It is important that learning experiences in the classroom be assessed in an authentic manner. The traditional grading of papers still has a legitimate place in the English language arts classroom but should not be the sole means of assessing writing. Rather, continuous assessment should mirror instruction and be interwoven with it. Evaluation is vital for a clear, reliable picture of how students are progressing and how well the methods of instruction address students' needs.
Writing assessment can take many forms. Where once only product was considered, the writing process must also be acknowledged in evaluation. In process assessment, teachers monitor the process students use as they write. In product assessment, teachers evaluate students' finished compositions. In both types of assessment, the goal is to help students become better writers.
| Process Assessment | Product Assessment | Some Final Considerations |
Teachers watch students as they engage in writing in order to determine strengths, abilities, and needs. Teachers observe in order to learn about students' attitudes and interests in writing, the writing strategies that they use, and how students interact with classmates during writing. While observing, teachers may ask students questions such as: How is it going? What are you writing about? Where do you want this piece to go? This type of informal observation, although not graded as such, enables teachers to make informed instructional decisions and demonstrates to students that teachers are supportive of the writing process.
Conferencing is a central means of assessing the writing process. A conference is a meeting to discuss work in progress. As teachers listen to students talk about writing, they can learn how to help students work through the process. A conference can occur at various points of the writing process. Teachers' questions can lead students to discuss what they know, what they are doing, what they find confusing, or of what they are proud. Teachers should balance the amount of their talk with the students' talk and allow the students to take responsibility for discussing and thinking about their own writing.
The key to success in any conference lies in asking questions that teach, such as the following:
As students are drafting:
As students revise their writing:
After students have completed their compositions:
(Adapted from Tompkins, 1994, p. 375)
Using anecdotal records and checklists, teachers can chart students' development and gather information that will help them determine grades and quality. Anecdotal records provide teachers with details about students' writing that provide a tool for continuous literacy assessment. Over time, these records provide comprehensive pictures of the students as writers.
Teachers can use or adapt the form accessed below to assess writing process.
The following assessment forms are provided as examples. To be able to view and copy these files the user must have a viewing program such as Acrobat Reader. If you do not have such a program, click on the Acrobat Insignia provided below.
When students assess their own writing and writing processes, they develop a sense of responsibility. In self- assessment, students assess their own writing and decide which pieces will be shared or evaluated. As students work through the writing process, they may address the quality of the writing and the effectiveness of the message. They may also judge if they have met the requirements for the given assignment. Early in the course, teachers can introduce students to the concept of self-assessment by creating a handout with questions such as the following:
Does my composition make sense?
Does it say what I want it to say?
Does it say it clearly?
Can the reader follow my thinking (i.e., my organization)?
Are there any details that need to be deleted? Added?
Am I happy with this composition? What makes this piece of writing strong? Weak?
Students' reflections and insights are an important element of evaluation. Most classes, with practice, are capable of assisting the teacher in establishing evaluative criteria. Teachers should clearly communicate to students their expectations regarding evaluation. An example follows:
Choose five compositions from your writing folder/dossier/portfolio that you wish to submit for evaluation. Each composition should have gone through the following steps:
Step 1: pre-writing plans
Step 2: rough draft(s)
Step 3: edited, proofread, and initialed by a peer or other person
Step 4: revised and rewritten.Work from each step must be submitted. You will be assigned/may choose a submission date.
| Process Assessment | Product Assessment | Some Final Considerations |
Assessment of the process students use when writing is of great importance in assisting students to improve their writing; however, the finished composition or product is also important as an indication of writing achievement.
Product assessment is often equated with a grade, yet this type of assessment attends only to the students' cognitive domain. "Teachers, raised and educated in the old tradition, do not easily let go of the belief that they must correct and grade each piece of writing that their students do" (Crowhurst, 1988, p. 8). This overriding obsession with correction, often narrowly focused on mechanics, actually undermines the more fundamental aspect of composing--content and clarity. Intensively marked papers give too many details, overwhelming and demoralizing the students in addition to overloading the teacher. Researchers have found that constructive, encouraging, and frequent feedback, as well as responses that emphasize content and process rather than just conventions, lead to improved competency and positive attitudes to writing. Praising what students do well improves their writing more than mere correction of what they do badly. Intensive correction actually does more damage than moderate correction. Focusing students' attention on one or two areas for concentration and improvement is more helpful.
When students use the writing process, intensive correction is not as likely to be required because students usually write more carefully considered and crafted compositions. They have gone through several revisions. They often reflect a more thorough understanding of the assignment's nature. They require, therefore, a thoughtful response from teachers. Too often teachers revert to reacting and evaluating papers only in terms of mechanics.
If students are to grow as writers they deserve regular feedback. In addition to noting errors with mechanics, teachers can respond with appropriate comments. Comments such as the following can help students grow and can validate them as writers.
Beginnings and Endings
Organization
Clarity
Structure and Language
Usage and Mechanics
(Tchudi & Mitchell, 1989, pp. 231-232. Used with permission of Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers Inc.)
By responding to more than surface mistakes, teachers become more comfortable articulating what makes one piece of writing more effective than another. They gain confidence in their own ability to evaluate writing.
Forms of product assessment include both holistic and analytic scoring.
Holistic Scoring
Teachers read the compositions for a general impression and, according to this impression, award a numerical score or letter grade. All aspects of the composition--content and conventions--affect the teacher's response, but none of them is specifically identified or directly addressed using a checklist. This approach is rapid and efficient in judging overall performance. It may, however, be inappropriate for judging how well students applied a specific criterion or developed a particular form. A sample holistic scoring guide follows, with scores ranging from 5 to 1.
Sample Writing Rubric 5/5 This writing has a strong central focus and is well organized. The organizational pattern is interesting, perhaps original, and provides the piece with an introduction which hooks the reader and carries the piece through to a satisfying conclusion. The writer has chosen appropriate details and established a definite point of view. Sentences are clear and varied. Word choice is appropriate. If there are errors in mechanics, they are the result of the student taking a risk with more complex or original aspects of writing.
4/5 This writing has a clear and recognizable focus. A standard organizational pattern is used, with clear introduction, transitions, and conclusion. A point of view is established and a sense of audience is clear. The writer has used appropriate details, clear and correct sentence structures, and specific word choices. The few errors in mechanics do not impede communication or annoy the reader unduly.
3/5 This piece of writing has a recognizable focus, though there may be superfluous information provided. The organizational pattern used is formulaic, and may be repetitive, but is clear and includes a basic introduction and conclusion. The point of view is clear and consistent. The word choices and sentence structures are clear but not imaginative. The mechanics show less effort and attention to proofreading than in the high levels.
2/5 This piece of writing has an inconsistent or meandering focus. It is underdeveloped and lacks a clear organization. Incorrect or missing transitions make it difficult to follow. There may be an introduction without a conclusion, or the reverse, a conclusion with no introduction. The point of view is unclear and there are frequent shifts in tense and person. Mechanical errors interfere with the reader's understanding and pleasure.
1/5 This piece of writing lacks focus and coherence. No organizational pattern has been chosen and there is little development of the topic. Point of view may shift in a confusing way. Mechanical errors are abundant and interfere with understanding. The piece must be read several times to make sense of it. It is not apparent that the writer has cared to communicate his or her message.
Holistic scores often emphasize creativity and overall effect.
It is important for students to be given evaluation criteria before they begin writing. A covering letter and résumé could be evaluated using the following criteria:
5/5 Letter and résumé are complete, succinct, neat, free of mechanical errors, and properly formatted.4/5 Letter and résumé are generally complete but wording and formatting could be improved. There may be details missing and a mechanical error or two.
3/5 Letter and résumé are adequate but appearance could be improved. There may be several mechanical errors. Information may be missing or unnecessary information may be included.
2/5 Letter and résumé do not make a good impression on the reader. Important facts have been left out or are disorganized. There are a number of mechanical errors.
1/5 Back to the drawing board. The letter and résumé are incomplete, unclear, and contain numerous mistakes.
Analytic Scoring
In analytic scoring, teachers read compositions focusing on a pre-determined list of criteria. Compositions can be compared to a set standard and teachers can diagnose to determine needed instruction. Although this type of analysis is more time consuming than other measures, it does provide detailed feedback. Diederich's Scale (1974) is the most widely used analytic measure but it must be used cautiously in order to reflect the instructional focus. It is easy to adapt the scale for specific purposes. The following is an example:
| 1-Poor 2-Weak 3-Average 4-Good 5- Excellent | |
| Writer:__________ | Reader:__________ |
| Quality and development of ideas Organization, relevance, movement Style, flavour, individuality Wording and phrasing Grammar, sentence structure Punctuation Spelling Manuscript form, legibility |
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Total score_____ | |
| (Diederich, 1974, p. 54. Adapted from Measuring Growth in English, copyright 1974 by the National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved.) | |
| Process Assessment | Product Assessment | Some Final Considerations |
Students need to know exactly what will be evaluated and how; teachers need to communicate their expectations or develop the expectations with the class. Consider the following:
Growth in writing is slow and highly individualistic. Effective evaluation depends on teachers clearly understanding what students can do, assessing students' growth, and giving meaningful feedback and encouragement.
