Issue 14: Aug 18, 2008 Connections Newsletter

Evaluating and Measuring Student Writing

Brenda Hill
Aug 18, 2008

Many schools, districts, and states have goals for the improvement of student writing. State and national standardized writing assessments show that students fall short in producing quality writing. Research results from the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) show that 16% of fourth and eighth graders and 22% of twelfth graders have not mastered basic writing skills.  There are multiple perspectives on what it means to write and write well. The current research on writing has contributed to teachers understanding what it means to teach composition and how to effectively implement writing instruction in a meaningful, productive way. The writing assignment and the purpose for writing influence how it is evaluated. Purposes for evaluating writing are listed below:

• To "direct" instruction

• To develop student self-awareness

• To document and celebrate growth

• To determine areas of need

• To set personal writing goals

• To obtain grades for students

According to the Journal of Staff Development (Summer 2006, Vol. 27, No 3), "assessments of good quality are perceptive, compassionate, and useful." The goal is to improve student writing development without inversely impacting the student's ability to write. Over an elapsed period of time there should be evidence of student growth. There are several effective informal methods for evaluating the quality of student writing and for determining growth over time. Methods of evaluation include:  conferencing, student self-evaluation, portfolios, analytical rubrics, and grades.

To learn more about these ideas and other strategies to make students more proficient and powerful writers, attend a Learning-Focused Writing workshop, or visit www.LEARNINGFOCUSED.com to view the Learning-Focused Writing resources available.

 

Mismatch Analysis

Carolyn Boyles
Aug 18, 2008

The concept of a mismatch analysis has roots in the biomedical research field for comparative views of DNA information, as well as cultural studies in India. However, its application in classrooms, as described by Vallecorsa (1999), is the one that has important relevance to teachers of classrooms with learners of varying abilities.

Assessment information about students identified and reported in the subgroup SWD (students with disabilities) can be used to plan more effectively for inclusive instruction, if that assessment includes more than data about the student's deficits. Information about the student's reading and math levels is important but does not provide adequate information to plan for optimum learning experiences.

Using the concept of the mismatch-analysis, teachers can examine the information they have about the students in their classroom and combine that with the expectations and demands of their curriculum and teaching techniques. In addition, if they have information about their students' background knowledge, language and vocabulary proficiencies and cultural experiences, mismatches can become matches.

In an example of this process from Scaffolding Grade Level Learning (2005, rev.2007), a classroom teacher has set up the following learning experience:

After discussing three familiar folk tales as a whole group activity, students will be working in small groups to analyze the tales for story components and recording them on a chart that will be used to launch an individual writing assignment.  The students will be working in small groups to complete the graphic organizer shown here after the whole group discussion.


Before beginning this activity, a mismatch analysis would reveal opportunities for scaffolding that would make the lesson more effective for all students in the classroom. This analysis can be initiated by the classroom teacher or as a key role for an inclusion teacher as the two teachers collaborate to optimize learning for all students in the classroom.

In a mismatch analysis of these lesson activities, the key questions to be asked are:

1) What are the demands of the materials/content that may create problems or obstacles for any of the learners in the classroom?  Example: Is the organizer effective for all students? Is the format appropriate for the purpose? Is the content complex, abstract, etc.?
2) What aspects of the teaching decisions have potential to create obstacles for any of the learners in the classroom?  Example: Are instructions or teacher expectations clear and understood by all students? Will the activity support the skill being taught?
3) Is there any demand of the process of interacting with the materials or with classmates that will become an obstacle for any of the learners in the classroom?

The answers to these questions result in the mismatch analysis below:

When students with disabilities are placed in inclusive settings, their rights to appropriately planned and soundly delivered instruction remain the responsibility of the school district and school. Co-teaching planning and collaboration should optimize their opportunities to achieve at grade-level. The collaboration between the classroom teacher and special education teacher can be enhanced with a shared responsibility for identifying the mismatches and turning them into matches.

Summarizing in Silence: Using “Chalk Talk” as a Tool

Toni Enloe
Aug 18, 2008

We often struggle with ways to summarize in our classrooms so we tend to fall back on the old standbys. "Chalk Talk" offers a different approach to summarizing. It is a silent conversation that can be used to check for student understanding. Middle school students love it because it gives them an opportunity to write notes to each other "legally" and it creates a safe environment for reflection.

Format

For summarizing purposes, the conversation should only last about five to ten minutes. The only materials you will need are a chalkboard, large whiteboard, or some butcher paper and either markers or chalk for written responses.

Guidelines for the Teacher

1. Decide on the question or statement that you would like to pose to the students and write it on the board or butcher paper. This can be your essential question if you are finished with your lesson.

      Examples:
      a. How do integers impact our everyday life?
      b. If an alien came to Earth, what would you tell them  
         about the three authors we have just studied?
      c. What have we learned about today?

2. Decide how long the activity will take. The first time, it may take a while for them to respond. Long waits are ok. As with any new strategy, you might teach them how to do the activity with a fun topic that is unrelated to your content.

3. Decide how many students you will allow at the board at one time by only making available that number of markers.

4. Decided how you will facilitate the activity. Perhaps you could stand back and watch. It is always fun to see how the conversation goes. If a student gets off track, peers will reel him back in. As the facilitator you can challenge their thinking by:

      a. writing your own questions in response to the students' 
         statements
      b. add your own ideas
      c. circle key points that come out of the conversation.

5. When it's done, it's done." Understand that when the activity is over, it is over and requires nothing else. As the facilitator, you have already made observations about whether the students "got it".

As with many other summarizers, this activity may also be used as an activating strategy to find out what prior knowledge students bring to a topic.


Procedure for the Students

1. "Chalk Talk" is a silent activity and they will be given the opportunity to carry on a conversation with their classmates. Emphasize that no one talks at all, and anyone can add to the chalk talk.

2. Students may comment on other students' thoughts by drawing an arrow between the two.

3. Students should respond to the question or phrase that has been posted.

4. Students may only write if there is a piece of chalk or a marker available.

5. Students should write when the spirit moves them. They may be reluctant to participate, but the more often you do the activity the more likely they are to see that no one really pays attention to who wrote the comments. It creates a safe environment for their responses.

As the conversation unfolds, you will notice that students will stop to read what their peers have written before they respond. The more often the students do this activity the more reflective they will become.