OVERVIEW: I don't know a single person in a classroom--student or teacher--who doesn't feel that it all comes down to the assessment. For most students, that's a negative, but, as Inoue argues, it most certainly doesn't have to be that way. And, in his plea in Chapter Five to commit to antiracist writing assessment, he tells us exactly what is at stake.
And so here we are, talking about writing assessment again this week. Clark's chapter, pretty clear cut, she says and does talk about assessment and trends in the field. What Adler-Kassner & Wardle do is a little different. We haven't really talked that much about their project--these threshold concepts--but it's a pretty cool idea that, if we really allow it to inform our practice, in a way that syncs with Inoue, we really have to start to think about what we are really asking our students--or any writer at any stage of proficiency--to learn when we are helping them to become better writers. DETAILS: I'm asking something a little different this week. I would like for you to take an experience--either as a writer, a student, or a teacher--and deconstruct it in light of what you are reading. I've talked extensively about how Inoue changed how I was teaching. It's not that I wasn't doing a lot of the same things that I do now, but I was not telling students how I was doing it and that led to mystery and confusion. I was not being explicit about how I was valuing their labor so they didn't know that this is what I most wanted them to commit to any project. It's not that this is foolproof, but it's made a difference in student commitment to the work and engagement in the class. As you write, of course, speak directly to what the reading this week helps you to understand about your practice of assessment that you are talking about here--either as someone doing the assessing or someone being assessed. RESPOND TO A CLASSMATE: Select one (or more if so moved) of your classmates to respond to. What is your take on their assessment story? Would you suggest a different way of looking at it from how they are looking at it? I know you all well enough to know that I don't need to say the "oh, yeah, I totally agree," sentence is not as useful as it might seem. But, see what I did there? I said it anyway.
20 Comments
Katelyn Fitzsimmons
9/28/2020 08:19:24 am
Looking at the reading due for this week, I see an emphasis on the obvious: the importance of assessment in a writing classroom, but also an emphasis on types of assessment and how certain modes of assessment create space for students to engage with the writing process. Clark highlights a variety of assessment tactics including but not limited to: portfolios, communicating clear, concise expectations, and inviting students to submit a note to the teacher describing what specifically the writer would like the teacher to give special attention to. Personally, I have never thought about doing this in my teaching process, but I absolutely love it -- I think it gives ownership to the writer and an opportunity for me as the teacher to see what the writer is focused on in a unique way. Similarly, Adler-Kassner and Wardle discuss in the section, “All Writers Have More to Learn,” the importance of the fact that writing can always be improved -- writing is not an innate ability that humans are born with and text is an ongoing, developing entity on its own.
Reply
Nicole Moscone
9/28/2020 05:50:05 pm
Katelyn, That quotation from Adler- Kassner and Wardle also stood out to me. I think students often think that writing is an innate skill where some students are naturally "good" writers and some are not. I always try to explain to students that they aren't born knowing how to play their favorite sport. I stress how many hours of practice and games are played for them to get better. Students then begin to see that writing, like anything else, gets better when we practice. I also love giving students the ability to revise and resubmit. That is so great that students have used this time to take advantage of that and grow as writers. The only thing problematic with revisions is how time consuming it is to grade. I don't want to just have kids revise or resubmit if they do poorly, but having all students revise multiple times does take a long time and then I risk late feedback.
Reply
Nicole Moscone
9/28/2020 05:42:08 pm
Assessing writing has proved to be the hardest aspect of my job. This is my third year teaching, and I have often questioned if assessing writing is simply challenging since I am not an experienced teacher who has seen years of writing samples. After reading this week's reading I feel as though writing assessment is a larger issue and not only for rookie teachers. Adler- Kassner & Wardle’s argument that each new context requires a different kind of writing and that writers cannot just repeat prior knowledge gained from writing to every prompt or class really struck me. I see this is in my classes often. Students think that they can just repeat what they did in their last essay and reproduce the same grade. I think my high achieving students do this the most. They find patterns and try to score a high grade. Each term, my students write a summary. My students struggle to understand the differences between the summaries. For example, after a compare and contrast summary students will now write their next summary which is a cause and effect summary using the same transition words: similarly, on the other hand, etc. Rather than understanding that they should still use transition words, but that those transitions depend on the context of their summary they fall back on what they did in their last summary. After reading this chapter, I started to think about ways to help students transfer knowledge learned in previous essays and how to apply them to a different context.
Reply
Katelyn Fitzsimmons
9/29/2020 07:19:36 am
Hi Nicole,
Reply
Andrea Hicks
9/29/2020 08:54:02 am
As I read through this week’s reading, the idea of labor based grading from Chapter Two of Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies kept coming back to me. While much of Clark’s chapter referred to different assessments, I noticed a few similarities between the two readings. Clark’s insistence that writing assessment focus on “global issues” in order to “help ensure that students’ ideas are being taken seriously” (155) reminded me of Inoue’s attempt to focus on labor based grading, and to ignore the dominant racial discourse in any given classroom. I found myself connecting a lot of this week’s reading to the ideas of labor based grading. Adler-Kessler and Wardle argue that with each assignment, with each context, writing changes, and I think that this ties directly to Inoue’s point and goal of labor based grading. If we were to only grade students based on the knowledge that they bring into the classroom, our assessments and results would be drastically different than they are today. While I was reading, I thought of the most direct assessment that we currently use, as mentioned by Clark, which is to assess grammar skills and knowledge. This is written off as reductive, and though I directly teach grammar in my classroom, I try to relate grammar to communication skills. That said, I couldn’t help but wonder where that line is drawn. As of right now, students struggle with grammar skills and knowledge, and I understand that directly teaching these skills is not effective, but I am wondering what our next steps are. I do not think that letting grammar slip out of the curriculum is the answer, but I do not think that we should use it as a weapon to destroy students’ confidence. I think that every teacher has encountered numerous students with amazing ideas that get lost in the shuffle of sentence structure, but I am wondering where that line can be drawn to maintain communication without getting bogged down in grammar and syntax.
Reply
Maeve McDonagh
9/29/2020 11:14:54 am
Andrea, I typically have a similar thought when doing these readings. I agree with what the theorists and researchers are saying, yet I wonder how applicable their concepts are to an actual classroom. While it is fair to put student’s ideas ahead of their grammar mechanics, that does not mean that students can ignore grammar rules and still effectively communicate their ideas. The question then follows: what is the ratio of idea development to grammar rules that teachers should aim for? Clark would seem to think that ideas make up a decent percentage of the idea ratio; however, how does that translate to a classroom like yours where students may need more help with grammar? I also wonder about the difference in labor which goes into a direct versus indirect assessment. For the students and the assessor, a short indirect assessment is less labor while, on the other hand, creating, completing, and evaluating an effective direct assessment takes significantly more time and effort. Is there something to be said for indirect assessment in the fact that it can help us assess what we consider lower-level concerns at a quicker pace than other more direct assessments?
Reply
Maeve McDonagh
9/29/2020 10:57:10 am
This week’s readings reminded me a lot of my time working as a writing consultant in the writing center at my undergraduate university. Because of the nature of my job, I was always providing formative assessments for students as I was tasked with helping them improve their writing rather than evaluating it. One concept from Naming What We Know which I found to be very relevant to this type of assessment was concept 4.0 “All Writers Have More to Learn.” This concept may have not affected my practice so much as my practice has helped me understand this concept. While working at the writing center I saw people at many different levels of confidence with their writing, but as a consultant, the more I worked, the more I realized that it was possible to have a conversation about writing with any writer. Their paper could be better than anything I had ever produced on my own, but having a new perspective on their writing was always valuable to the clients in my experience. Clark’s idea that global concerns should be more important than smaller, surface-level errors was another concept that stood out to me in this week’s readings. This idea helped shape how I worked because I would start a session by addressing global concerns of the papers I worked with such as how effectively they address their prompt and how clearly their ideas are developed with the client. Once we revised or made a revision plan based on the global issues depending on the length of the paper, I would utilize another skill Clark mentions and comment on a few patterns of surface-level errors I noticed which would affect the clarity of the writer’s message. By not overwhelming the client with a multitude of tiny errors, I was able to make more meaningful and well-received comments by pointing out a few patterns.
Reply
Diana Cross
9/29/2020 06:05:19 pm
Hi Maeve,
Reply
Diana Cross
9/29/2020 04:49:58 pm
As I read the subsection titled Providing a Note to the Instructor, in Clark’s chapter “Assessing Writing”, I initially thought about the effectiveness of this task for my students, but then, more thoughtfully, I considered how it might have shaped my writing and my relationships with my teachers throughout grade school. As an ELL teacher, the way that I assess student writing has to be unique. I like to think that I look at the heart or “meat” of what my students’ are writing, trying to focus on the overall structure and development of an argument or extension of ideas in their writing rather than critiquing word choice or grammar. After reading Clark’s chapter, I felt excited by the idea of asking my students to write a note explaining what I should pay special attention to while reading their work, but I also paused to consider the challenges this presents with students developing their language acquisition. I then thought about how this small, but significant form of empowerment would have shaped my work in school and created a more meaningful space to write. In school, I often felt that what I wrote for teachers held little significance beyond the grade my teacher assigned to the work. One English teacher that I had, would only give A grades on revision essays if students used the sentences she had rewritten for them in the margins. What purpose does this serve? As Clark suggests in providing formative assessment, “...the comments often put too much attention on surface errors and stress fixing the paper to satisfy the teacher, seldom giving the student a reason to engage in deep revision” (155). Assessing writing is incredibly subjective and without being addressed, creates a real power gap between teacher and student, leaving students (including myself) little desire to write introspectively. I think the “note for the instructor” is a first step in addressing this. There were many times, when I was first practicing and learning how to write, where writing a note to my teacher explaining areas I was proud of, struggles, changes I would make with more time, etc. would have fostered a trusting relationship with them. Involving the writer in metacognitive reflection of their work with a trusted advisor/ teacher would’ve empowered me to invest in my writing at an early age.
Reply
Clare Nee
9/29/2020 07:38:03 pm
Diana, I also found Clark's idea of a note to a professor or teacher to be very helpful. I feel like the sentiments that Clark was valuing in this note mirror some of the questions that I would start my sessions off with students in the Writing Center. I think that it is a great way to set goals and to assist in the process of writing. I think that your point on revision essays is particularly insightful in this conversation. If a teacher telling a student exactly what to say, it defeats the revision purpose and the process of writing in and of itself. When I worked in the Writing Center I used to refer to spelling, grammar, and punctuation as "lower order concerns" to the students that I'd work with, whereas higher order concerns are more so about the big picture (thesis, organization, evidence, etc.) I see where it gets a bit tricky when working with ESL students, as the value of these concerns varies by writer. One An interesting idea regarding grammar, spelling, punctuation would be to come up with a symbol chart or numerical system that you can mark for a frequently made error to show these students the proper function of each mistake. That way the student can still engage in the critical thinking process and learn something by correcting it themselves rather than re-writing sentences in the margins. I totally agree with you on that one.
Reply
Clare Nee
9/29/2020 07:05:13 pm
I’m writing this post after receiving not one, but two rejections in the span of a couple of hours for the creative work that I submitted for publication. I’ve had a few successful publications of research, but as Adler-Kassner so aptly puts it, “Writers never cease learning to write, never completely perfect their writing ability, as long as they encounter new or unfamiliar life experiences that require or inspire writing” (61). Reading Chapter 4 really reinforced the idea that you can either take feedback or the outcome of an “assessment”, which in this case is rejection, at face value and allow it to stifle your growth, or you can take it as a learning opportunity. This is easier said than done, but I think that the reason this is is because writing is so personal, because it’s our voice. Thus, we take a negative assessment as a personal rejection of worth, but the truth is that revision is a key part of the process for all writers and that is something that this chapter also illuminates very well.
Reply
Carl Olson
9/30/2020 02:14:08 pm
I have never personally been able to see the effectiveness in those big standardized essay tests. They put too much emphasis on the product and not the process, as you mention. Revision is an important part of that process, and these tests do not allow for that. Sure, you can do a quick proofread and edit, but that is completely different to how the process of revision should work. Students have to become trained how to produce effective essays specifically for these tests, which are, frankly, not indicative of the sort of writing they will ever have to do in the real world or even in most classrooms. The assessment of these tests is supposed to be on writing ability, but it often really boils down to assessing students’ ability to quickly mimic what an effective essay is supposed to look like. I agree with you, that they do not allow for the important work that revision can do in the writing process.
Reply
Andrea Hicks
9/30/2020 04:03:33 pm
Clare- first of all, I am so sorry to hear about your rejection. It seems, though, like you are learning so much about how to use that rejection as fuel, and I am excited to see what you do moving forward!
Reply
Carl Olson
9/30/2020 01:58:41 pm
One of the key themes in this week’s reading and in connection to Inoue’s work is that open communication with students is incredibly important to their continued success. Clark discusses the various types of assessment of student writing and how it can impact their performance, such as using portfolios or rubrics. Communicating with students on how their work is being assessed is essential because of the subjective nature of writing. With little understanding on why they receive the grades or feedback that they do, students will not be able to grow their writing skills and continue to struggle in the same areas. Rubrics are great tools because they “make the teacher’s expectations for the paper explicit” (Neff-Lippman 161). Inoue takes this further by actually involving students in the process of creating rubrics, which helps students feel more invested in the work they are doing. When creating these assessment tools for one’s class, though, it is important to keep in mind the concepts laid out in Wardle and Adler-Kassner’s book. They note that there is always more to learn, failure is important to that learning process, and that revision is key to continued development of writing skills. Building in that revision is another form of open communication with students, because it allows for the student to get feedback and put that into practice.
Reply
Erin Slayton
9/30/2020 08:32:28 pm
Carl,
Reply
Erin Slayton
9/30/2020 08:16:04 pm
The particular writing experience I’m reflecting on occurred in my third year of college, when I took a poetry workshop writing course. Having never taken a workshop course before, I was pleased to find that the nature of the class would be to have rich and lovely discussions about peer work in person, offer meaningful feedback and suggestions for revision, with a final expectation that you would later revisit and revise your own poems, that have accrued feedback of their own.
Reply
Kyle
9/30/2020 08:58:30 pm
Hey Erin,
Reply
Eternal Late-night DB Poster, Kyle Rego!
9/30/2020 08:43:03 pm
Clark’s fifth chapter, “Assessing Writing” was informative in that it outlined many different modes of assessment that have, and do represent the inner-workings of classes concerned with the direct instruction of writing. As Dr. Torda points out in the directions for this post, the content of her chapter is clear cut, but certainly informatively so. I found, however, Adler-Kassner’s & Wardle’s chapter to be thoughtful, engaging, and...inspiring? I hate to use that word--it definitely gets tossed around haphazardly. It’s like the word “love” in a middle school. BUT I often felt encouraged in an inspiring way as I read. The nine years I’ve spent teaching, as I recall it, is marked by a deep mistrust of assessment. My love for the profession lies in the opportunity to plan lessons and work with students. I have worked to generate a classroom space that is very different from the ones I inhabited when I was in high school. I hope my approach to teaching “ELA” (and I truly believe that the last...three or so years of my career can be characterized by the fact that it) generates a “practice space.” I have been able to decentralize my role in the classroom, and in doing so I’ve come to mistrust my ability to create authentic opportunity for valuable assessment and feedback. Yet in reading the fourth chapter of Adler-Kassner’s & Wardle’s book I found myself more encouraged. For example, Peggy O’Neill offers a section entitled “Assessment Is an Essential Component of Learning to Write” wherein she posits that “...studentes benefit when teachers integrate assessment throughout the learning process through a variety of activities.” Here, O’Neill helped me realize that my most successful academic years of teaching take their truest form as an amalgamation of consistent mini-assessments. Her section “inspired” (see! There it is again--the word love written at the bottom of a note folded into a triangle) me to realize that I MUST find a way to decentralize my view of the most important assessment in a writing class as THE ESSAY (in all caps with a “dun dun dun” a la 1940s radio drama). I find that I place an incredible amount of importance on these “final” essays that cap off the units that divi up my years. Yet, I believe, the purest and most helpful forms of assessment in my classroom are the much smaller, instruction-based, real-time, conversational feedback that takes place while I allow my students to work and grapple with their learning among the comfort and assistance of their classmates.
Reply
Liz Brady
10/1/2020 11:52:53 am
I loved reading your love-fest for Adler-Kassner and Wardle's chapter because I, too, found myself inspired. I like that you treat your classroom as a practice space because, like Collin Brooke and Allison Carr write, writing classrooms should be "treating failure as something all writers work through, rather than as a symptom of inadequacy or stupidity" (63). If students never get the space to try and fail, then they will not progress as writers. I spent most of middle and high school regurgitating the same essay with different words and my growth as a writer fell stagnant. Allowing for experimentation is awesome and I totally cosign that.
Reply
Liz Brady
10/1/2020 11:46:47 am
Adler-Kassner and Wardle’s chapter regarding writing being a constant learning process was really impactful to me. Shirley Rose highlights the idea that “encountering difficulty in a writing situation is an indication that they are ready to learn something new about writing” (61). Struggling with writing isn’t indicative of a lack of intelligence or capability. It’s an opportunity to grow. Considering I turned in the worst paper I’ve written since starting graduate school in August and promptly cut bangs into my hair, I think I need to internalize that message.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
torda & the 513sPost to this space no later than 15 minutes before class when we meet synchronously; post by midnight on the day of class when we meet asynchronously (that includes both your post and your response to your colleagues). Archives
November 2020
Categories |