Effect of Holistic vs. Analytic Assessment on Improving Iranian Intermediate EFL Learners’ Writing Skill

Subject Areas : All areas of language and translation

Massumeh Hosseini ¹ , Bahram Mowlaie ²

1 - Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 - Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Islamic Azad University, South Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2017-02-22 Accepted : 2017-02-22 Published : 2016-09-01

Keywords: Assessment, writing skill, Analytic scoring, Composition, Holistic scoring,

Abstract :

In assessing foreign language writing, holistic and analytic scoring can be used to measure a variety of discourse and linguistic features. This study aimed to investigate the possible significant effect of analyt- ic and holistic assessments on improving writing skill among Iranian EFL learners. For this purpose, two groups of intermediate EFL learners, after being homogenized, were divided into two experimental groups. In treatment phase, groups A’s compositions were scored holistically while group B’s composi- tions were scored analytically using Paulus’s scoring rubric as the benchmark. The result of Paired t-tests revealed that both scoring methods caused statistically significant differences between pre- and post-test in both groups. However, the result of the independent samples t-test in post-test between the two exper- imental groups showed that whether the writings of both groups were scored analytically or holistically, the group, which received analytic scoring during the treatment outperformed the group, which received holistic scoring. This study could have pedagogical implications in that it could encourage writing teach- ers to take the findings into account to improve the quality of writing as the Cinderella skill in a foreign language instruction and avoid sweeping the writing assignments under the practicality carpet.

References:

 Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alterna-tive interpretation of cognitive dissonance Phenomena. Psychol. Rev. 74, 183– 20010.1037/h0025145

 

Bong, M. & Clark, R. (1999). Comparison be-tween self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educa-tional Psychologist, 34(3), 139-153.

 

Bong, M. & Skaalvik E. M. (2003). Academic self-concept and self-efficacy: how dif-ferent are they really? Educational Psy-chology Review, 15, 1-40.

 

Borg, S. (2001). Self-perception and practice in teach-ing grammar. ELT Journal, 55 (1), 21−9

 

Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what lan-guage teachers think, know, believe, and do.

Language Teaching, 36(2), 81-109.

 

Borg, S. (2006). Teacher cognition and language education. London: Continuum.

 

Bulger, S. M., Mohr, D. J., & Walls, R. T. (2002). Stack the deck in favor of your students by using the four aces of effec-tive teaching. Effective Teaching, 5(2).

 

Byra, M., & Coulon, S. C. (1994). The effect of planning on the instructional behaviors of pre-service teachers. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 13 (3), 123-139.

 

Calderhead, J. (1996). Teachers’ beliefs and knowledge. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (1996). Handbook of educational psycholo-gy. New York: Macmillan Library ReferenceUSA, Simon & Schuster Macmillan.

 

Causton‐Theoharis, J., Theoharis, G., & Trezek, B. (2008). Teaching pre‐service teachers to design inclusive instruction: a lesson-planning template. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(4), 381-399.

Clark, C. M., & Yinger, R. J. (1979). Three stud-ies of teacher planning. Paper presentedat the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California.

 

Coutinho S. A. (2007). The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academic suc-cess. Educate. 7, 39–47.

 

Darling-Hammond, L. (2001). The research and rhetoric on teacher certification: A re-sponse to “Teacher certification reconsid-ered”. New York: National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.

 

Eisner, E. W. (1967). Educational objectives: Help or hindrance? The School Review, 75(3), 250-260.

 

Evertson, C. M., & Weinstein, C. S. (2006). Classroom management as a field of in-quiry. In vertson, & C. Weinstein, (Eds). Handbook of classroom manage-ment. Mahwah, N.J.Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates.

 

Farrell, T.S.C. (2002). Lesson planning. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.),

 

Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. New York:Cambridge University Press.

 

Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D.A., Gul-ly, S. M., and Salas, E. (1998) Relation-ships of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with learning outcomes and transfer. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 218-233.

 

Gülten, A. (2013). Am I planning well? Teacher trainees’ voices on lesson planning. Pro-cedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93,1409-1413.

 

Hall, T., & Smith, M. (2006). Teacher planning, instruction and reflection: What we know about teacher cognitive processes. Quest, 58(4), 424-442.

 

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English lan-guage teaching. Harlow, England: Pear-son Longman.

 

Jackson, P.W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

 

 

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2012). Language teacher education for a global society. New York:Routledge/Taylor and Francis.

 

Kyriacou, C. (1995). Essential teaching skills. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

 

Little, O., Goe, L., & Bell, C. (2009). A Practical Guide to Evaluating Teacher Effective-ness. National Comprehensive Center forTeacher Quality.

 

Liyanage, I., Bartlett, BJ. (2010). from autopsy to biopsy: A metacognitive view of lesson planning and teacher trainees in ELT.

 

Teaching and Teacher Education 26 (7),1362-1371.

 

Macdonald, J. B. (1965). Myths about instruc-tion. Educational Leadership, 22(8), 609– 617.

 

Macdonald, J., Wolfson, B., & Zaret, E. (1973).

 

Reschooling society: a conceptual model.Washington: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

 

Masemann, V. (2012). Living in diversity: Les-son plans for secondary schools. Interna-tional Review of Education, 58(3), 429-430.

 

Mercer, S. (2011). Towards an understanding of language learner self-concept. Dordrecht:Springer.

 

Mutton, T., Burn, K., & Hagger, H. (2010). Mak-ing sense of learning to teach: learners in context. Research Papers in Education, 25(1), 73-91.

 

Pajares, M . F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and ed-ucational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Re-search, 62 (3), 307−32.

 

Pallant, J. (2006). SPSS Survival Manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS, 4^th

 

Edition, Crows Nest, New South Wales. Pallant, J., (2007). SPSS Survival Manual, 3rd

 

Edition, Crows West, New South Wales. Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers' be-

 

liefs about second language learning: a lon-gitudinal study. System, 29(2), 177-195.

 

Pintrich, P. (2002). The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 219-225.

Richards, J. (1998). Beyond training. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press.

 

Roche, L. A., & Marsh, H. W. (2000). Multiple di-mensions of university teacher self-concept.

 

Instructional Science, 28, 439–468.Rusznyak, L. & Walton, E. (2011). Lesson plan-

 

ning guidelines for student teachers: A scaffold for the development of pedagogi-cal content knowledge. Education As Change, 15(2), 271-285.

 

Saslow, J., & Ascher, A. (2011). Top notch Fun-damentals. Longman: Pearson Education.

 

Simmons, N. (2009) Family and Friends 4, Ox-ford University Press.

 

Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning.

 

Educational Psychologist, 25, 71–86.Schunk, D. H. (1996). Self-efficacy for learning

 

and performance. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Re-search Association, New York.

 

Sougari, A. M. (2011). Student teachers’ deci-sion-making skills in relation to lesson planning: The impact of a practicum. Se-lected papers from the 19th international on student achievement: Implications for teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 57-67.

 

Suhr, D. (2006). Exploratory or Confirmatory Factor Analysis. SAS Users Group Inter-national Conference (pp. 1 - 17). Cary: SAS Institute, Inc.

 

Thomas, R. (2012). Learning, teaching and edu-cation research in the 21st century: An evolutionary analysis of the role of teach-ers. International Review of Education,

 

58(4), 589-591.

 

Tsui, A. (2005). Expertise in Teaching Perspec-tive and Issues. In K. Johnson (Ed.), Ex-pertise second language learning and teaching (pp. 167-189). New York, NY:Palgrave Macmillan.

Tyler, R. (1950). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University ofChicago

 

Woodward, T. (2001). Planning lessons and courses. Cambridge, U.K.: CambridgeUniversity Press.

 

Yinger, R. (1980). A Study of Teacher Planning.

 

The Elementary School Journal, 80(3),107-127.

 

Zazkis, R., Liljedahl, P., & Sinclair, N. (2009). Lesson Plays: Planning teaching vs. teaching planning. For the learning of mathematics, 29 (1), 40-47.