This article focuses on a study comparing five elements of a timed writing assignment contrasted with essays available for revision each three weeks and turned in as part of a portfolio at the term's end. The five traits tracked were organization, focus, elaboration, evidence, and mechanics. Both authors reviewed the essays and scored them according to a rubric. Disparity of less than one interval was determined by the mean while disparity of more than one point was negotiated between both authors until they reached consensus. Students did score higher on the workshop-based pieces than the timed essays and the authors purport than an environment allowing revision is a more accurate reflection of the classroom experience. Furthermore, it is a more accurate judge of how effective classroom teaching strategies are because students have the ability to incorporate newly acquired data into the revisions.
The strength of the article lies in the attempt to offer quantitative date for interpretation that could indicate concise areas most benefiting from specified approaches. That the grading is inherently subjective complicates the ability to classify the study as objective. Also, the authors evaluated the student work and inherent bias could exist as they may skew toward an anticipated outcome. Perhaps the study would benefit from an outside evaluator of the assignments to curb bias.
Again, this article reinforced the concept of portfolio as a process to inform writing. Students in high school cannot be assumed to have the desire to become good writers. Often students write as a requirement to the class or take a class, such as creative writing, with the anticipation that it is easier. A concern stemming from the portfolio is that this assumption is inherent. While students will benefit from the process, how to keep students engaged and committed to their own development remains critical to success. A goal of writing is to further critical thinking and the ability to self assess and analyze.
1 comment:
Interesting article; no doubt the bibliography includes several studies that might help answer some of Karin's reservations about the scoring process and results; this work has been in progress for a couple of decades at least.
Here's a question this article raises for me, and it goes to the "how to engage them" issue: How much difference might it make to high school students if they knew their prospective university would place them in first-year writing on the basis of their high school portfolios? Would that help them regard their work as building toward a larger goal?
Post a Comment