In the present study, aspects of the measurement of writing are disentangled in order to investigate the validity of inferences made on the basis of writing performance and to describe implications for the assessment of writing. To include genre as a facet in the measurement, we obtained writing scores of 12 texts in four different genres for each participating student. Results indicate that across raters, tasks and genres, only 10% of the variance in writing scores is related to individual writing skill. In order to draw conclusions about writing proficiency, students should therefore write at least three different texts in each of four genres rated by at least two raters. Moreover, when writing scores are obtained through highly similar tasks, generalization across genres is not warranted. Inferences based on text quality scores should, in this case, be limited to genre-specific writing. These findings replicate the large task variance in writing assessment as consistently found in earlier research and emphasize the effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores. This research has important implications for writing research and writing education, in which writing proficiency is quite often assessed by only one task rated by one rater.

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ? Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

In this study, we tested the effects of Tekster [Texter], a comprehensive strategy-focused writing instruction program, using a switching replication design. The program was implemented by fourth, fifth, and sixth grade teachers (N = 76) in 60 general education classrooms in the Netherlands. Students (n = 688) and teachers (n = 31) in Group 1 worked with Tekster during the first eight-week period, between the first and second measurement occasion. Students (n = 732) and teachers (n = 45) in Group 2 implemented Tekster during the second eight-week period, between the second and third measurement occasion. The intervention led to statistically significant improvements in the quality of students' writing.The effect size for the full sample was 0.32 and 0.40 for students who students who completed all 16 Tekster lessons. Gains shown by students in Group 1 were maintained after eight weeks. Because writing quality was assessed in three genres, the findings are generalizable across students, classes, and writing tasks. Taken together, the results of this study demonstrate that a strategy-focused writing instruction program, such as Tekster, can be an effective way to improve upper-elementary students' written language skills.

No abstract

In this study we examined the effectiveness of Tekster [Texter], a comprehensive program for writing for the upper elementary grades, combining strategy instruction, text structure instruction, and the teaching of self-regulation skills with observational learning, explicit instruction, and (guided) practice to address both the focus of instruction (what is taught) and the mode of instruction (how it is taught). Further, we investigated the added value of a professional development program for teachers on the effectiveness and implementation of the intervention in the classroom, by adopting a teachers-training-teachers approach. One group of teachers (N = 31) was trained by experts, and subsequently trained their colleagues (N = 37). Quasi-experimental results showed that students' writing performance improved after the intervention (ES = 0.55), while generalizing over tasks, students, and teachers. Further, teachers became more positive and felt more efficacious about teaching writing after the intervention. There were no differences between trainers and trainees, which provides evidence for the spillover effect of professional development. To get more insight in how teachers implemented the intervention in their classroom and in the social validity of the intervention and the teachers-training-teachers approach, we triangulated postintervention questionnaires with classroom observations and interviews. This mixed methods approach revealed that both trainers and trainees were highly satisfied with the program and easily adapted their focus of instruction. However, for adjusting the mode of instruction more teacher support seems to be needed.