Brian huot writing assessment

Rearticulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning

There, "[w]hile the composition program goals stipulate the number of formal papers for each class and differentiate between a writing process orientation for and a research focus forthey do not dictate a specific curriculum or text" But then Huot goes into "Reading Like a Teacher," which essentially rehashes everything you've ever read about genuine reading of genuine writing, and how to respond to that writing.

Regardless of the specific method of assessment, this book emphasizes the need to continually evaluate assessment programs to ensure that they are functioning according to current theory and the goals of writing programs. He wants to reorient composition studies' view of writing assessment.

The first four chapters in particular provide a theoretical overview of the foundations of the field; however, the book becomes increasingly practical in the last three chapters and in the appendix, which offers sample writing assessment documents for placement, proficiency evaluation, and program assessment.

Interestingly, this notion of appropriateness in Smith's work was similar to the work being done by Cronbach and Messick in educational measurement, which began to focus validity away from the text itself toward the inferences, interpretations, and in Smith's context, decisions being made on behalf of a measure like the standard writing sample for placement into first year writing courses.

This last step clearly shows how much progress students are making through the program itself. Because the University of Louisville also has access to high school writing portfolios, a small number of these are compared to their respective writers' college portfolios to assess improvement between high school and college.

The dark side of this truth is what many teachers find troubling about large scale assessments, as standardized tests don't grant attention or merit to all they should. Because evaluating student writing is something that requires some effort and expense, we do not assess student work every year.

Ah—now we're starting to see the picture. But hold on, Huot must first make some interesting connections, such as validation as research, and an aside in which he puts assessment into rhetorical terms—seeing validation as argument, which necessitates that we always consider our writing assessment audience, a form of rival hypothesis testing Utah State University Press, A guide to college writing assessment.

Assessment, as Huot points out, defines what is valued by a teacher or a society. From this data "course goals, faculty development opportunities, grading procedures, and other program guidelines and policies" may be assessed and revised as needed. A recent experience I had underscores how important it is for these types of assessment to be examined in our scholarship and included for discussion in books like this one.

Because we are looking at a limited amount of student writing, we can choose to look at it in some depth. He describes the problems associated with assessment's two main foci—reliability and validity—when applied to writing assessment, concluding that past attempts to increase interrater reliability have led to indirect measures that are actually deleterious to the learning of writing.

There, "[w]hile the composition program goals stipulate the number of formal papers for each class and differentiate between a writing process orientation for and a research focus forthey do not dictate a specific curriculum or text" A Guide to Writing Assessment not only emphasizes an understanding of theory as the responsibility of writing teachers and assessment creators, it also speaks to the need for a research agenda that works to inform practitioners about students, practices, and programs.

But now that you've seen it, you probably don't need to read the whole book. If we can change the ways in which we respond to our students in our classrooms and the ways in which we think and write about response in our scholarly literature, then we can harness the power of reading and writing to teach writing to our students, instilling in them the same wonder and struggle that guides all of us who work with language.

As Huot notes, "These portfolios allow the Composition Program to know what's going on in various classrooms, while at the same time providing instructors with freedom in course design and curriculum" 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 fourth of seven chapters, the centerpiece if you will.

In addition, because we are looking to evaluate the program and not individual students, it's not necessary that we assess every student's writing.

Rearticulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning

One of the most critical parts of the placement chapter is the focus on validation inquiry, and the means to responsibly evaluate placement programs. Untangling theoretical and practical considerations in writing assessment. While I agree that we must all continually assess and improve our teaching methods, I can tell you that there are a number of factors inhibiting my students' writing excellence that have nothing whatsoever to do with me, their teacher.

Instead, assessment has been used as an interested social mechanism for reinscribing current power relations and class systems. He moves into the central chapter of the book, "Toward a New Theory of Writing Assessment," in which he argues that "writing assessment has always been a theory-driven practice" Huot then discusses "Writing Assessment as Technology and Research," which would seem to be out of place, as maybe it should have come earlier, probably right after "Writing Assessment as a Field of Study," but it does propel us ever so slowly toward "real change in the ways we think about writing assessment and the positive role assessment can play in the teaching of writing and the administration of writing programs" From there, Huot moves into "Assessing, Grading, Testing, and Teaching Writing," in which he reveals the assumptions behind his approach to writing assessment.

I discuss this experience because I believe it is not unique. Re Articulating Writing Assessment. His conclusion is superb, but watching it develop is mind-numbingly redundant.

I mean, the first minute-and-a-half is interesting, captivating even, but then it's pretty much the same thing over and over.

Re Articulating Writing Assessment. The first tier is composed of three-teacher teams that meet to read portfolios from each other's classes, discuss their readings, and evaluate each of the selected portfolios.

Huot then discusses "Writing Assessment as Technology and Research," which would seem to be out of place, as maybe it should have come earlier, probably right after "Writing Assessment as a Field of Study," but it does propel us ever so slowly toward "real change in the ways we think about writing assessment and the positive role assessment can play in the teaching of writing and the administration of writing programs".

Writing assessment scholars, such as Brian Huot () Pamela Moss (), Bob Broad (), and more recently, Patricia Lynne (), have agreed that the emphasis in assessment is on practice without adequate attention to theory.

BRIAN HUOT is Assistant Professor, English Department, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY He specializes in writing assessment and writing across the curriculum. This article attempts to describe the condition of direct writing assessment literature. Instead of focusing on a particular.

(Re)Articulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning Written by Brian Huot.

Utah State University Press, $; pages. ISBN. Brian Huot has been a full time writing teacher and writing program administrator since Currently he is Professor of English at Kent State University.

He is past chair of the College Section Committee and Member of the NCTE Executive Committee () and a current member of the Council of Writing Program Administrator Executive Board. In (Re)Articulating Writing Assessment, Huot advocates a new understanding, a more optimistic and productive one than we have seen in composition for a very long time.

Assessment, as Huot points out, defines what is valued by a teacher or a society/5(1). O'Neill, P., Moore, C., & Huot, B.

(). A guide to college writing assessment. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. In A Guide to College Writing Assessment, Peggy O'Neill, Cindy Moore, and Brian Huot provide composition scholars, writing program administrators, and assessment professionals with a broad overview of current assessment theory and practice.

Brian huot writing assessment
Rated 5/5 based on 83 review
"(Re)Articulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning" by Brian Huot