Primary trait scoring is linked with the work of Lloyd- Jones (1997) for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), a large scale testing program for schools in the US. Primary trait scoring shows a limiting of criteria planned for holistic scoring as it requires scoring a piece of writing by just one characteristic related to that task. The primary trait is recognized by the task designers and makes teachers and students able to concentrate on a critical characteristic of the task, such as appropriate text staging, creative response, effective argument, reference to sources, audience design, and so on. But while the approach identifies that responding to everything at the same time is not possible, raters may find it hard …show more content…
In a primary trait assessment, a scoring rubric is produced for each writing task which are: a) The writing task; b) A statement of the primary rhetorical trait evolved by the task; c) A theory about the expected performance on the task; d) A statement of the relationship between the task and the primary trait; e) A rating scale which expresses levels of performance; f) Sample scripts at each level; and g) Descriptions of why each script was scored as it was. Figure 2.1 clarifies part of a scoring guide for a primary trait assessment. As the figure illustrates, the scoring rubric in primary trait scoring contains a lot of details and particularly presents how different examinees move towards the writing task. It can be seen that in primary trait scoring, a lot of concentration is paid on time and …show more content…
The fact that raters must give a score for each category aids to make sure that features are not subsided into one and so provides more information than a single holistic score. Analytic scoring defines the features to be evaluated by separating and sometimes weighting individual elements clearly and is therefore more efficient in differentiating between weaker texts. Weigle (2002) claims that in analytic scoring unlike holistic scoring, scripts are scored on different features of writing or criteria such as content, organization, cohesion, register, vocab, grammar, or mechanics. Thus, analytic scoring provides more comprehensive information about an examinee’s performance. Because of this, analytic scoring is more popular than holistic scoring among writing experts. Jacobs et al. (1981) propose one of the most operational analytic scales in ESL. Their scale focuses on five features of writing: content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics. Figure 2.3 illustrates their
In Holistic Versus Trait-Specific Evaluation, the author claims that the best person to professionally judge a writer's work, is the person writing them self. They can look at their own writing by using what's provided after the reading, they're called "self-talk" rubrics, used as guides for talking to one self about their own writing. The self guide offers statements for talking to one self ,for one's writing. The author argues that students have to learn how to talk to themselves in a way that their professor do, when grading the student's papers. If a student understands what their professor is looking for, then the student will increase their chances at success. The author uses the Olympic games as an excellent example to show how working
It also evaluates the quality of O’Brien writing, and focuses on any areas of weaknesses, and
Several people have trouble writing college level essays and believe that they are unable to improve their writing skills. In “the Inspired Writer vs. The Real Writer,” Sarah Allen argues how no one is born naturally good at writing. Sarah Allen also states how even professional writers have trouble with the task of writing. Others, such as Lennie Irvin, agree. In Irvin’s article “What is ‘Academic’ Writing?” states how there are misconceptions about writing. Furthermore, Mike Bunn’s article “How to Read Like a Writer” shows ways on how one can improve their writing skills. Allen, Bunn, and Irvin are correct to say how no one is born naturally good writers. Now that we know this, we should find ways to help improve our writing skills, and
This article, reporting on the research done by Margo Glew and Charlene Polio of Michigan State University, examines writing assessment in a different way than most research on the topic. The goal of this research was to look into how an ESL student chooses prompts for a writing exam when offered a choice. Polio and Glew not only investigate how they choose, but how long it takes each student to choose and if they should even be given a choice at all.
...eading and Writing. Ed. Edgar V. Roberts. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2008. 709. Print
Learning to read and write are both considered to be fundamental human skills, that we begin to learn from the day we start school. As time advances, as do our minds, and we are expected to evolve in our reading and writing skills. Finishing high school is a large milestone for the lives of young adults; however, there is so much to learn in order to reach the next big milestone. To be a writer in college can challenge our preconceived thoughts on how we write. Although some skills remain unchanged, high school graduates are faced with overcoming new ways of doing a skill that seems so simple that it is practically innate. The definition of writing skills for college students is much different than high school. However, considering we have come so far it is time to go over the information we already know and challenge ourselves with ideas that we are yet to learn more about.
Being a new teacher of English, I find the assessment of compositions to be a concept I question and struggle with on a regular basis. Having consulted several colleagues, mentors, administrators, and fellow graduate students, I have come to the conclusion that there is no easy answer to this tedious yet ever important question. While there are many inlets and outlets to this dilemma, for the sake of time I will touch on only three. While all three are very different in terms of concepts, rituals, and conducts, they all come together to one common goal - helping students express themselves in terms of writing.
Frahm holds a similar point of view encouraging clear, straightforward writing not one with a “Confusing introduction. Lack of content. Bad transitions. (and) Excessive grammatical errors.” (Frahm 271).
There are various ways writers can evaluate their techniques applied in writing. The genre of writing about writing can be approached in various ways – from a process paper to sharing personal experience. The elements that go into this specific genre include answers to the five most important questions who, what, where, and why they write. Anne Lamott, Junot Diaz, Kent Haruf, and Susan Sontag discuss these ideas in their individual investigations. These authors create different experiences for the reader, but these same themes emerge: fears of failing, personal feelings toward writing, and most importantly personal insight on the importance of writing and what works and does not work in their writing procedures.
Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R.B. (1996) Theory and practice of writing Addison Wesley Longman Limited, Harlow, Essex, England. Martlew, M. (1983) The Psychology of Written Language, Developmental and Educational Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, U.K. Protherough, R. (1983)
A few of the common conventions are capitalization, paragraphing of ideas, punctuation and proper spelling. However, the English language can be exceptionally difficult for ELL’s when it comes to the mechanics of spelling, due to the fact that it is made up of like sounding words known as a Homonym. The perfect example of a homonym is to, too, and two. Each of these three words differs from each other, but can cause great confusion when it comes to speech. So not only is tackling tricky words a tough skill to learn, ELL students also need to maintain focus on correct punctuation and writing techniques. In the written assignment of a Vietnamese ELL student, the student states “My mother’s name is ____.” This sentence demonstrated a phenomenal use of English mechanics by adding an apostrophe in order to show possession. Also, the sentence began and ended with correct written mechanics. The grading scale of mechanic on a rubric can range from insufficient in the result of little technical formatting; to excellent, being that there was an effective use of spelling, capitalization, punctuations,
sentence level of the language. However, descriptive linguists in the 1970’s emphasized the study of language properties and the language in use in a social context. Different from cognitive model which focuses on the mental and cognitive processes of writing, linguistic model of writing focuses on sentence level and the use of language in the process of composition. Linguistic factors such as syntax, semantic, phonological, lexical, and discourse are all involved in the writing process. In this respect, the use of simple linguistic factors and frequently used vocabulary may reduce the difficulty level of the text; however, the use of complex sentence structures and lower frequency words may increase the difficulty of the written text.
writing” by R. Ramsey, the ability to write competently is a requirement for success in any field.
However, their purposes for writing are sometimes not the kind valued by Western academic communities. The nature of academic literacy often confuses and disorients students, “particularly those who bring with them a set of conventions that are at odds with those of the academic world they are entering” (Kutz, Groden & Zamel, 1993, p. 30). In addition, the culture-specific nature of schemata–abstract mental structures representing our knowledge of things, events, and situations–can lead to difficulties when students write texts in L2. Knowing how to write a “summary” or “analysis” in Mandarin or Spanish does not necessarily mean that students will be able to do these things in English (Kern, 2000). As a result, any appropriate instruction must take into consideration the influence from various educational, social, and cultural experiences that students have in their native language. These include textual issues, such as rhetorical and cultural preferences for organizing information and structuring arguments, commonly referred to as contrastive rhetoric (Cai, 1999; Connor, 1997; Kaplan, 1987; Kobayashi & Rinnert, 1996; Leki, 1993; 1997; Matalene, 1985), knowledge of appropriate genres (Johns, 1995; Swales, 1990), familiarity with writing topics (Shen, 1989), and distinct cultural and instructional socialization (Coleman, 1996; Holliday, 1997; Valdes, 1995). In addition to instructional and cultural
Another thing that I learned through this experience is how difficult it can be to code the tone of paragraphs as positive, negative, or neutral. This is a completely subjective task, and it is easy to see how there could be some disagreement in assigning scores between different coders. What one person sees as being a negative paragraph in tone, another person may read the same thing and see it as being neutral. I spent quite a bit of time contemplating how to code each paragraph. Since the accuracy of the results depend on coding the paragraphs with consistency between coders, I used my best judgement and tried to think about how others would code each paragraph as well.