Comments:

Student
(Evidence/
standards met

Concerns
(Improve or
Remediate)

Standards/
Criteria
(ERWC)

I have learned
how to
adequately
analyze and
annotate text and
provide analysis
as to why the
author said what
they said and
how everything
they say interact
with each other. I
also can provide
a summary of
the text

Even though I
can prove a
summary, my
summaries need
to be more in
depth because I
tend to be very
vague and a little
confusing with
how I word
things.

Reading:
Met standards.
Determine two
or more central
ideas of a text
and analyze their
development
over the course
of the text,
including how
they interact and
build on one
another to
provide a
complex
analysis; provide
an objective
summary of the
text

I am not very
good at writing
narratives to
develop real or
imagined
experiences in
my opinion, and
my technique is
lacking (not very
good?).

Writing: Write
narratives to
develop real or
imagined
experiences or
events using
effective
technique, wellchosen details,
and wellstructured event
sequences

Did not meet

standards.

Speaking and
Listening:
Evaluate a
speaker's point
of view,
reasoning, and
use of evidence
and rhetoric,

Met standards.

This is
something I
think I am good
at. Its really
interesting to try
and look at
things from the
authors

Advanced/
Exceeded
Standards

Comments:
Teacher

perspective, like
why they chose
to do what they
did and why it
helps with their
writing.

assessing the
stance, premises,
links among
ideas, word
choice, points of
emphasis, and
tone used.
I feel like I need
a lot of
improvement in
this area because
while a lot of the
claims I have
previously
written in my
papers are good I
feel like they are
also very lacking
in gauging the
audiences
interest and
things of that
nature

I also feel like I

am very good in
this area. I feel
as if I can
determine an
authors pov or
purpose in a text
and analyze the
style and how
the content
contributes

I am generally

Writing:
Did not meet
Develop claim(s) standards.
and
counterclaims
fairly and
thoroughly,
supplying the
most relevant
evidence for
each while
pointing out the
strengths and
limitations of
both in a manner
that anticipates
the audience's
knowledge level,
concerns, values,
and possible
biases
Reading:
Met standards.
Determine an
author's point of
view or purpose
in a text in which
the rhetoric is
particularly
effective,
analyzing how
style and content
contribute to the
power,
persuasiveness
or beauty of the
text

Though I can

Speaking/

Met standards

pretty good at
conveying a
clear point I just
need to work on
the stuff listed in
the next column

convey a clear
and distinct
perspective, I
have a little
more trouble
finding the best
way to present
the information
as to opposing
perspectives and
how to appeal to
the audience.

Listening:
Present
information,
findings, and
supporting
evidence,
conveying a
clear and distinct
perspective, such
that listeners can
follow the line of
reasoning,
alternative or
opposing
perspectives are
addressed, and
the organization,
development,
substance, and
style are
appropriate to
purpose,
audience, and a
range of formal
and informal
tasks

I think I am also
doing well in
this area because
its easier to
analyze things
for me than it is
to write research
based papers

Reading:
Met standards
Analyze the
impact of the
author's choices
regarding how to
develop and
relate elements
of a story or
drama

I think Im doing I dont think I

very good in this need much
area.
improvement in
this area. I come
to discussions
every day
prepared and use
evidence from
text. Though, I

Speaking and
Met standards.
Listening: Come
to discussions
prepared;
explicitly draw
on that
preparation by
referring to
evidence from

could use a
couple of other
sources and
more research.

texts and other

research on the
topic or issue to
stimulate a
thoughtful, wellreasoned
exchange of
ideas