Assessment of Directed Writing by a Group of TESL Student at UPSI
Twenty-eight TESL students from UPSI and one experienced English SPM Examination examiner (Expert Rater 1) assessed twenty-five samples of Form Four ESL secondary school students’ writing. Twelve of the TESL students used the analytic scoring method; seven used the primary trait scoring method; a...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Book Section |
| Published: |
Penerbit Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
2006
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://pustaka2.upsi.edu.my/eprints/406/ http://pustaka2.upsi.edu.my/eprints/406/1/Assessment%20of%20Directed%20Writing%20by%20a%20Group%20of%20TESL%20Student%20at%20UPSI.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Twenty-eight TESL students from UPSI and one experienced English SPM
Examination examiner (Expert Rater 1) assessed twenty-five samples of Form
Four ESL secondary school students’ writing. Twelve of the TESL students used
the analytic scoring method; seven used the primary trait scoring method; and
eight used the holistic scoring method. The expert rater and one of the TESL
students (Teacher A) used the English SPM Examination scoring method. Teacher
A and Expert Rater 1 assessed the writing samples individually, but the other
twenty-eight TESL-students were gathered during three separate seminars and
workshops. The scores from the twenty-eight TESL students, Teacher A and
Expert Rater 1 were correlated using descriptive statistics and non-parametric
(Spearman Rho) calculations. The analysis of these scores showed that there was
a significant correlation coefficient between the subjects, even though they used
three different scoring methods to assess the writing samples. The TESL students
who took part in the assessment during the seminars and workshops agreed that
the three scoring methods were suitable for classroom assessment as compared to
the English SPM Examination scoring method, which was more suitable for
standardized assessment. A few strengths and weaknesses of each scoring method
were identified and solutions for use in the classroom assessment were recorded
in the salient features of assessment. |
|---|