:
- chooses appropriate organizational strategies for task, purpose, and audience
- includes a clear introduction, body, and conclusion
At this score point, the writer:
- displays little evidence of organizational strategies
- may not include an introduction, body, and conclusion
At this score point, the writer:
- displays little to no evidence of organizational strategies
- may not include an identifiable introduction, body, and conclusion
At this score point, the writer:
- displays no evidence of organizational strategies
- does not include an identifiable introduction, body, and conclusion
- does not respond to prompt
Evaluates the writer's organizational strategies and whether the response includes a clear introduction, body, and conclusion.
3 Content
At this score point, the writer:
- provides relevant content and specific and effective supporting details that demonstrate a clear understanding of purpose
- uses sophisticated transitional words, phrases, and clauses to link ideas and create cohesion
At this score point, the writer:
- provides relevant content and effective supporting details
- uses transitional words, phrases, and clauses to link ideas
At this score point, the writer:
- provides insufficient content and ineffective supporting details
- may use simplistic and/or illogical transitional expressions
At this score point, the writer:
- provides minimal content
- uses few or no transitional expressions to link ideas
At this score point, the writer:
- provides little to no content
- does not use transitional expressions to link ideas
- does not respond to prompt
Evaluates relevant content, supporting details, and transitional expressions.
4 Style
At this score point, the writer:
- uses consistently precise language and a wide variety of sentence structures
- chooses an effective style and tone and maintains a consistent point of view
At this score point, the writer:
- uses precise language and a variety of sentence structures
- chooses an appropriate style, tone, and point of view
At this score point, the writer:
- uses imprecise language and a limited variety of sentence structures
- may choose an inappropriate style or tone and may shift point of view
At this score point, the writer:
- uses simplistic or repetitious language and limited sentence structures
- demonstrates little or no understanding of style, tone, or point of view
At this score point, the writer:
- uses simplistic, repetitious language and one type of sentence structure
- demonstrates no understanding of style, tone, or point of view
- does not respond to prompt
Evaluates language precision, sentence variety, style, tone, and point of view.
5 Conventions
At this score point, the writer:
- demonstrates command of standard English grammar and usage
- demonstrates command of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling
- demonstrates command of sentence formation
- Summation: At this score point, the writer makes few errors, and errors do not interfere with reader understanding.
At this score point, the writer:
- demonstrates control of standard English grammar and usage
- demonstrates control of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling
- demonstrates control of sentence formation
- Summation: At this score point, the writer makes few errors, and errors seldom interfere with reader understanding.
At this score point, the writer:
- demonstrates limited or inconsistent control of standard English grammar and usage
- demonstrates limited or inconsistent control of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling
- demonstrates limited or inconsistent control of sentence formation
- Summation: At this score point, the writer makes errors, and errors may interfere with reader understanding.
At this score point, the writer:
- demonstrates minimal control of standard English grammar and usage
- demonstrates minimal control of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling
- demonstrates minimal control of sentence formation
- Summation: At this score point, the writer makes errors, and errors often interfere with reader understanding.
At this score point, the writer:
- demonstrates little or no control of standard English grammar and usage
- demonstrates little or no control of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling
- demonstrates little or no control of sentence formation
- Summation: At this score point, the writer makes errors, and errors consistently interfere with reader understanding.
Conventions is scored on a separate shared rubric used for both Informative/Explanatory and Argumentative Keystone responses. The rubric scores three sub-domains, Grammar and Usage, Mechanics (capitalization, punctuation, spelling), and Sentence Formation. A Summation row describes the level of error interference at each score point. Each score level below lists the descriptor for each sub-domain followed by the Summation.
How to score with the Keystone Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric.
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.
Analytic, four Composition domains plus Conventions
- Score each Composition domain (Focus/Thesis, Content, Organization, Style) independently on its own pass, then score Conventions on its own pass.
- Each domain is scored 0 to 4. The Composition rubric and Conventions rubric are separate; a response can be strong in one and weaker in another.
- Don't collapse Style and Conventions. Style covers precision and sentence variety. Conventions covers grammar, mechanics, and sentence formation errors.
Apply descriptors literally
- Start at the lowest score point and ask, does the response meet this descriptor? Move up only when it clearly satisfies the next level's bullets.
- Score what is on the page, not intent or potential.
- When between two score points, default to the lower one.
Common pitfalls to avoid
- Confusing informative/explanatory with argumentative. The Module 1 Content rubric does NOT score counterclaims. Adding a counterargument paragraph does not help (or hurt) the Content score on this rubric.
- Letting a strong controlling idea halo weak organization. Each domain is scored independently.
- Penalizing convention errors under Style or Content. Errors are scored only under Conventions.
Tips for norming with your team
- Anchor with 3 to 5 PDE Keystone Informative/Explanatory samples scored across all four Composition domains plus Conventions before the session.
- Score the first 5 silently, then compare. Discuss any domain where graders are more than one point apart.
- Re-norm halfway through a long batch. Drift is real.
Notes for the Keystone Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric
The Keystone Informative/Explanatory Composition rubric (Module 1) is one of two Composition rubrics used on the Keystone Literature exam. The other is Argumentative (Module 2). The Composition rubric structure (Focus/Thesis, Content, Organization, Style) is identical across genres; descriptors differ.
The Informative/Explanatory rubric does not score counterclaims. The Module 1 Content rubric evaluates relevant content, supporting details, and transitional expressions. Acknowledging or refuting an opposing view is not part of the rubric for this genre.
The Conventions rubric is shared with the Argumentative rubric. It is identical for both genres. Conventions scores three sub-domains (Grammar and Usage, Mechanics, Sentence Formation) on a 0 to 4 scale, with a Summation row describing the level of error interference with reader understanding.
Universal scoring note from the PDE rubric: at Score Point 0, the writer does not respond to the prompt across multiple domains. Off-topic, off-prompt, or non-English responses cannot earn points across the four Composition domains.
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.
How technology has reshaped teenage communication
A decade ago, most teenagers ended a school day by calling a friend on a landline phone or passing folded notes between classes. Today, the average teenager moves between six or seven different communication tools before bedtime. Technology has changed the way teenagers communicate by shifting it from a small set of slow, private channels to a constant stream of fast, visible, and multimodal exchanges.
From slow channels to constant streams
The most visible shift is in pace. A teenager in 1990 might have spoken to three or four friends in a given afternoon. A teenager today can send and receive several hundred messages between dismissal and dinner. Group chats on iMessage, Snapchat streaks, and Instagram direct messages all run simultaneously, and a single conversation can stay open for weeks. The result is that teenage communication no longer fits into the discrete time blocks that older models assumed. It is now closer to a background hum than a series of phone calls.
From audio-only to multimodal
Technology has also changed what counts as a message. A landline call carried voice. A folded note carried words. Today's tools carry photos, short videos, voice memos, reaction emojis, animated GIFs, location pins, and edited screenshots. A single Snapchat message often combines a photo and a typed caption. The teenagers using these tools have developed conventions about which channel fits which kind of news. Big news goes on a phone call or FaceTime. Small updates go on Snapchat. Inside jokes live in a meme. The rules are not written down, but they are real.
From private exchanges to visible ones
The third shift is visibility. Older communication was largely private. Two people talked, and no one else heard them. Today, much of teenage communication happens in front of an audience. A group chat with twenty members is a private conversation in name but a small public one in effect. A Snapchat story is visible to hundreds of friends. Even one-to-one messages can be screenshotted and shared. Teenagers now negotiate who can see a message before they decide what to say, a step earlier generations did not need to think about.
Conclusion
From slow private calls to a constant, multimodal, visible stream, technology has changed teenage communication on three different dimensions at once. The tools are new. The norms around them are still being written. Understanding what counts as a message and who can see it is now part of growing up.
Clear controlling idea, well-organized
Thesis names three specific shifts (pace, modality, visibility) and the body paragraphs follow that order. Each body paragraph develops one shift. Pushing to 4 would require sharper subordination in the thesis and more sophisticated transitions between paragraphs.
Relevant content with effective details
Supporting details are concrete (landline calls, group chats, iMessage, Snapchat streaks, screenshot sharing) and clearly explain each shift. Transitions like "the most visible shift" and "the third shift" are appropriate. More sophisticated cohesion devices would push toward 4.
Precise language, controlled mechanics
Vocabulary is appropriate for an 11th-grade explanatory response (modal, visibility, negotiate). Sentence structures vary. Conventions show control of grammar, mechanics, and sentence formation, with errors that seldom interfere with reader understanding.
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 Keystone Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric
What is the Keystone Informative/Explanatory Writing Rubric?
How is the Informative/Explanatory rubric different from the Argumentative rubric?
Does the Informative/Explanatory rubric reward counterclaims?
Is the Conventions rubric the same for Informative/Explanatory and Argumentative?
Is this rubric the official version from PDE?
Where can I find the source documents?
Can EnlightenAI score student writing using this rubric?
Use this rubric in EnlightenAI
Train EnlightenAI on the Keystone Informative/Explanatory Composition rubric (Module 1) plus the shared Conventions rubric, and start scoring student writing, with consistent per-domain feedback, in a single class period.