<scp>icy lee</scp> Classroom Writing Assessment and Feedback in L2 School Contexts

Mao, Zhicheng; Lin, Jiang

doi:10.3138/cmlr.599

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, overconfidence in scoring accuracy will lead to overestimate the students' writing scores and cause raters to create bias in judging the students' written works (Rahayu & Rahayu, 2019). Therefore, their consistency and judgment influence raters' efficacy in L2 writing evaluation (Mao & Jiang, 2018). Their efficacy determines the variation of their accuracy in rating specific texts based on the assessment method they select.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since teachers play their vital role to judge the linguistic and rhetorical features of their students responds, they have to be literate in administering assessment for learning (AfL), assessment as learning (AsL) and assessment of learning (AoL) integrated well to assign a value to represent the quality of the students' learning outcomes (Mao & Jiang, 2018). However, due to the lack of their English language assessment discernment and training, they still have a problem to collect and interpret the students' learning result in the form of summative and formative assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Anonymous Teachers’ Factors of Assessing Paragraph Writing

Rahayu

2020

JEASP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scoring writing is very subjective and mainly relies on a lot on teachers as raters. They play a significant role to meticulously carry out writing evaluations to adjudicate the linguistic and rhetorical features of their students' written responses. Based on the previous studies, the teachers’ factors of knowledge of basic writing assessment, efficacy in selecting assessment method, efficacy in scoring accuracy, and perception in practicing writing assessment can contribute a lot to the quality in teachers’ writing assessment. The 56 junior high school English teachers having at least five years of teaching experience, was invited to fill out the questionnaire and scoring paragraph writing. The results were examined with Multiple Linear Regression analysis. Amongst these factors, only the efficacy in scoring writing accuracy predicts the teachers’ scoring paragraph writing.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Anonymous Teachers’ Factors of Assessing Paragraph Writing

Rahayu

2020

JEASP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gullbekk and Bystrӧm describe the phenomenon of a research competence and the process of its formation at university [2]. A number of researchers have considered the development of research competence's components through the inclusion of students in academic writing practice for publications and noted the difficulties of their integration into an international academic community [3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. Morton, Storch, and Thompson define the students' problems in meeting the written assignment requirements and reporting research results beyond formal interaction [10].…”

Section: A Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student-supervisor interaction problems in joint research activity

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growing interest in improving the quality of student’s research activity in higher education has led to an emphasis on student-supervisor interaction in joint research activity. The study presented here was carried out in Tyumen State University, Tyumen, Russia. The participants were 30 supervisors and 60 students from the Pedagogical Institute. The study defined student and supervisor interaction problems and characterized the ways of student-supervisor interaction that reduce student’s motivation for a creative approach to writing research work when student’s research work is perceived as (1) supervisor’s burden, (2) a source of supervisor’s innovative ideas, (3) a source of additional information or (4) a source of primary information processing for supervisor’s scientific work. Implications are given to prevent ineffective ways of student-supervisor interaction and improve the quality of student’s research training in multi-level university education.

show abstract

icy lee Classroom Writing Assessment and Feedback in L2 School Contexts

Cited by 2 publications

References 1 publication

The Anonymous Teachers’ Factors of Assessing Paragraph Writing

The Anonymous Teachers’ Factors of Assessing Paragraph Writing

Student-supervisor interaction problems in joint research activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About