Teaching Writing Skills

Wipada Prasansaph D.Ed. (TESOL)

Faculty of Education
Suan Sunandha Rajabhat University
Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing

1. Language teaching prepares students for real-life interaction – writing

tasks should reflect real-life/ plausible communication.

2. L2 writing can have the same wide range of purposes as L1 writing.

3. L2 writing should be taught systematically, not as a random thing used

here and there only as a support task.
Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing

4. All students have the ability to learn to write. Teachers of writing

believe all students can develop their writing skills by providing their
students with high-quality instruction and personalized support.
5. Writing is a process. Teachers of writing guide students throughout
the writing process, offering meaningful feedback that encourages
revision and editing, which seeks to strengthen their writing rather than
pointing out errors.
6. Writing is a tool for thinking. When students write, they discover
things about themselves and the world that they may not have known
prior to writing. As they write, they make new discoveries, explore
questions, and find meaning in the thoughts and ideas they create for
themselves and others.
Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing

7. Writing follows a developmental process. The developmental process

of writing follows discrete stages, where students progress in age and
from one phase to the next. Each phase requires the acquisition of one
set of skills, building on skills acquired at an earlier phase.

8. There are many effective ways to teach students to write. Teachers of

writing should become well versed in writing theories, research, and
best practices. They realize that ongoing professional development and
collaboration with other teachers aids their knowledge about the
teaching of writing.
Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing
9.Writing should be integrated into all curriculum areas. Students
require many opportunities to write in diverse academic settings,
offering them the tools and practice necessary to write effectively for a
variety of purposes, audiences, and contexts.

10.Writing and reading are interrelated–Reading different text styles

often helps students improve their writing. Similarly, the act of writing
assists students in becoming better readers.

11.Teachers of writing should write themselves–Through their own

writing and personal reflection, writing teachers understand the
complexity of the writing process and are better able to support the
needs of their students.
 Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing
12.Recognize that writing is challenging and takes time. Students
understand that the writing process requires persistence and the
commitment to persevere as they explore ideas, topics, or a
challenging task.

13.Realize the connection between the writer and the reader. Students
must think about their audience and customize their writing to fit their
readers. When writing, students should consider how much
information their audience knows, if they will agree or disagree, and
what the reader will do with the information.

14.Experience high-quality literature. When students realize the power

of another’s writing, they understand how others use their words to
convey information and ideas, persuade an audience, and evoke
emotion.
 Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing

► Convey their thoughts and ideas freely. Students have both the
opportunity and responsibility of sharing their ideas in thoughtful
and creative ways.

► Receive meaningful, positive, and timely feedback about their

writing. Students’ writing assignments require frequent
individualized feedback from their writing teachers.

► Enjoy opportunities to choose their writing topics. While

engaging in a variety of writing assignments and projects, students
should have as much choice as possible in selecting their own
topics and all other aspects of their writing.
 Essential Principles for the Teaching of Writing

15.Compose writing using varied modalities and

technologies. Students require support as they write use tools
to write–paper, pen, word processing, and other digital
technologies–and become independent in the modalities and
technologies that best fit their needs.
 Teaching Writing Skills
Principles of Teaching Writing in regard to Writing Instruction Methods
Students write better when:
a) they take ownership of their own writing.
b) they are provided with prior knowledge or experience of a
subject matter.
c) they are taught how to evaluate/revise their own story to
make it better aligned to objectives.
d) they are given a focus or specific writing task.
e) they are allowed to work in small group activities to prepare
them for a writing assignment.
f) they self- select their writing.
 Teaching Writing Skills
Principles of Teaching Writing in regard to Follow-up Teaching

Students write better when:

g) they are provided with clear, honest and positive feedback,
in accordance with clear goals, by their peers and teachers.
h) they are taught how to evaluate their own writing based on
specified objectives.

Principles of Teaching Writing in regard to Teaching-learning Contents

Students write better when:
i) they are given a chance to explore a set of data in relation to
what they will be writing about.
 Teaching Writing Skills
j)They are taught how to extend or elaborate on an idea/
sentence/ point.
k)They are taught how to edit a piece of writing based on
specific criteria.
l) Students tend to write better when they prepare their work
and back-up their data with research done through self-
questioning to clarify all doubts they have before writing
begins.
m) Children write better when they write about something
that interests them.
Writing tasks
Writing tasks in the foreign language classroom typically fall into one
of two possible categories: writing as support skill and writing as main
skill. Both are appropriate pedagogical tools, as long as both are
included in the lesson plan. When designing a writing task, follow these
simple steps:
1. Make sure that your assignment is appropriate for the learners'
language level.
2. Select level-appropriate writing purpose.
3. Decide on writing as a support skill or as a main skill.
4. Identify sub-skills students need in order to complete the main task.
5. Design activity set that prepares sub-skills.
6. Guide students through pre-, during-, and post-writing activities.
Writing tasks
These points are important to consider in order to design more effective
writing tasks that:

1. fulfill the pedagogical purposes of the assignment (e.g., do not say

that the task practices narration when all it does is drill the past
tense),
2. reflect pedagogically sound practices (e.g., the process approach to
writing, effective feedback, etc.),
3. can be successfully completed by the students (i.e., the sub-skills
that they need have been reviewed and/or learned),
4. have a meaningful learning outcome (e.g., help students learn
something they can actually use, either to support another skill area
or to communicate in plausible/authentic L2 situations).
Teaching writing
The writing skill has finally been recognized as an important skill
for language learning.

The reasons for teaching writing to students of English as a foreign

language include reinforcement, language development, learning
style, and most importantly, writing as a skill in its own right”

Writing instruction has become a field of increasing interest at

higher learning institutions in recent years. There have been
numerous approaches to the teaching of writing in the history of
language teaching and these have led to several paradigm shifts in
the field.
The importance of writing
Clay (1983) claimed that writing as a skill is very paramount for many
reasons.

The first reason is that writing involves much more than the
transcription of speech.

The second reason for focusing on writing is that it is in attempting to

communicate in the new mode that students most effectively discover
and master the relationship between speech and written text.

The third reason is that writing is a surer way than reading into
mastering the written code.
The importance of writing

Another importance for writing is that writing is more than speech

written down in another sense. Although saying it first and then
writing it down may be the way in which students first learn to write,
they very quickly discover that the two modes of communication are
organized on different principles.

Writing is thus potentially a powerful means of developing one’s own

understanding of the topic about which one is writing.
Approaches in Teaching Writing

There are different approaches to teaching writing in ESL/EFL. They are

actually complementary (Badger & White 2000). According to Rimes
(1983), there is no one adequate approach, as there are different teaching
and learning styles. Silva (1990) categorises the teaching of writing into
four types: controlled composition, current traditional rhetoric, the
process approach and English for academic purposes. Other approaches
are proposed, e.g. controlled-to free; free-writing; paragraph pattern;
grammar syntax organisation and the communicative approach (Hyland,
2002; Ramies, 1983; Tribble, 1996; Williams, 2005).

Cohen (1990) and Brown (2001) classify these approaches as ‘product

and process’ approaches. Badger and White (2000) also include the genre
approach, together with the previously mentioned approaches. However,
these are the most common classifications.
Teaching Writing
Brown (2001: 336) states that writing is a thinking process, a writer
produces a final written product based on their thinking after the
writer goes through the thinking process. In addition, Brown quotes
Elbow (1973: 14-16) as saying that writing should be thought of as
an organic, developmental process . . . not as a way to transmit a
message but as a way to grow and cook a message.

The teaching of writing in ESL/EFL has seen dramatic changes in the

last 20 years that have led to paradigm shifts in the field. There have,
over time, been numerous approaches to the teaching of writing. In
recent years however, there has been emphasis and debate on the
differences between three major approaches - the product-based
approach, the process-based approach and the genre-based
approach. Such debate very often generates conflicting views of
teaching writing.
The Product Approach
A product approach is “a traditional approach in which students are
encouraged to mimic a model text, is usually presented and
analyzed at an early stage” (Gabrielatos, 2002: 5). For example, in a
typical product approach-oriented classroom, students are supplied
with a standard sample of text and they are expected to follow the
standard to construct a new piece of writing.
Theoretical Underpinning
BEHAVIORISM: Learning is a mechanical process or habit formation.
The basic exercise technique is pattern practice.

The product approach focuses on writing tasks in which the learner imitates,
copies and transforms teacher supplied models, it focuses on the steps
involved in creating a piece of work. (Nunan, 1999)
The Product Approach

The product approach to writing usually involves the presentation of

a model text, which is discussed and analyzed. According to this
model text learners construct a similar or a parallel text.

This might seem a mechanical task; however, learners can discover

the structure of the given discourse, its linguistic features and how
its ideas are organized.
The Product Approach

During the audio-lingualism era, language classes downplayed the

role of writing since writing was seen as only a supporting skill. ESL
writing classes thus only focused on sentence structures as a
support for the grammar class.

The product approach was used in order to highlight form and

syntax and the emphasis was on rhetorical drills (Silva, 1990).

Students using the product approach are normally told to write an

essay imitating a given pattern. Generally the focus of such writing
is on the written product rather than on how the learner should
approach the process of writing.
The product approach comprises of four stages (Steele, 2004).

Stage one: Students study model texts and then the features of the
genre are highlighted. For example, if studying a formal letter,
students’ attention may be drawn to the importance of paragraphing
and the language used to make formal requests. If a student reads a
story, the focus may be on the techniques used to make the story
interesting, and students focus on where and how the writer employs
these techniques.

Stage two: This stage consists of controlled practice of the

highlighted features, usually in isolation. So if students are studying
a formal letter, they may be asked to practise the language used to
make formal requests, for example, practising the ‘I would be grateful
if you would...’ structure.
Stage three: This is the most important stage where the ideas are
organized. Those who favor this approach believe that the
organization of ideas is more important than the ideas themselves
and as important as the control of language.

Stage four: This is the end product of the learning process. Students
choose from the choice of comparable writing tasks. To show what
they can be as fluent and competent users of the language, students
individually use the skills, structures and vocabulary they have been
taught to produce the product.
 Strengths and weaknesses of the product approach
Strengths Weaknesses
• Easy to use with large • has no practical applications (Jordan,
classes. 1997)
• Easier to grade because • resulted in 'mindless copies of a
emphasis is on form. particular organizational plan or style
(Eschholz, 1980)
• Useful approach when • devalues “the learners’ potential, both
form is important. linguistic and personal (Prodromou,
1995)
• Does not teach how to write
independently
• Does not teach how to think
• Does not make writing a manageable
and intentional activity
• Limits creativity
The Product Approach

Writing is viewed as “mainly concerned with the knowledge

about the structure of language, and writing development is
mainly the result of the imitation of input, in the form of texts
provided by the teacher” (Badger and White, 2000: 154). It is
therefore teacher-centred, as the teacher becomes the arbiter of
the models used (see Brakus, 2003).

Proponents of the product approach argue that it enhances

students’ writing proficiency. Badger and White (2000: 157), for
example, state that writing involves linguistic knowledge of texts
that learners can learn partly through imitation.
The Product Approach

The product approach, often referred to as “the current-

traditional rhetoric”, however, suffers from a number of strong
criticisms that have led teachers and researchers to reassess the
nature of writing and the ways writing is taught.

Arndt (1987: 257-67) argues the importance of models used in

such an approach not only for imitation but also for exploration
and analysis. Myles (2002) further argues that, “if students are
not exposed to native-like models of written texts, their errors in
writing are more likely to persist”. Pincas (1982 cited in Badger
and White, 2000: 157) focused on the appropriate use of
vocabulary, syntax and cohesive devices.
The Product Approach

Prodromou (1995: 21) for example, argues that it devalues “the

learners’ potential, both linguistic and personal.” The outcome
of the re-assessment is the writing-as-process movement,
which has led the field toward a paradigm shift, revolutionising
the teaching of writing.
Product Writing:
Pincas (1982, cited in Badger & White, 2000) realizes learning as
assisted imitation, and adopts many techniques (e.g. substitution
tables), where learners respond to a stimulus provided by the
teacher. However, her comment that, at the stage of free writing,
students should feel as if they are creating something of their own
suggests a view of learners as being ready to show rather more
initiative.

In short, product-based approaches see writing as mainly

concerned with knowledge about the structure of language, and
writing development as mostly the result of the imitation of input,
in the form of texts provided by the teacher.
The Process Approach

Since 1980’s process approach has been used more than

product (see Applebee, or Rogers, 2012) since it emphasizes
the composing process rather than the form.

The process approaches focus on how a text is written instead

of the final outcome. As noted in Hyland (2003), the process
approaches have a major impact on understanding the nature
of writing and the way writing is taught.

Research on writing processes has led to viewing writing as

complex and recursive – not linear. The process approach,
therefore, emphazises the importance of a recursive procedure
of prewriting, drafting, evaluating and revising.
The Process Approach
The pre-writing activity would involve introducing techniques
that help the students discover and engage a topic. Instead of
turning in a finished product right away, students are asked
for multiple drafts of a work.

After discussion and feedback from readers, the learners

would revise the drafts.

Rewriting and revision are integral to writing, and editing is an

on-going multi-level process. The multiple draft process thus
consists of: generating ideas (pre-writing); writing a first draft
with an emphasis on content (to discover meaning/ author’s
ideas); second and third (an possibly more) drafts to revise
ideas and communication of those ideas.
The Process Approach

In writing classrooms that follow such process model, the

central elements are the writer, the content and the purpose,
and multiple drafts.

The teacher in a process-approach classroom becomes the

facilitator. In such classrooms, writing is essentially learnt, not
taught. Providing input or stimulus for learners is perceived as
unimportant, since the teacher’s task is only to facilitate the
exercise of writing skills and draw out the learners’ potential.
The process approach is thus learner-centred.
The Process Approach
The following is a diagram taken from Tribble (1996), illustrating
the recursive and unpredictable process of writing.
The Process Approach

As a recursive model, the process approach focuses on

revision, in response to feedback that is obtained from readers.

Feedback is seen as essential, functioning as an input that

prompts the revision of texts. As mentioned by Keh (1990),
“what pushes the writer through the writing process onto the
eventual end-product is reader feedback on the various drafts.”
Among the major kinds of feedback leading to revision are:
peer-feedback; feedback from conferences; and teachers’
comments as feedback.
Process Approach
In the Process approach, learners are looked upon as central in
learning, so that learners‟ needs, expectations, goals, learning
styles, skills and knowledge are taken into consideration.

Through the writing process, learners need to make the most of their
abilities such as knowledge and skills by utilizing the appropriate
help and cooperation of the teacher and the other learners. It
encourages learners to feel free to convey their own thoughts or
feelings in written messages by providing them with plenty of time
and opportunity to reconsider and revise their writing and at each
step seek assistance from outside resources like the instructor.
Process Approach
Hence the process approach tends to focus more on varied
classroom activities which promote the development of language
use: brainstorming, group discussion and rewriting.

The writing process usually involves several steps. A typical

sequence is comprised of three steps: prewriting, drafting, and,
revising. Some sequences, however, use four steps, such as
thinking, planning, writing, and editing, while others use five steps,
prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and evaluating. In other words,
each writer has a preferred way of approaching the writing process,
from simpler to more complex depending on the level of the
learners, and the purpose of writing.
Process Approach
These steps generally are implemented in sequence, but in
process writing the writing process is not necessarily a linear
learning process, rather more of a recursive or spiraling
process as the learners move around these steps, sometimes
going forward and retracing their steps.

For example, brainstorming, one skill that is important

particularly for the prewriting step, can be exercised again and
again at different stages if the learner needs new ideas later in
the process. Learners can achieve their writing goals through
the process in different ways.
Process Approach
The Process Approach Model comprises of eight stages (Steele,
2004):

Stage one (Brainstorming): This is generating ideas by brainstorming

and discussion. Students could be discussing the qualities needed to
do a certain job.

Brainstorming can be carried out as mind-mapping diagrams.

Process Approach
Stage two (Planning/Structuring): Students exchange ideas into note
form and judge quality and usefulness of the ideas.

Stage three (Mind mapping): Students organize ideas into a mind

map, spidergram, or linear form. This stage helps to make the
hierarchical relationship of ideas which helps students with the
structure of their texts.

Stage four (Writing the first draft): Students write the first draft. This
is done in the class frequently in pairs or groups.
Process Approach
Stage five (Peer feedback): Drafts are exchanged, so that students
become the readers of each others work. By responding as readers
students develop awareness of the fact that a writer is producing
something to be read by someone else and thus they can improve their
own drafts.
Stage six (Editing): Drafts are returned and improvements are made
based upon peer feedback.
Stage seven (Final draft): A final draft is written.
Stage eight (Evaluation and teachers’ feedback): Students’ writings are
evaluated and teachers provide a feedback on it.
White and Arndt’s diagram (1991: 43) offers teachers a framework
which tries to capture the recursive, not linear, nature of writing. The
following diagram shows the cyclical nature and the interrelationship
of the stages:
Process Writing
The 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s witnessed a highly influential trend in L1
composition pedagogy and research.
Raimes (1985) and Zamel (1982) were among the strongest voices calling for
process writing. Zamel (1982) claims that the composing processes of L1 writers
can be suitable to ESL writers, but teacher-guided revision is the main focus of
instruction in ESL classes. Process approaches, as they now are generally
labeled, emphasized the individual writer as a creator of original ideas. It was
believed that written discourse encoded these ideas, helping as a vehicle for
exploring one, conveying one's thoughts, and claiming one's individual voice, or
authorial persona, as a writer.
Process-oriented writing pedagogies focused particular attention on procedures
for solving problems, discovering ideas, expressing them in writing, and revising
emergent texts—typically, in isolation from any cultural, educational, or
sociopolitical contexts in which writing might take place.
Process Writing
Zamel (1982) also points out that writing is a process of discovering and
making meaning and that the writing process is recursive, nonlinear, and
convoluted.
In recent years, however, the process approach has come under
serious scrutiny. The approach has a “somewhat monolithic view of
writing” (Badger and White 2000).
Writing is seen as involving the same process regardless of the target
audience and the content of the text. The process approach seems to
narrowly focus on the skills and processes of writing in the classroom
itself and as a result fails to take into account the social and cultural
aspects that have an impact on different kinds of writing (Atkinson,
2003).
Process Writing

The product approach to writing usually involves the

presentation of a model text, which is discussed and analyzed.
According to this model text learners construct a similar or a parallel
text. This might seem a mechanical task; however, learners can discover
the structure of the given discourse, its linguistic features and how its
ideas are organized.
The process approach to writing in contrast focuses on the
development of language use: brainstorming, group discussion,
rewriting.
The Process Approach
Johns (1995), for instance, strongly expresses her view against “The Process Movement”:

This movement’s emphasis on developing students as authors when they

are not yet ready to be second language writers, in developing student
voice while ignoring issues of register and careful argumentation, and in
promoting the author’s purposes while minimising understandings of role,
audience and community have put our diverse students at a distinct
disadvantage…
(Johns, 1995)

As a result, opponents of the process approach are beginning to gather under a

new banner – “the genre approach” (or genre-based approach).
The Genre Approach

As noted by Badger and White (2000:155), there are similarities

between the product approach and the genre approach, which,
in some ways, can be seen as an extension of the product
approach. Like the product approach, the genre approach views
writing as predominantly linguistic. The genre approach,
however, places a greater emphasis on the social context in
which writing is produced.

At the heart of the approach therefore is the view that writing

pedagogies should “offer students explicit and systematic
explanations of the ways language functions in social contexts”
(Hyland, 2003).
The Genre Approach

Swales (1990), describes genre as “a class of communicative

events.” He further explains that the members of the
communicative events “share some set of communicative
purposes which are recognised by the expert members….”

A range of methods is employed in a classroom using the genre

approach. For instance, Paltridge (2001) proposes a framework that
involves investigating the texts and contexts of students’ target
situations, encouraging reflection on writing practices, exploiting
texts from different types of genre and creating mixed genre
portfolios.
The Genre Approach
The underpinning theory of such a pedagogical approach, according
to Vygotsky (1978), as reported in Hyland (2003), is an “emphasis on
the interactive collaboration between teacher and student, with the
teacher taking an authoritative role to ‘scaffold’ or support learners
as they move towards their potential level of performance.”

In the scaffolding activity, students are provided with models, and

are asked to discuss and analyse their language and structure. The
scaffolding element gradually lightens as the learners independently
produce a text parallel to the model.

The role of the teachers thus moves from explicit instructor to

facilitator and eventually the learners gain autonomy.
Genre Approach
Rothery’s (1985) suggestion for a genre-based approach to teaching
writing includes the following steps:
1. introducing a genre: modeling a genre by reading to the whole class,
2. focusing on a genre: modeling a genre explicitly by naming its stages,
3. jointly negociating a genre: teacher and class jointly composing the
genre under focus,
1. researching: selecting material; assessing information before writing,

2. independent construction: students individually construct the genre.

Genre Approach
Hayland (2004) sees the advantages of a genre based writing instruction that can be
summarized as follows:

Explicit. Makes clear what is to be learned to facilitate the acquisition of

writing skills
Systematic. Provides a coherent framework for focusing on both language
and contexts
Needs-based. Ensures that course objectives and content are derived from
students needs
Supportive. Gives teacher a central role in scaffolding student learning and
creativity
Empowering. Provides access to the patterns and possibilities of variation in
valued texts
Critical. Provides the resources for students to understand and challenge
valued discourses
Consciousness raising. Increases teacher awareness of texts and confidently
advise students on their writing.
(Hayland 2004: 10-11)
The Genre Approach

Like the other approaches, the genre approach has been criticised
by its opponents. Caudery (1998: 11-13), for example, notes that by
attempting explicit teaching of a particular genre, teachers are in
actual fact not helping the learners.

The approach may not require students to express their own ideas
or may be too dependent on the teacher finding suitable materials
as models. It could thus become counter-productive.
 A comparison of the product and process
approaches is given below: (Steele, 2004: 1)
Process approach Product approach
● text as a resource for ♠ imitate a model text;
comparison; ♠ organization of ideas more
● ideas as starting point, important than ideas themselves;
necessitating more than one ♠ one draft;
draft; ♠ features highlighted including
● focus on purpose, theme, text controlled practice of those
type …; features;
● the reader (audience) is ♠ individual;
emphasized; ♠ emphasis on end product.
● collaborative with other peers;
● emphasis on creativity.
The following table upholds a comparative study of genre and process
approach: (Hyland, 2003: 24)

Attribute Process Genre

Writing is a thinking process Writing is a social activity
Main Idea Concerned with the act of writing Concerned with the final product
Emphasis on creative writer Emphasis on reader expectations and
Teaching product
Focus How to produce and link ideas How to express social purposes
effectively
Makes processes of writing Makes textual conventions
Advantages transparent transparent Contextualizes writing for
Provides basis for teaching audience and purpose

Assumes L1and L2 writing similar Requires rhetorical understanding of

Overlooks L2 language difficulties texts
Disadvantages Insufficient attention to product Can result in prescriptive teaching of
Assumes all writing uses same texts
processes Can lead to over attention to written
products Undervalue skills needed to
produce texts
 Compare the 3 approaches of teaching writing skills

Attribute Product Approach Process Approach Genre Approach

Main Idea

Teaching
Focus

Advantages

Disadvantages
Writing Assessment

There are several steps we, as instructors, can take to make writing the
real focus of our feedback and assessment:

Connect the feedback to the purpose of the task. Do assign a grade for
accuracy because it plays an important role in comprehensible
communication, but also assign a grade for global content: clear
statement of purpose, sufficient details, effective connection between
ideas, for example. Students are smart, and if your grades only pertain to
grammatical and lexical accuracy, in their next essay they will only focus
on those features. This turns your "writing" assignment into a mere
linguistic exercise.
Writing Assessment
Teachers should act as collaborators in the writing process. Your
objective should be to help students learn how to write well. Giving a
simple grade to a written assignment means that you judge that
assignment. Giving it feedback and letting students revise their written
work will make your assignment be truly about writing.

Focus on content first, then on accuracy. This sequence will help your
students view writing as genuine interpersonal communication
between the author and reader(s). Research has found that when
feedback focuses on content first, the final written work is better both
in content and accuracy (Semke, 1984).
Writing Assessment

Facilitative comments maintain students' integrity and help keep them

motivated. Instead of writing a comment like "Don't use the subjunctive
here", ask them a question: What does the subjunctive form suggest
here? Sometimes, students intentionally flout linguistic norms for a
creative, meaningful purpose (i.e., humor). Find out before you mark it
wrong. Negative statements will shut down your students, while
clarification questions will help them express an idea more effectively.
Self-correction increases accuracy, linguistic gains, and productivity.
Make a few marks on the paper, then pose questions and offer
facilitative comments. This process "forces" learners to resolve
questions they still have and come up with the solution themselves
(with peer or instructor guidance as necessary).
Writing Assessment
Types of Scoring

Writing can be assessed in different modes, for example analytic

scoring, holistic scoring, and primary trait scoring. If evaluating the
same piece of writing, each mode of scoring should result in similar
"scores," but each focuses on a different facet of L2 writing.

Analytic Scoring

In this mode, students' writing is evaluated based on detailed grades

for elements of writing such as vocabulary, grammar, composition, or
mechanics. Results are based on multiple sub-grades (e.g., 4 out of 5
on vocabulary, plus 3 out of 5 on grammar plus 4 out of 5 on content,
etc.)
Writing Assessment

Holistic Scoring

Holistic scoring results in a more general description for categories,

but includes the different elements of writing implicitly or explicitly.
The result is usually a global grade, such as A, B, C, D, E.

Primary Trait Scoring

If the class or the assignment focuses on a particular aspect of

writing, or a specific linguistic form, or the use of a certain semantic
group, primary trait scoring allows the instructor and the students to
focus their feedback, revisions and attention very specifically.
Writing Assessment
Which of these is the appropriate form of evaluation depends on the
purpose of the writing task.

For example, the first draft could be evaluated holistically, a second

and subsequent draft using primary trait scoring and the final draft
analytically.

Each mode of scoring will give the instructor and students slightly
different information about the writing process and students' level of
development. It is highly recommended, though, with the goal of
improving writing instead of just assigning a grade, that the criteria
for evaluation be shared with the students as soon as the writing
task is assigned.
Writing Assessment
Portfolio Assessment
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.
Some characteristics important to any type of portfolio assignment
are:
1. Repeated submissions over time: students submit one or two
writing samples each week, each month, or as the course allows.
2. Student selection of "representative sampling": students have
latitude in which draft or assignment they submit, within teacher-
established guidelines.
Writing Assessment

Portfolio Assessment

3. Feedback from multiple sources: 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.

4. Focus on process, growth, active analysis: Asking students to revise

a written assignment helps them develop their writing skills and
engages them in active analysis of their writing. Over the course of the
semester, by comparing their very first and last assignments, they
become cognizant of the progress they have made.
Writing Assessment

Portfolio Assessment

5. Meaningful, motivating and long-term learning: When students re-

examine and compare their different writing assignments, they realize
that the writing task is part of a long-term learning process rather than
a single evaluative event. The noticeable progress they make and the
recognition of their work by the instructor and peers can be highly
motivating for most students.
Good Luck!