Writing assessment in early primary classrooms: thoughts from four teachers

Author:

Mariano Elle,Campbell-Evans Glenda,Hunter Janet

Abstract

AbstractIt is important that teachers are conscious of and reflect upon their views of writing in order to support students to achieve writing outcomes. This study examined teacher views about which aspects of writing they considered most important in years one and two and explored how these views came to be formed. Four West Australian teachers participated in semi-structured interviews, during which they carried out a think-aloud process, voicing their thoughts as they examined, commented on, and evaluated young students’ writing samples. These data provided insights into their reasoning as they assessed children’s writing in years one and two. Findings revealed that participants focussed on the more surface-level, or secretarial aspects of writing, such as punctuation and ‘correct’ structure for the genre. The data indicated that teachers were particularly influenced by their knowledge of the contexts in which they worked, including knowledge they shared with colleagues, together with curriculum and systemic documents such as the Judging Standards materials supplied by the School Curriculum and Standards Authority (SCSA) or the NAPLAN marking guides. These results highlight how systemic assessments can shape teacher perceptions of writing more generally than the purpose for which they were originally intended.

Funder

Edith Cowan University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Linguistics and Language,Education,Language and Linguistics

Reference67 articles.

1. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2012). Australian Curriculum implementation survey (February 2012). https://www.acara.edu.au/

2. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and reporting authority. (n.d.). Writing. NAP National Assessment Program. https://www.nap.edu.au/naplan/writing

3. Baer, A. L. (2008). Creating a shared definition of good and bad writing through revision strategies. Middle School Journal, 39(4), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00940771.2008.11461644

4. Ballock, E., McQuitty, V., & McNary, S. (2018). An exploration of professional knowledge needed for reading and responding to student writing. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(1), 56–68.

5. Bazerman, C. (2015). What do sociocultural studies of writing tell us about learning to write? In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 11–40). Guilford Press.

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3