ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS RESOURCES

LANGUAGE ARTS :: SECONDARY RESOURCES :: WRITING HANDBOOK :: ASSESSMENT IN A VARIETY OF CONTEXTS

Throughout the school year a student's writing is assessed in many different ways. For tenth graders, one of those assessments is the Grade 10 Writing Test. Teachers should understand, however, that this is only one method of assessment and that it should not be used to limit or undermine opportunities for other kinds of assessment in the classroom. Students should not, for example, be assessed only on timed informational writing samples produced outside the context of regular classroom instruction.

Irvin, Buehl, and Klemp (2003) write that "Research and common sense support the assumption that attempting to teach the test in isolation does not improve student test scores" (p. 208). They cite the work of Langer (2000) who has identified six features of classroom instruction that do, however, correlate with improved student test performance. Irvin, Buehl, and Klemp (2003) identify them as follows:

• teaching skills with a variety of approaches;
• integrating test preparation into all instruction;
• making connections across instruction, curriculum, and life;
• teaching learning and test-taking strategies explicitly;
• encouraging creative thinking;
• fostering collaboration. (p. 208)

Bearing this in mind, teachers should strive to use what they know about effective instruction and assessment to integrate writing into the content areas in ways that are meaningful, linked to the Standard Course of Study, and challenge students to learn.

The goal of classroom assessment is simple: to enable students to grow as learners. Although students are also "rewarded" for their efforts when they receive grades for the writing, the teacher's ultimate responsibility is to help students use writing as a tool for thinking and improve their abilities as writers. For this reason, opportunities for peer and teacher response, not just evaluation or grading of writing, is important. Students need to be able to see the evolution of their writing and understand how they are progressing throughout the course.

Some teachers have found authentic assessment to be an appropriate tool to use with their students. In short, authentic assessment requires that "… the activity must be meaningful, carefully tied to instruction, and involve multiple checkpoints and evaluators" (Irvin, Buehl, and Klemp, 2003, p. 213). When teachers design complex, holistic writing activities which actively engage students, involve real-world activities, and offer evaluation from someone other than just the teacher, they are engaging in authentic assessment. As Irvin, Buehl, and Klemp (2003) write, "The use of authentic assessment represents an effort to change assessment from a negative event, in which knowledge and people are measured, to a positive process, by which knowledge is applied and people are valued. With authentic assessment, the focus is on learning" (p. 210).

Dornan, Rosen, and Wilson (2003) describe classroom assessment of writing as "low stakes/ high yield" (p. 204). It is low stakes because individual assignments tend to carry little weight, and evaluation tends to be more formative than summative. It is high yield because students can learn from the teacher's evaluation, they often have opportunities for revision, and they can directly apply what they are learning to other writing assignments immediately.

The National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) conducts national writing assessment surveys every four years of fourth, eighth, and twelfth-grade students and reports the results for the nation and for the participating states. Student performance on the assessment is reported in terms of an average writing score as well as the percentage of students achieving each of the following three levels: Basic, Proficient, or Advanced. These achievement levels are collective judgments made by representative panels of teachers, education specialists, and members of the public of what students should know and be able to do for each grade tested. While caution is advised when interpreting and using these achievement levels since they are developmental, they have been widely used by national and state officials as a common measurement of academic performance in writing.

State writing assessments are usually conducted to fulfill one of two purposes (1) using student performance as a measurement of the effectiveness of curriculum delivery, or (2) as part of a statewide accountability plan. Statewide accountability plans may use the measurement of student performance for a variety of purposes including but not limited to: student accountability, school accountability, and/or school district accountability. The rewards and/or sanctions associated with these plans vary from state to state

 

<< Back | Table of Contents | Next >>