A WGU performance assessment passes when every rubric aspect is independently judged Competent. Evaluators score aspect by aspect against the published rubric, so the winning method is mechanical: restate each aspect as a heading or an explicit paragraph, answer it in the task's required format with evidence, and leave nothing for the evaluator to infer. Submissions bounce when an aspect is answered implicitly, partially, or in the wrong artifact. Write to the rubric in its own order and first-pass approval becomes the norm, not the exception.
How WGU evaluators actually read your task
Tasks submitted at tasks.wgu.edu route to evaluation faculty whose job is narrow by design: compare the submission to the rubric, aspect by aspect, and mark each one Competent or Not Yet Competent. They do not grade style beyond professional communication, they do not award credit for effort or length, and they cannot pass a task that satisfies nine aspects out of ten. One missed aspect returns the whole task.
Two consequences follow. First, the rubric is not guidance, it is the entire exam; anything in your task that no aspect asks for is unpaid labor. Second, findability is competence: an evaluator who cannot quickly locate your answer to aspect B2 has, functionally, found a missing aspect. The strongest submissions read like a checklist the evaluator can walk without backtracking.
The anatomy of a task
| Component | What it is | What to do with it |
|---|---|---|
| Scenario | The fictional company, school, or patient context many tasks supply | Use its names, numbers, and constraints throughout; generic answers to specific scenarios are a classic bounce |
| Requirements list | The lettered items (A, B, B1, C...) the task orders you to produce | Mirror them as your document's structure, same letters, same order |
| Rubric aspects | The scoring table: each requirement's definition of Competent vs Not Yet Competent | Read the Competent column as acceptance criteria; your draft must satisfy its exact verbs |
| Template or artifact | Some tasks require a supplied template, spreadsheet, slide deck, or recording | Use the required artifact and format; correct content in the wrong artifact does not pass |
| Originality check | Similarity screening on submission | Submit only writing that is genuinely yours; study materials must be reworked into your own voice |
The writing method, step by step
Read the rubric before the course material
Twenty minutes with the aspects tells you what the course actually bills for. Most tasks use a fraction of the courseware; the rubric is the map to which fraction.
Build the skeleton from the requirement letters
Create a heading for every lettered requirement, in order, before writing a sentence. A1 is a heading. B2a is a heading. The evaluator's checklist is now your table of contents, and nothing can be forgotten.
Answer each aspect with its own verb
If the aspect says describe, describe; if it says analyze, weigh causes and consequences; if it says justify, give reasons against alternatives. Matching the verb's depth is what Competent means in practice.
Anchor every claim to the scenario or a source
Scenario tasks want the scenario's own facts used by name. Research-flavored aspects want current, real sources cited in APA unless the task says otherwise.
Run the two-pass check
Pass one: read only your headings against the requirements list, hunting for gaps. Pass two: read each aspect's Competent definition, then the section that answers it, asking "could a stranger point to the sentence that satisfies this?" If pointing takes effort, sharpen it.
Submit without ceremony
Unlimited penalty-free attempts mean submission risk is nearly zero, and evaluator feedback beats another week of private polishing. Once the two-pass check is clean, send it.
The five reasons tasks come back
- The implicit answer. The information exists somewhere in the document, but never as a direct, findable response to the aspect. Most common bounce by far.
- The verb mismatch. An aspect asked for analysis and received description. Depth, not length, was the miss.
- The ignored scenario. A textbook-general answer to a scenario-specific prompt, no company names, no given figures.
- The wrong artifact. A brilliant essay where the task demanded the supplied template, a slide deck, or a recorded presentation.
- The sourcing slip. Missing citations where an aspect requires them, stale references, or APA errors severe enough to trip the professional communication aspect.
If your task comes back: reading evaluator comments
A returned task is not a failure record, it is a private punch list. The evaluation report names exactly which aspects sat at Not Yet Competent and usually says why. Fix only what is named, resubmit, and nothing about the bounce ever appears on a transcript. The discipline is to answer the comment literally: if the evaluator says the justification of B3 was not evident, do not lightly edit the old paragraph, write the justification as its own labeled passage. Treat each comment as a new mini-rubric and returns stop repeating.
The done-with-you version
Everything above is the method we run in-house. Send any task through the performance assessment service and an eight-person course team executes it for you: a premium original draft built on the rubric skeleton, every aspect answered at its verb's depth, scenario compliance and APA handled, double-QA'd, delivered in 24 to 48 hours with an aspect map and walkthrough. You rework it into your own voice, submit, and if any aspect returns, revision is free until the course reads Passed. The first sample is free, so the method can prove itself on your current task before a dollar moves.
Put the method on your task
Send the code, the task number, and the rubric. A Competent-targeted draft comes back in 24 to 48 hours.
Sources and verification
Facts on this page come from official and independent sources, and anything that matters is worth checking against the originals:
- www.wgu.edu/about/institutional-catalog.html: WGU's Institutional Catalog, the primary source for assessment, grading, and term policies
- www.wgu.edu/financial-aid-tuition/tuition-business-degrees.html: official per-term tuition published at wgu.edu
- nwccu.org: Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities, the institutional accreditor
- www.ccneaccreditation.org: Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education, the nursing accreditor
- apastyle.apa.org: APA Style, the official style authority behind the formatting rules