Use this rubric when students are using several sources to build an explanation, argument, or research-based response. It is designed for assignments where students need to focus a research question or topic, select relevant evidence, integrate sources, connect ideas across texts, and attribute source information.
This page offers an example rubric for Grades 11-12 research and source synthesis. It focuses on common features teachers often look for in this kind of writing: research focus, source relevance, evidence integration, synthesis, analysis, organization, attribution, and language control. You can use it as a starting point, adapt it to your curriculum, or use it as a model when building your own rubric.
TA39 drafts from the rubric you choose; you review, adapt, and decide what fits your assignment.
At a Glance
| Field | Details |
|---|---|
| Level | Grades 11-12 / Years 12-13 equivalent, depending on system |
| Subject Area | English / Language Arts, or equivalent |
| Writing Type | Research / Source Synthesis |
| Task Type | Source-based research response / synthesis essay |
| Useful For | research tasks, multi-source responses, synthesis assignments |
| Reference Example | Smarter Balanced source-use expectations from argumentative and explanatory writing references |
| Optional Reference Codes | US Common Core / California Common Core codes are included below as one example of how this writing task can be mapped to standards |
| Scoring Scale | 4-level analytic rubric, 32 points total |
What This Rubric Covers
This rubric focuses on the writing moves students need for source-based research response / synthesis essay:
- Establishing a research focus or question
- Selecting relevant sources or source details
- Integrating quoted or paraphrased evidence
- Connecting ideas across sources
- Explaining what the evidence shows
- Organizing information clearly
- Attributing source information
- Using accurate grammar, punctuation, spelling, and sentence structure
Download
For easier reuse, the rubric grid and performance conversion are packaged as a separate Markdown file inside this zip:
Rubric
Score: ___ / 32
| Criteria | 4 - Exceeds Expectations | 3 - Meets Expectations | 2 - Approaching Expectations | 1 - Not Yet Meeting Expectations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Research Focus (Optional US ref: W.11-12.7) | Establishes a clear research focus or question that guides the response. | Establishes a research focus that mostly guides the response. | Research focus is broad, unclear, or only partly sustained. | Research focus is missing or unrelated. |
Source Selection and Relevance (Optional US refs: W.11-12.7, W.11-12.8) | Uses sources that are relevant and useful for the task. | Uses mostly relevant sources. | Uses sources unevenly; some may be weakly connected. | Uses sources that are missing, irrelevant, or not useful. |
Evidence Integration (Optional US refs: W.11-12.8, W.11-12.9) | Integrates quoted or paraphrased evidence smoothly and accurately. | Uses quoted or paraphrased evidence mostly accurately. | Uses evidence unevenly or with limited accuracy. | Provides little or no usable evidence from sources. |
Synthesis Across Sources (Optional US refs: W.11-12.8, W.11-12.9) | Connects ideas across sources to build a fuller explanation or argument. | Makes some clear connections across sources. | Connections across sources are limited or mostly summary-based. | Shows little or no connection across sources. |
Explanation and Analysis (Optional US ref: W.11-12.9) | Explains what the evidence shows and why it matters for the task. | Explains evidence and generally connects it to the focus. | Explanation is brief, repetitive, or only partly connected. | Provides little or no explanation of evidence. |
Organization (Optional US refs: W.11-12.2, W.11-12.4) | Organizes information logically so the reader can follow the line of thinking. | Organizes information clearly. | Organization is uneven or sometimes confusing. | Organization is difficult to follow. |
Citation / Attribution (Optional US ref: W.11-12.8) | Clearly attributes source information according to the assignment expectations. | Attributes source information with minor lapses. | Attribution is inconsistent or incomplete. | Source attribution is missing or unclear. |
Language Accuracy (Optional US refs: L.11-12.1, L.11-12.2) | Demonstrates strong control of grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and sentence structure. | Demonstrates adequate control of language accuracy. | Demonstrates partial control of language accuracy. | Frequent errors interfere with understanding. |
Performance Conversion
| Raw Score | Performance Level |
|---|---|
| 29-32 | 4 - Exceeds Expectations |
| 22-28 | 3 - Meets Expectations |
| 14-21 | 2 - Approaching Expectations |
| 13 or below | 1 - Not Yet Meeting Expectations |
Teacher Adaptation Notes
Before using this rubric with students, review it against your assignment, curriculum, and marking expectations.
- If the assignment is argumentative, add claim and counterclaim expectations.
- If the assignment is explanatory, emphasize main idea and explanation over persuasion.
- Add the citation or referencing format your students are expected to use.
- If students use provided sources only, adjust the source-selection criterion.
Standards and Reference Examples
The rubric above can be adapted for many curricula. The standards listed here are US-specific reference examples, not requirements for using the rubric. They are included for teachers who want to see how this kind of writing task is described in one widely used US framework.
If you work in another curriculum, you can map the same criteria to your own outcomes, such as GCSE, IGCSE, IB MYP, CBSE, Australian Curriculum, Singapore English, UAE standards, or your school-based writing framework.
You can review the US reference standards here:
- California Content Standards: English Language Arts
- Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts
| Standard | What It Means for This Rubric |
|---|---|
W.11-12.7 | Conduct research projects to answer a question or solve a problem. |
W.11-12.8 | Gather relevant information from authoritative sources and avoid plagiarism. |
W.11-12.9 | Draw evidence from texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. |
W.11-12.2 | Write informative or explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas. |
W.11-12.4 | Produce clear writing appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. |
L.11-12.1 | Demonstrate command of grammar and usage. |
L.11-12.2 | Demonstrate command of capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. |
Source and Attribution
This example is based on publicly available standards and assessment-reference materials. These links are provided for attribution, teacher context, and further reading:
- Smarter Balanced Argumentative Performance Task Writing Rubric
- Smarter Balanced Explanatory Performance Task Writing Rubric
- Smarter Content Explorer
- Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts
- California Content Standards: English Language Arts
This is a TA39 example informed by Smarter Balanced source-use expectations. It is not an official Smarter Balanced research synthesis rubric.
Smarter Balanced is cited as an external reference source for assessment target information and related writing expectations. This example is not an official Smarter Balanced rubric and does not imply endorsement by Smarter Balanced, the Regents of the University of California, the California Department of Education, NGA Center, or CCSSO.
The US standards links are included as one example of standards alignment. Teachers using other frameworks can treat these links as optional background and focus on the rubric criteria themselves.
Want to Build a Different Rubric?
You can also use the Smarter Content Explorer to explore a different grade, claim, target, or writing purpose. This can be helpful if you want to see how a large assessment system describes writing expectations.
If you download reference materials from an external site, review that site's terms and copyright notices before reusing or redistributing the content. TA39 can help turn a rubric or reference document into a format you can review and adapt. You still review the criteria, adjust the wording, and decide whether it fits your assignment.