Official scoring guide
New Hampshire NH-SAS Grades 6–8 3 scoring criteria Analytic rubric 10 pts total

NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8

Complete scoring guide for NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory writing at Grades 6–8. All three domains, every score point, every descriptor extracted verbatim from the New Hampshire Department of Education NH SAS Modular/Interim Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric.

Verified against official source Last updated May 2026
01 Overview

What this rubric measures

The NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8 is the official scoring guide used to evaluate student writing on New Hampshire NH-SAS assessments. It is an Analytic rubric that scores responses across 3 distinct criteria, allowing teachers to give precise, targeted feedback on each area of writing.

02 Full rubric

All 3 scoring criteria

Click any criterion to expand its score level descriptors. The language below is taken verbatim from the official New Hampshire Department of Education NH-SAS scoring guide.

1
Statement of Purpose/Focus and Organization
0-4 pts
4 pts Fully sustained

The response is fully sustained and consistently and purposefully focused:

  • controlling idea or main idea of a topic is focused, clearly stated, and strongly maintained
  • controlling idea or main idea of a topic is introduced and communicated clearly within the purpose, audience, and task
  • The response has a clear and effective organizational structure creating unity and completeness
  • effective, consistent use of a variety of transitional strategies between and among ideas
  • logical progression of ideas from beginning to end
  • effective introduction and conclusion for audience and purpose
  • strong connections among ideas, with some syntactic variety
3 pts Adequately sustained

The response is adequately sustained and generally focused:

  • focus is clear and for the most part maintained, though some loosely related material may be present
  • some context for the controlling idea or main idea of the topic is adequate within the purpose, audience, and task
  • The response has an evident organizational structure and a sense of completeness, though there may be minor flaws and some ideas may be loosely connected
  • adequate use of transitional strategies with some variety between and among ideas
  • adequate progression of ideas from beginning to end
  • adequate introduction and conclusion
  • adequate, if slightly inconsistent, connection among ideas
2 pts Somewhat sustained

The response is somewhat sustained and may have a minor drift in focus:

  • may be clearly focused on the controlling or main idea, but is insufficiently sustained
  • controlling idea or main idea may be unclear and somewhat unfocused
  • The response has an inconsistent organizational structure, and flaws are evident
  • inconsistent use of transitional strategies with little variety
  • uneven progression of ideas from beginning to end
  • conclusion and introduction, if present, are weak
  • weak connection among ideas
1 pt Little or no focus

The response may be related to the topic but may provide little or no focus:

  • may be very brief
  • may have a major drift
  • focus may be confusing or ambiguous
  • The response has little or no discernible organizational structure
  • few or no transitional strategies are evident
  • frequent extraneous ideas may intrude
Note Non-scorable

Non-scorable code: Insufficient, illegible, foreign language, incoherent, off-topic, or off-purpose writing.

2
Evidence/Elaboration
0-4 pts
4 pts Thorough and convincing

The response provides thorough and convincing support/evidence for the controlling idea or main idea that includes the effective use of sources, facts, and details. The response achieves substantial depth that is specific and relevant:

  • use of evidence from sources is cited, smoothly integrated, comprehensive, relevant, and concrete
  • effective use of a variety of elaborative techniques
  • The response clearly and effectively expresses ideas, using precise language
  • use of academic and domain-specific vocabulary is clearly appropriate for the audience and purpose
3 pts Adequate support

The response provides adequate support/evidence for the controlling idea or main idea that includes the use of sources, facts, and details:

  • some evidence from sources is integrated, though citations may be general or imprecise
  • adequate use of some elaborative techniques
  • The response adequately expresses ideas, employing a mix of precise with more general language
  • use of domain-specific vocabulary is generally appropriate for the audience and purpose
2 pts Uneven, cursory

The response provides uneven, cursory support/evidence for the controlling idea or main idea that includes partial or uneven use of sources, facts, and details:

  • evidence from sources is weakly integrated, and citations, if present, are uneven
  • weak or uneven use of elaborative techniques
  • The response expresses Ideas unevenly, using simplistic language
  • use of domain-specific vocabulary may at times be inappropriate for the audience and purpose
1 pt Minimal

The response provides minimal support/evidence for the controlling idea or main idea that includes little or no use of sources, facts, and details:

  • use of evidence from sources is minimal, absent, in error, or irrelevant
  • The response expression of ideas is vague, lacks clarity, or is confusing
  • uses limited language or domain-specific vocabulary
  • may have little sense of audience and purpose
Note Non-scorable

Non-scorable code: Insufficient, illegible, foreign language, incoherent, off-topic, or off-purpose writing.

3
Conventions/Editing
0-2 pts
2 pts Adequate command

The response demonstrates an adequate command of conventions:

  • some errors in usage and sentence formation are present, but no systematic pattern of errors is displayed
  • adequate use of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
1 pt Partial command

The response demonstrates a partial command of conventions:

  • errors in usage may obscure meaning
  • inconsistent use of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling
0 pts Lack of command

The response demonstrates a lack of command of conventions.

The Conventions/Editing rubric begins at score point 2. The 4-point levels do not apply to this domain by design.

03 How to score

How to score with the NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory 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.

01

Three-domain analytic, scored independently

  • Score Statement of Purpose/Focus and Organization (0 to 4) first, then Evidence/Elaboration (0 to 4), then Conventions/Editing (0 to 2). Sum for a rubric total out of 10.
  • Each domain is scored independently. A response can earn a strong controlling-idea score but a developing evidence score.
  • Conventions has only 3 score points (0, 1, 2) on a tighter scale than the first two domains by design.
02

Apply descriptors literally

  • Start at the lowest score point and ask, does the response meet the bullets at this level? Move up only when it clearly satisfies the next level's bullets.
  • Score 4 in Purpose for Grades 6-8 requires strong connections among ideas with some syntactic variety, an extra bullet that does not appear at Grades 3-5.
  • If a response sits between two score points, default to the lower one.
03

Common pitfalls to avoid

  • Letting a clear controlling idea halo weak source use. Evidence/Elaboration at Score 4 requires concrete, cited, smoothly integrated evidence, not just relevance.
  • Confusing length with quality. A long essay with general source references still earns Evidence/Elaboration 3, not 4.
  • Penalizing surface errors in Purpose or Evidence when the rubric only scores them under Conventions/Editing.
04

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 domain where graders are more than one point apart.
  • Re-norm halfway through a long batch. Drift is real.
Rubric-specific guidance

Notes for the NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8

The NH-SAS informative rubric at Grades 6-8 adds two bullets that do not appear at Grades 3-5. Score 4 Purpose explicitly requires strong connections among ideas with some syntactic variety. Score 4 Evidence requires concrete, cited, smoothly integrated evidence that achieves substantial depth, not just relevance.

NH-SAS informative prompts at Grades 6-8 typically provide one or more short source texts. The rubric expects evidence drawn from those sources at score points 3 and 4. Score 3 describes adequate integration with general or imprecise citations. Score 4 requires cited, smoothly integrated, comprehensive, relevant, and concrete evidence.

Conventions/Editing on NH-SAS is scored on a 3-point scale (0, 1, 2) that begins at score point 2 in the rubric. The 4-point bullets in Purpose and Evidence do not apply to Conventions by design.

Non-scorable codes apply to insufficient, illegible, foreign language, incoherent, off-topic, or off-purpose writing. These cannot earn points across the three domains.

04 See it in action

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.

05 Why EnlightenAI

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.

06 Frequently asked

About the NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8

What is the NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric for Grades 6 to 8?
It is the official New Hampshire Department of Education scoring rubric for informative-explanatory extended constructed responses on the NH SAS modular interim writing assessments at Grades 6 through 8. The rubric is analytic with three domains, Statement of Purpose/Focus and Organization (0 to 4), Evidence/Elaboration (0 to 4), and Conventions/Editing (0 to 2), for a total of 10 possible points.
What is different between the NH-SAS Grades 6-8 informative and Grades 3-5 informative rubrics?
The structure is the same, three domains scored 4/4/2. The Grade 6-8 rubric adds two bullets that do not appear at Grades 3-5. Score 4 Purpose explicitly requires strong connections among ideas with some syntactic variety. Score 4 Evidence requires concrete, cited, smoothly integrated evidence that achieves substantial depth, not just relevance.
How many sources do NH-SAS informative prompts give students?
NH-SAS informative prompts at Grades 6-8 typically provide one or more short source texts. The rubric expects evidence drawn from those sources at score points 3 and 4. Score 3 describes adequate integration with general or imprecise citations. Score 4 requires cited, smoothly integrated, comprehensive, relevant, and concrete evidence.
How is Conventions/Editing scored on NH-SAS?
Conventions/Editing is scored on a 3-point sub-scale (0, 1, 2) that begins at score point 2 in the rubric. The 4-point bullets in the first two domains do not apply. Score 2 requires no systematic pattern of errors. Score 1 means errors may obscure meaning. Score 0 means a lack of command of conventions.
Is this rubric the official version from the NH Department of Education?
Yes. The descriptor language on this page is extracted verbatim from the official New Hampshire NH SAS Modular/Interim Informative-Explanatory Short Essay Writing Rubric (Grades 6 to 8), published by the New Hampshire Department of Education. We do not edit, paraphrase, or interpret the criteria.
Where can I find the source document?
The official NH-SAS rubrics are published by the New Hampshire Department of Education at education.nh.gov under the Office of Assessment.
Can EnlightenAI score student writing using this rubric?
Yes. Upload this rubric (or import it from our library), provide a few teacher-scored exemplars, and EnlightenAI will score new student work on every domain with per-domain feedback that mirrors the NH-SAS descriptors.

Use this rubric in EnlightenAI

Train EnlightenAI on the NH-SAS Informative-Explanatory Writing Rubric, Grades 6–8 and start scoring student writing, with consistent per-domain feedback, in a single class period.