What this rubric measures
The STAAR Informational Writing Rubric, Grades 3–5 is the official scoring guide used to evaluate student writing on Texas STAAR assessments. It is an Analytic rubric that scores responses across 2 distinct criteria, allowing teachers to give precise, targeted feedback on each area of writing.
All 2 scoring criteria
Click any criterion to expand its score level descriptors. The language below is taken verbatim from the official Texas Education Agency STAAR scoring guide.
1 Organization and Development of Ideas
The response demonstrates the following:
- Central idea is clear and fully developed. The central idea is clearly identifiable. The focus is consistent throughout, creating a response that is unified and easy to follow.
- Organization is effective. A purposeful structure that includes an effective introduction and conclusion is evident. The organizational structure is appropriate and effectively supports the development of the central idea. The sentences, paragraphs, or ideas are logically connected in purposeful and highly effective ways.
- Evidence is specific, well chosen, and relevant. The response includes relevant text-based evidence that is clearly explained and consistently supports and develops the central idea. For pairs in grades 3-5, evidence is drawn from at least one text. The response reflects a thorough understanding of the writing purpose.
- Expression of ideas is clear and effective. The writer's word choice is specific, purposeful, and enhances the response. Almost all sentences and phrases are effectively crafted to convey the writer's ideas and contribute to the overall quality of the response and the clarity of the message.
The response demonstrates the following:
- Central idea is present and partially developed. A central idea is presented, but it may not be clearly identifiable because it is not fully developed. The focus may not always be consistent and may not always be easy to follow.
- Organization is limited. A purposeful structure that includes an introduction and conclusion is present. An organizational structure may not be consistent and may not always support the logical development of the central idea. Sentence-to-sentence connections and clarity may be lacking.
- Evidence is limited and may include some irrelevant information. The response may include text-based evidence to support the central idea, but it may be insufficiently explained, and/or some evidence may be irrelevant to the central idea. For pairs, evidence is drawn from at least one of the texts. The response reflects partial understanding of the writing purpose.
- Expression of ideas is basic. The writer's word choice may be general and imprecise and at times may not convey the writer's ideas clearly. Sentences and phrases are at times ineffective and may interfere with the writer's intended meaning and weaken the message.
The response demonstrates the following:
- Central idea is evident but not developed. A central idea is present but not developed appropriately in response to the writing task.
- Organization is minimal and/or weak. An introduction or conclusion may be present. An organizational structure that supports logical development is not always evident or is not appropriate to the task.
- Evidence is insufficient and/or mostly irrelevant. Little text-based evidence is presented to support the central idea, or the evidence presented is mostly extraneous and/or repetitious. Explanation of any evidence presented is insufficient and may be only vaguely related to the writing task. The response reflects a limited understanding of the writing purpose.
- Expression of ideas is ineffective. The writer's word choice is vague or limited and may impede the quality and clarity of the essay. Sentences and phrases are often ineffective, interfere with the writer's intended meaning, and impact the strength and clarity of the message.
The response demonstrates the following:
- A central idea may be evident.
- The response lacks an introduction and conclusion. An organizational structure is not evident.
- Evidence is not provided or is irrelevant. The response reflects a lack of understanding of the writing purpose.
- The expression of ideas is unclear and/or incoherent.
Four sub-criteria are embedded in each score point, clarity of the central idea, effectiveness of organization, specificity of text-based evidence, and effectiveness of expression. To earn the higher score, the response must satisfy all four.
2 Conventions
Student writing demonstrates consistent command of grade-level-appropriate conventions, including correct sentence construction, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, and spelling. The response has few errors, but those errors do not impact the clarity of the writing.
Student writing demonstrates inconsistent command of grade-level-appropriate conventions, including limited use of correct sentence construction, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, and spelling. The response has several errors, but the reader can understand the writer's thoughts.
Student writing demonstrates little to no command of grade-level-appropriate conventions, including infrequent use of or no evidence of correct sentence construction, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, and spelling. The response has many errors, and these errors impact the clarity of the writing and the reader's understanding of the writing.
Important STAAR scoring rule, if a response receives a score point 0 in the Organization and Development of Ideas trait, the response will also earn 0 points in the Conventions trait.
How to score with the STAAR Informational Writing Rubric, Grades 3–5.
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.
Two-trait analytic, scored independently
- Score Organization and Development (0 to 3) first, then Conventions (0 to 2). Sum for the rubric total out of 5.
- Conventions has only 3 score points (0, 1, 2) on a tighter scale than Development.
- Critical TEA rule, a response that earns 0 on Development AUTOMATICALLY earns 0 on Conventions.
Apply the sub-criteria together
- The four sub-criteria (central idea, organization, evidence, expression) are NOT scored independently. They describe what writing at each score point looks like across all four areas.
- To earn a 3, the response must satisfy all four sub-criteria consistently. A response with strong evidence but a fuzzy central idea typically caps at 2.
- Start at the lowest score point and ask, does the response meet all four sub-criteria for this level? Move up only when it clearly does.
Common pitfalls to avoid
- Awarding 3 to a response that retells the source without organizing around a clear central idea, informational writing requires synthesis, not summary.
- Counting source mentions instead of asking whether evidence develops the central idea.
- Forgetting the 0-on-Development → 0-on-Conventions rule when scoring source-summary responses that have clean mechanics.
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 point apart.
- Re-norm halfway through a long batch. Drift is real.
Notes for the STAAR Informational Rubric, Grades 3–5
STAAR Grades 3-5 Informational rubric uses "central idea" rather than "controlling idea" or "thesis." The expectation is age-appropriate explanation built around one clear main idea, not the kind of complex thesis statement expected in later grades.
STAAR prompts at Grades 3-5 typically provide one or two short source texts on a topic. The rubric expects evidence drawn from at least one text. Responses that just retell the source without synthesizing around a central idea typically cap Development at 2.
Informational writing should explain or describe, not argue. Responses that take a position ("I think this is the most important") slip into opinion writing and lose alignment with the genre, lowering the focus score.
Universal STAAR scoring rule, a response that earns 0 on Organization and Development of Ideas earns 0 on Conventions regardless of mechanical quality.
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 honey bees help plants grow
Many plants need help to grow new seeds. Honey bees help plants grow by carrying pollen from one flower to another, and without honey bees many of the plants we eat would not produce as much fruit.
How pollination works
The article explains that pollen is a powder inside a flower. When a honey bee lands on a flower to drink the nectar, pollen sticks to its fuzzy body. When the bee flies to the next flower, some of the pollen rubs off. This is called pollination. The article says pollination is what allows the plant to start growing fruit or new seeds.
Why this matters for food
The article gives one important example. Apple trees, almond trees, and blueberry bushes all need honey bees to pollinate their flowers. If no honey bees visit the flowers, the plants do not make many apples, almonds, or blueberries. Many foods that people eat depend on honey bees doing this job.
Why bees are special at this job
Other animals like butterflies and birds can carry pollen too, but the article says honey bees are the best at it. They visit hundreds of flowers in one day, and their fuzzy bodies hold a lot of pollen. That makes one bee much more useful to a farmer than one butterfly.
Conclusion
Honey bees carry pollen from flower to flower while they drink nectar. This helps plants like apple trees, almond trees, and blueberry bushes grow the fruits we eat. Without honey bees, our food would look very different.
Clear central idea, all four sub-criteria met
Central idea (honey bees help plants by carrying pollen) is clear and maintained throughout. Organization moves logically from pollination to food crops to why bees specifically. Specific evidence (apple, almond, blueberry; hundreds of flowers per day) is drawn from the source.
Consistent command of grade-level conventions
Spelling, capitalization, sentence formation, and grammar are correct throughout. There are no patterns of errors. Earns full credit on the STAAR 0-2 Conventions sub-scale.
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 STAAR Informational Writing Rubric, Grades 3–5
What is the STAAR Informational Writing Rubric for Grades 3 to 5?
What does "central idea" mean on the STAAR Grades 3-5 Informational rubric?
How is informational writing different from argumentative writing on STAAR?
How many sources do STAAR Grades 3-5 Informational prompts give students?
What is the "0 on Development equals 0 on Conventions" rule?
Is this rubric the official version from TEA?
Where can I find the source document?
Can EnlightenAI score student writing using this rubric?
Use this rubric in EnlightenAI
Train EnlightenAI on the STAAR Informational Writing Rubric, Grades 3–5 and start scoring student writing, with consistent per-trait feedback, in a single class period.