What this rubric measures
The NY State Grades 4–5 Writing Evaluation Rubric is the official scoring guide used to evaluate student writing on New York Regents assessments. It is an Holistic 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 New York State Education Department Regents scoring guide.
1 Content and Analysis
- clearly introduce a topic in a manner that follows logically from the task and purpose
- demonstrate insightful comprehension and analysis of the text(s)
- clearly introduce a topic in a manner that follows from the task and purpose
- demonstrate grade-appropriate comprehension and analysis of the text(s)
- introduce a topic in a manner that follows generally from the task and purpose
- demonstrate a literal comprehension of the text(s)
- introduce a topic in a manner that does not logically follow from the task and purpose
- demonstrate little understanding of the text(s)
- demonstrate a lack of comprehension of the text(s) or task
The extent to which the essay conveys ideas and information clearly and accurately in order to support analysis of topics or text(s). Aligned to CCLS W.2 and R.1 to 9.
2 Command of Evidence
- develop the topic with relevant, well-chosen facts, definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information and examples from the text(s)
- sustain the use of varied, relevant evidence
- develop the topic with relevant facts, definitions, details, quotations, or other information and examples from the text(s)
- sustain the use of relevant evidence, with some lack of variety
- partially develop the topic of the essay with the use of some textual evidence, some of which may be irrelevant
- use relevant evidence with inconsistency
- demonstrate an attempt to use evidence, but only develop ideas with minimal, occasional evidence which is generally invalid or irrelevant
- provide no evidence or provide evidence that is completely irrelevant
The extent to which the essay presents evidence from the provided text(s) to support analysis and reflection. Aligned to CCLS W.2 and R.1 to 8.
3 Coherence, Organization, and Style
- exhibit clear, purposeful organization
- skillfully link ideas using grade-appropriate words and phrases
- use grade-appropriate, stylistically sophisticated language and domain-specific vocabulary
- provide a concluding statement that follows clearly from the topic and information presented
- exhibit clear organization
- link ideas using grade-appropriate words and phrases
- use grade-appropriate precise language and domain-specific vocabulary
- provide a concluding statement that follows from the topic and information presented
- exhibit some attempt at organization
- inconsistently link ideas using words and phrases
- inconsistently use appropriate language and domain-specific vocabulary
- provide a concluding statement that follows generally from the topic and information presented
- exhibit little attempt at organization, or attempts to organize are irrelevant to the task
- lack the use of linking words and phrases
- use language that is imprecise or inappropriate for the text(s) and task
- provide a concluding statement that is illogical or unrelated to the topic and information presented
- exhibit no evidence of organization
- exhibit no use of linking words and phrases
- use language that is predominantly incoherent or copied directly from the text(s)
- do not provide a concluding statement
The extent to which the essay logically organizes complex ideas, concepts, and information using formal style and precise language. Aligned to CCLS W.2, L.3, and L.6.
4 Control of Conventions
- demonstrate grade-appropriate command of conventions, with few errors
- demonstrate grade-appropriate command of conventions, with occasional errors that do not hinder comprehension
- demonstrate emerging command of conventions, with some errors that may hinder comprehension
- demonstrate a lack of command of conventions, with frequent errors that hinder comprehension
- are minimal, making assessment of conventions unreliable
The extent to which the essay demonstrates command of the conventions of standard English grammar, usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Aligned to CCLS W.2, L.1, and L.2.
How to score with the NY State Grades 4–5 Writing Evaluation 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.
Holistic across four criteria
- Assign a single 0 to 4 score that best matches the response across all four criteria.
- Criteria are NOT scored independently and summed. The holistic score reflects the response as a whole.
- Use the descriptor language at each level as the touchstone. If the response straddles two levels, the lower of the two is awarded.
Apply the Grades 4-5 paired-text expectation
- Grades 4-5 prompts pair two texts. The rubric expects insightful comprehension and analysis of BOTH texts at the top score.
- Per NYSED rule, a response that only references one of the two texts can be scored no higher than a 2.
- Evidence at the top score must be 'varied' as well as relevant. A response that uses only one type of evidence (only quotations, for example) typically caps at 3 even if the evidence is sustained.
NYSED scoring rules and condition codes
- If the prompt requires two texts and the student only references one text, the response can be scored no higher than a 2.
- If the student writes only a personal response and makes no reference to the text(s), the response can be scored no higher than a 1.
- Responses totally unrelated to the topic, illegible, or incoherent should be given a 0.
- A response totally copied from the text(s) with no original student writing should be scored a 0.
- Condition Code A is applied whenever a student who is present for a test session leaves an entire constructed-response question in that session completely blank (no response attempted).
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 criterion where graders are more than one point apart.
- Re-norm halfway through a long batch. Drift is real.
Notes for the NY State Grades 4–5 Writing Evaluation Rubric
The Grades 4-5 Writing Evaluation Rubric raises two bars relative to Grade 3. The top-score Content descriptor expects insightful (rather than just grade-appropriate) comprehension and analysis. The Command of Evidence criterion now expects sustained, varied evidence drawn from BOTH paired texts.
NYSED prompts at Grades 4-5 pair two texts related by theme, genre, tone, time period, or other characteristics. The single-text expectation that applied at Grade 3 does not apply here. A response that ignores one of the two paired texts cannot score above a 2.
The Coherence, Organization, and Style criterion at Grades 4-5 evaluates the response across four bulleted aspects, organization, linking, language sophistication, and a concluding statement. All four must be present at the level claimed for the response to earn that score.
Stylistic sophistication is part of the top score at Grades 4-5. Responses that are clearly organized and use grade-appropriate (rather than sophisticated) language and vocabulary typically score 3, not 4.
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 lighthouse keepers helped sailors
For hundreds of years, lighthouse keepers had one of the most important jobs on the coast. Both "The Lighthouse Keeper" and "Lights on the Coast" show that lighthouse keepers helped sailors by keeping lamps burning at night and warning ships about dangerous rocks, but their job changed over time as new technology took over.
Lighthouse keepers guided sailors with light
"The Lighthouse Keeper" describes how a keeper named Mr. Briggs would climb the tower every night to fill the lamps with oil and trim the wicks. The story says he "never missed a night, even in storms." Without that light, ships could crash on the rocks below. "Lights on the Coast" adds that early lighthouses burned whale oil and later kerosene, and that keepers polished the lenses every morning so the light could be seen from far away.
The job changed when technology changed
"Lights on the Coast" explains that electric lights replaced oil lamps in the 1900s, and then automatic timers replaced human keepers. The article says the last U.S. lighthouse keeper retired in 1998. "The Lighthouse Keeper" shows Mr. Briggs near the end of his life watching a new electric beacon turn on by itself. He felt proud but also sad.
Conclusion
Lighthouse keepers helped sailors by tending the lights that warned them of danger. As technology improved, their job slowly disappeared, but the work they did kept countless ships safe.
Clear topic, paired-text comprehension, sustained evidence
Topic introduced clearly with both texts named. Comprehension is grade-appropriate but not insightful, the response describes what keepers did rather than analyzing why their work mattered. Evidence is drawn from both texts with one direct quote per text. Fits the 3 descriptor.
Clear organization, grade-appropriate language
Two body paragraphs (light, change over time), each grouped under a heading. Linking words ("without that light", "and then") connect ideas. Domain vocabulary (beacon, kerosene, wicks) is used correctly. Language is grade-appropriate but not stylistically sophisticated, so a 3.
Grade-appropriate, occasional errors
Quotation marks around titles and direct quotes are placed correctly. Capitalization is consistent. Commas in compound sentences are used correctly throughout. No errors that hinder comprehension. Matches the 3-level descriptor exactly.
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 NY State Grades 4–5 Writing Evaluation Rubric
What is the NY State Grades 4-5 Writing Evaluation Rubric?
Do Grades 4-5 prompts pair two texts?
What's the difference between Grade 3 and Grades 4-5 on the top score?
What is the rule when a Grades 4-5 student writes only a personal response?
Is this rubric the official version from NYSED?
Where can I find the source document?
Can EnlightenAI score student writing using this rubric?
Use this rubric in EnlightenAI
Train EnlightenAI on the NY State Grades 4–5 Writing Evaluation Rubric and start scoring student writing, with consistent per-criterion feedback, in a single class period.