Thursday, December 22, Representations of Student Work and Assessment Scores databases As we move toward the end ofhere is a nice little article from Noblesville, Indiana about using FileMaker Pro to make assessment data accessible to teachers. According to William Fouts, Data Dashboard can instantly pull ISTEP assessment information for individual students or groups of students and graphically display how those scores compare to previous year's scores, how they compare to the average scores in each school as well as state averages. The juxtaposition of an article about using a database to more effectively represent student scores on ISTEP and Yancey's article is a bit strange.
Such writing may not utilize the formatting conventions such as italics and bold facing available on a word processor; alternatively, such writing often includes sophisticated formatting as well as hypertextual links.
Digital composing can take many other forms as well. For example, such composing can mean participating in an online discussion through a listserv or bulletin board Huot and Takayoshi. It can refer to creating compositions in presentation software. It can refer to participatingin chat rooms or creating webpages.
It can mean creating a digital portfolio with audio and video files as well as scanned print writings. Most recently, it can mean composing on a class weblog or wiki. And more generally, as composers use digital technology to create new genres, we can expect the variety of digital compositions to continue proliferating.
The focus of writing instruction is expanding: In addition, work in one medium is used to enhance learning in the other. As we refine current practices and invent new ones for digital literacy, we need to assure that principles of good practice governing these new activities are clearly articulated.
As with all teaching and learning, the foundation for teaching writing digitally must be university, college, department, program, and course learning goals or outcomes. Once programs and faculty have established learning outcomes, they then can make thoughtful decisions about curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment.
Writing instruction is delivered contextually.
Therefore, institutional mission statements should also inform decisions about teaching writing digitally in the same ways that they should inform any curricular and pedagogical decisions. Regardless of the medium in which writers choose to work, all writing is social; accordingly, response to and evaluation of writing are human activities, and in the classroom, their primary purpose is to enhance learning.
Therefore, faculty will incorporate principles of best practices in teaching and learning.
Given new genres, assessment may require new criteria: Because digital environments make sharing work especially convenient, we would expect to find considerable human interaction around texts; through such interaction, students learn that humans write to other humans for specific purposes.
Good assessment requires human readers. This work is located within a new field of expertise and should be both supported—with hardware and software—and recognized. As important, writing programs will work to help develop the infrastructure and the pedagogy to assist students in moving their portfolios from one course to another, one program to another, one institution to another, as well as from educational institutions to the workplace, working to keep learning at the center of the enterprise and to assure that students learn to use the technology, not just consume it.
To accomplish this goal, institutions need to work with professional organizations and software manufacturers to develop portfolio models that serve learning.
Electronic Rating Because all writing is social, all writing should have human readers, regardless of the purpose of the writing. Assessment of writing that is scored by human readers can take time; machine-reading of placement writing gives quick, almost-instantaneous scoring and thus helps provide the kind of quick assessment that helps facilitate college orientation and registration procedures as well as exit assessments.Rearticulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning by Brian Huot (): Brian Huot: Books - leslutinsduphoenix.comor: Brian Huot.
An avid writer, Chris has published 15 books and over journal articles and book chapters and is on the editorial or reader's boards of numerous journals, including College English, Research in the Teaching of English, Across the Disciplines, Written Communication, Assessing Writing, and The Journal of Writing Assessment.
Writing Across the Curriculum.
Ackerman, John M. “Reading, Writing, and Knowing: The Role of Disciplinary Knowledge in Comprehension and Composing.”. Table of Contents for Labor, writing technologies, and the shaping of composition in the academy / [compiled by] Pamela Takayoshi, Patricia Sullivan, available from the Library of Congress.
Brian Huot's book, (Re)Articulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning, shares many of these same leslutinsduphoenix.com conclusion is superb, but watching it develop is mind-numbingly redundant.
The book had its genesis in as an article in College Composition and Communication, titled "Toward a New Theory of Assessing Writing," which Huot revised and included here as the .
Huot and Michael Williamson in their publication “Rethinking Portfolios for Evaluating Writing Issues of Assessment and Power” () declare that there is not a unanimous definition for portfolios (Huot, Kent State University) (Williamson, Indiana University of Pennsylvania) (p.