Writing Self Assessment

Use this tool to assess your own writing.
Name: 


A red asterisk (*) indicates required questions.

  1. What is the name of the assignment?*


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the ideas of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    Ideas: The heart of the message, the content of the‎
    piece, the main theme, with details that enrich and
    develop that theme.‎
    *
    The topic is narrow and manageable.‎ (5)
    Relevant, telling, quality details go beyond the obvious.‎ (5)
    Reasonably accurate details.‎ (5)
    Writing from knowledge or experience; ideas are fresh. (5)
    Reader's questions are anticipated and answered.‎ (5)
    Insight. (5)
    The topic is fairly broad.‎ (3-4)
    Support is attempted.‎ (3-4)
    Ideas are reasonably clear.‎ (3-4)
    Writer has difficulty going from general observations to ‎specifics.‎ (3-4)
    The reader is left with questions.‎ (3-4)
    The writer generally stays on topic.‎ (3-4)
    The writer is still in search of a topic.‎ (1-2)
    Information is limited or unclear or the length is not adequate for development.‎. (1-2)
    The idea is a simple restatement or a simple answer to the question. (1-2)
    The writer has not begun to define the topic.‎ (1-2)
    Everything seems as important as everything else.‎ (1-2)
    The text may be repetitious, disconnected, and contains too ‎many random thoughts. (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the ideas of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the organization of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    Organization: The internal structure, the thread of‎
    central meaning, the logical and sometimes ‎intriguing pattern of the ideas.‎
    *
    An inviting introduction draws the reader in; a satisfying ‎conclusion leaves the reader with a sense of closure and ‎resolution.‎ (5)
    Thoughtful transitions. (5)
    Sequencing is logical and effective. (5)
    Pacing is well controlled.‎ (5)
    The title, if desired, is original.‎ (5)
    Flows so smoothly, the reader hardly thinks about it. (5)
    The paper has a recognizable introduction and conclusion. (3-4)
    Transitions often work well.‎ (3-4)
    Sequencing shows some logic, yet structure takes. (3-4)
    Pacing is fairly well controlled.‎ (3-4)
    A title (if desired) is present.‎ (3-4)
    Organization sometimes supports the main point or story ‎line.‎ (3-4)
    No real lead.‎ (1-2)
    Connections between ideas are confusing.‎ (1-2)
    Sequencing needs work.‎ (1-2)
    Pacing feels awkward.‎ (1-2)
    No title is present (if requested).‎ (1-2)
    Problems with organization make it hard for the reader. (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the organization of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the voice of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    The unique perspective of the writer evident in the ‎piece through the use of compelling ideas, engaging ‎language, and revealing details.‎*
    Uses topic, details, and language to strongly connect. (5)
    Purpose is reflected by content and arrangement of ideas. (5)
    The writer takes a risk with revealing details.‎ (5)
    Expository or persuasive reflects understanding and commitment to topic. (5)
    Narrative writing is honest, personal, and engaging.‎ (5)
    Attempt to connect with audience is earnest but impersonal. (3-4)
    Attempts to include content and structure to reflect purpose. (3-4)
    Occasionally reveals personal details, but avoids risk.‎ (3-4)
    Expository or persuasive writing lacks consistent engagement with the topic. (3-4)
    Narrative writing reflects limited individual perspective.‎ (3-4)
    Fails to connect with the audience.‎ (1-2)
    Purpose is unclear.‎ (1-2)
    Writing is risk free, with no sense of the writer.‎ (1-2)
    Expository or persuasive writing is mechanical, showing no engagement with the topic. (1-2)
    Narrative writing lacks development of a point of view.‎ (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the voice of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the word choice of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    Word Choice: The use of rich, colorful,‎
    precise language that moves and enlightens the ‎reader.‎
    *
    Words are specific and accurate.‎ (5)
    Striking words and phrases.‎ (5)
    Natural, effective and appropriate language.‎ (5)
    Lively verbs, specific nouns and modifiers.‎ (5)
    Language enhances and clarifies meaning.‎ (5)
    Precision is obvious.‎ (5)
    Words are adequate and correct in a general sense.‎ (3-4)
    Familiar words and phrases communicate.‎ (3-4)
    Attempts at colorful language.‎ (3-4)
    Passive verbs, everyday nouns, mundane modifiers. (3-4)
    Functional, with one or two fine moments.‎ (3-4)
    Occasionally, the words show refinement and precision.‎ (3-4)
    Words are nonspecific or distracting.‎ (1-2)
    Many of the words don’t work.‎ (1-2)
    Language is used incorrectly.‎ (1-2)
    Limited vocabulary, misuse of parts of speech.‎ (1-2)
    Words and phrases are unimaginative and lifeless.‎ (1-2)
    Jargon or clichés, persistent redundancy.‎ (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the word choice of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the sentence fluency of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    Sentence Fluency: The rhythm and flow of the
    language, the sound of word patterns, the way in ‎which the writing plays to the ear, not just to the ‎eye.‎*
    Sentences enhance the meaning.‎ (5)
    Sentences vary in length as well as structure.‎ (5)
    Purposeful and varied sentence beginnings.‎ (5)
    Creative and appropriate connectives.‎ (5)
    The writing has cadence.‎ (5)
    Sentences get the job done in a routine fashion.‎ (3-4)
    Sentences are usually constructed correctly.‎ (3-4)
    Sentence beginnings are not ALL alike; some variety is ‎attempted.‎ (3-4)
    The reader sometimes has to hunt for clues.‎ (3-4)
    Parts of the text invite expressive oral reading; others may be stiff, awkward, choppy, or gangly.‎ (3-4)
    Sentences are choppy, incomplete, rambling, or awkward. Phrasing does not sound natural‎. (1-2)
    No "sentence sense" present.‎ (1-2)
    Sentences begin the same way.‎ (1-2)
    Endless connectives.‎ (1-2)
    Does not invite expressive oral reading.‎ (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the sentence fluency of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5


  1. Check all of the following statements which are true about the conventions of the paper. The numbers in parentheses after each response is the score associated with that response on the rubric.

    Conventions: The mechanical correctness of the‎
    piece; spelling, grammar and usage, paragraphing, ‎use of capitals, and punctuation.‎*
    Spelling is generally correct.‎ (5)
    Punctuation is accurate.‎ (5)
    Capitalization skills are present.‎ (5)
    Grammar and usage are correct.‎ (5)
    Paragraphing tends to be sound.‎ (5)
    The writer may manipulate conventions for stylistic effect; and it works!‎ (5)
    Spelling is usually correct or reasonably phonetic on common words. (3-4)
    End punctuation is usually correct.‎ (3-4)
    Most words are capitalized correctly.‎ (3-4)
    Problems with grammar and usage are not serious.‎ (3-4)
    Paragraphing is attempted.‎ (3-4)
    Moderate (a little of this, a little of that) editing.‎ (3-4)
    Spelling errors are frequent.‎ (1-2)
    Punctuation missing or incorrect.‎ (1-2)
    Capitalization is random.‎ (1-2)
    Errors in grammar or usage are very noticeable.‎ (1-2)
    Paragraphing is missing.‎ (1-2)
    The reader must read once to decode, then again for meaning. (1-2)


  1. What score would you give the conventions of your paper?*
    1 2 3 4 5