Assessing the Writing Product: Qualitative and Quantitative Measures

Isaacson, Stephen

doi:10.1177/001440298805400606

Cited by 35 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Isaacson (1988) defined vocabulary as the originality and maturity of a student's choice of words and identified it as one of the five principal components that emerge from every major theory of written language. Diverse word usage is one of the most consistent predictors of both narrative and expository writing quality (Olinghouse & Compton, 2009;Olinghouse & Leaird, 2009).…”

Section: Vocabularymentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective Writing Instruction for Students Who Have Writing Difficulties

Santangelo¹,

Olinghouse²

2009

focusXchild

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Writing well is not just an option for young people-it is a necessity. Along with reading comprehension, writing skill is a predictor of academic success and a basic requirement for participation in civic life and in the global economy. Yet every year in the United States large numbers of adolescents graduate from high school unable to write at the basic levels required by colleges or employers.... Because the definition of literacy includes both reading and writing skills, poor writing proficiency should be recognized as an intrinsic part of this national literacy crisis. (Graham & Perin, 2007b, p. 3) As Graham and Perin (2007b) assert, the ability to compose represents a fundamental and essential competency for children and adults alike. Writing is one of the most powerful tools we have for learning and for demonstrating what we know. Therefore, difficulties with writing create significant barriers in education, employment, and other life pursuits (Graham, 2006b).Despite the importance of writing, assessment data indicate that we are not yet highly effective at helping students gain the critical knowledge and skills required for competent narrative, expository, and persuasive prose. For example, according to the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 33% of eighth graders and 24% of 12th-graders were classified as proficient writers (Salahu-Din, Persky, & Miller, 2008). The NAEP data further documented that students with disabilities are at particularly high risk for writing difficulties, as the percentage of eighth-and 12th-grade students with disabilities classified as "proficient" writers was 6% and 5%, respectively (see , for a review of research related to writing difficulties among students with disabilities).In this article, we offer a synthesis of contemporary qualitative and quantitative research related to one of the most critical elements vis-à-vis improving struggling writers' performance: effective writing instruction. To facilitate understanding and implementation of the findings from what is, ináeed, a substantial body of literature, we have organized our discussion into four overarching recommendations:1. Establish the context for effective writing instruction. 2. Use research-based instructional methods and practices. 3. Teach writing strategies. 4. Teach word-, sentence-, and paragraph-level skills.

show abstract

Section: Vocabularymentioning

confidence: 99%

Effective Writing Instruction for Students Who Have Writing Difficulties

Santangelo¹,

Olinghouse²

2009

focusXchild

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to researchers (Chenowith & Hayes, 2001;Isaacson, 1988;Kaufer et al, 1986), a more experienced writer produces longer language units. According to Kaufer et al (1986), this length is 10-12 words for experienced writers and 5-6 words for inexperienced writers.…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Lannin (2007), writing fluency is a concept related to the number of words written per minute and the degree of harmony and cohesion of ideas. Therefore, according to some researchers (Chenowith & Hayes, 2001;Isaacson, 1988;Kaufer, Hayes, & Flower, 1986), those with fluent writing skills produce more texts in a short period of time.…”

Section: Fluent Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Secondary School Students’ Writing Fluency Skills

2016

EDUC SCI-THEOR PRACT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developed to evaluatesecondary school students' writing fluency skills, this studyis descriptive in nature and uses a mixed method approach. During the research, the researcher attempted to identify students' abilities to write in terms of quantity and complexity, on the one hand, and also attempted to identify findings on accuracy, the organization of ideas, and the obstacles to fluent writing using qualitative data collection tools. The research population consisted of 379 secondary school students in the city center of Hatay, Turkey.Students were given 5 minutes to write, with most texts reaching between 91 and 125 syllabes.Students' texts scored 5 points, 19-36 points, and 3 points on the "Accuracy," "Syntactic Complexity," and "Organization of Ideas" dimensions, respectively. Students' lexical diversity was fuond to be 17.48% when taking polysemy into account, however, the lexical diversity ratios of the students are 20.9%. The lexical density percentage of students was found to be 86.01%

show abstract

“…Brown (1973) has identified three stages associated with levels of MLU during which specific morphemes appear. In written language, T-unit length-the shortest complete, nonfragmented, segment of a passage-is used to assess syntax (Isaacson, 1988). T-unit length in written language is comparable to MLU in oral language.…”

Section: Mean Length Of Utterance (Mlu)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If the ratio is less than .50, the student is using a smaller range of vocabulary; if the ratio is more than .50, he or she is using a wide range of vocabulary. Although this measure is most frequently used to assess oral language, it can also be used to evaluate writing (Isaacson, 1988).…”

Section: Semanticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linking Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction of Oral and Written Language

Wesson¹,

Otis‐Wilborn²,

Hasbrouck³

et al. 1989

focusXchild

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two major instructional questions addressed by the assessment process, according to Zigmond and Miller (1986), are what to teach and how to teach. In their reconceptualization of the assessment process for instructional planning purposes, they concluded that both questions could be answered best through the use of various informal assessment strategies. They suggested a two-stage process of (a) identifying the broad curricular domain and, (b) selecting specific instructional objectives. Formal testing and functional analysis of environmental demands have been useful in selecting domains in which IEP goals are necessary for the individual exceptional student.Selection of goals occurs prior to placement in the special education program. Once the student is participating in the special education program, the second stage, informal assessment for selecting identifying objectives, must begin. This process includes:1. Planning for assessment; selecting or developing a hierarchy of skills or behaviors that represent the domain; deciding at what point in the hierarchy to start the assessment, and selecting or developing a set of tasks to reflect the steps of the hierarchy. 2. Administering the informal assessment survey. 3. Analyzing the students' performance and determining which skills require further probes. 4. Administering more specific probes. 5. Using survey and probe results to specify objectives.We refer to this process as pre-instructional assessment (PIA).Zigmond and Miller point to continuous monitoring of student performance as the means for determining how to teach. Documenting the failure of attribute-treatment interaction research, they contend that a priori testing cannot lead teachers to reliably know what teaching methods are best for the individual student. Instead, they suggest "direct and frequent evaluation of student achievement" (p. 507) and reframing of the question "how to teach" to"how can good instruction be responsive to individual differences?" (p. 507). We refer to the assessment conducted to answer this question as on-going monitoring of progress in the domain (OMPD).

show abstract

Assessing the Writing Product: Qualitative and Quantitative Measures

Cited by 35 publications

References 15 publications

Effective Writing Instruction for Students Who Have Writing Difficulties

Effective Writing Instruction for Students Who Have Writing Difficulties

Evaluation of Secondary School Students’ Writing Fluency Skills

Linking Assessment, Curriculum, and Instruction of Oral and Written Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About