Assessing writing.

Feedback should include positive comments and corrections that cover content as well as grammatical/lexical accuracy. It is best to use a separate sheet of paper for comments instead of writing over students' work. It is also good to focus on important errors which hinder comprehension -- these are higher in frequency and may stigmatize the author -- or which are currently the focus of instruction.

Grading can provide valuable feedback when the criteria for grading are clearly articulated and shared with the students beforehand. But at the end of the day, students will look at the grade they got and won't be interested in how to improve.

This a very interesting video where Professor Raizen who teaches Hebrew explains that she does not grade students' writing:

http://tltc.la.utexas.edu/methods/video/mp4/wr/wr-04-01-assessment-2.mp4

There are several steps to make writing the real focus of our feedback and assessment:

• Connect the feedback to the purpose of the task.
  Make sure to assign a grade for global content: clear statement of purpose, sufficient details, effective connection between ideas, for example.
• Act as a collaborator in the writing process.
  Let students revise their written work.
• Focus on content first, then on accuracy.
  Research has found that when feedback focuses on content first, the final written work is better both in content and accuracy (Semke, 1984).
• Facilitative comments maintain students' integrity and help keep them motivated.
  Negative statements will shut down students, while clarification questions will help them express an idea more effectively.
• Self-correction increases accuracy, linguistic gains, and productivity.

A somewhat newer approach of evaluation is the writing portfolio. This approach underscores writing as a process, a meaningful communicative act, and a skill worthy of emphasis in the foreign language curriculum. Students submit one or two writing samples each week, each month, or as the course allows. Students may be asked to include feedback from a variety of sources, such as self-editing checklists, peer-editing comments, and/or comments from the instructor.

There are several types of peer-editing that can be effectively implemented in any level of foreign language classroom:

• Classical editing: author reads paper; peers in small group take notes on content, organization, accuracy (both lexical and grammatical); discuss comments.
• Silent editing: each partner reads quietly then gives feedback during debriefing session (with or without specific check-lists).
• Select editing: members of group get different colored pencils; each is responsible for one aspect of paper to give feedback on.
• Post-teacher editing: teacher gives feedback; students work collaboratively in pairs making corrections and resolve any questions they may have about the instructor's comments (this seems to be the most satisfying for students and results in the least amount of hypercorrection.

Books to consider reading are Scott, Virginia M. 1996. Rethinking Foreign Language Writing and Semke, Harriet D. 1984. Effects of the Red Pen.

I think I have been assigning meaningless grades far too often this year, so my goal for next year is to grade less and to give more constructive feedback instead. I also want my students to have a writing portfolio where they will be able to re-examine and compare their different writing assignments. That way, they will be able to see the noticeable progress they make.

If you liked this post, you can also read:

• How to design good communicative tasks
• How to implement communicative tasks
• Writing is a productive skill
• How to design good writing tasks
• Creative writing
  

Permalink | Leave a comment  »