Carina Flores Calyeca Sharing
Content
TEACHERS’ AND STUDENTS’ STUDENTS’ BELIEFS ABOUT THE USE OF RUBRICS TO EVALUATE WRITING BY CARINA FLORES CALYECA
Purpose This study based on Markee’s theoretical framework explores the implementation of English writing rubrics by attempting to understand professors’, and students’ different beliefs regarding this implementation.
Research ues!"o#s RQ1: Who proposed the implementation of the writing rubrics in this context? Why and what did they think of the implementation? RQ 2: What are higher education English teachers’ beliefs about the use of rubrics as tools to assess writing? Do they use them? When do they use them? Do they use them to teach writing or only to evaluate? Have they changed them or adapted them? RQ 3: What do students report about the implementation of the writing rubrics?
Theore!"ca$ Fra%e&or'
A) WHO?
F) HOW?
B) WHAT?
C) WHERE? Cu$!ura$( po$"!"ca$( a)%"#"s!ra!"*e( e)uca!"o#a$ a#) "#s!"!u!"o#a$ su+s,s!e%s-
.ar'ee’s Theore!"ca$ Fra%e&or'
E) WHY?
D) WHEN?
1982
Cooper,
Ru+r"cs Descriptive scoring schemes that are developed by teachers or other evaluators to guide the analysis of the products or processes of students’ efforts !rookhart, "###$.
T,pes o/ ru+r"cs ". %olistic rubrics &. 'nalytic rubrics (. )rimary trait rubrics *. Multiple trait rubrics
Pr"%ar, Tra"! Scor"#1 Ru+r"c /or Wr"!"#1 .echa#"cs Tra"! +entences and paragraph s
1ord choice
E0cep!"o#a$ ♦
♦
♦
+pelling
♦
)unctuatio n
♦
Accep!a+$e
sage of sophisticated sentence patterns. )aragraphs indicate shift in thought and are used to make se-uence of events clear.
♦
1ords are used correctly and precisely.
♦
+pelling is correct, including complex and irregular words.
♦
♦
' range of punctuation including commas, apostrophes, colons and semicolons is used accurately and effectively.
♦
♦
+imple and some complex sentences are used. +ome paragraphing to show se-uence of eventsideas.
A%a!eur
U#sa!"s/ac!or,
+entence structure is usually correct. +imple sentences are used. /ittle attempt made to paragraph writing.
♦
♦
+imple vocabulary.
♦
2ncorrect vocabulary.
+pelling is generally accurate.
♦
3re-uent spelling errors.
♦
+pelling errors interfere with understanding.
)eriods and capitals are used correctly and punctuation is beginning to be used within the sentence.
♦
3re-uent punctuation errors.
♦
2nsufficient or lacks punctuation. 2ncorrect use of capital letters.
'cceptable vocabulary. 1ords are technologically appropriate.
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
+entences do not make sense. 0o paragraphing.
Le!!er2&r"!"#1 3 A)*"s"#1 a /r"e#) a+ou! &or' Categor
!
"a#$tat%o& a&' +alutation and closing have no (#o%&g errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
3 +alutation and closing have "5& errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
2
1
+alutation and closing have ( or more errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
+alutation andor closing are missing.
6omplies with less than 789 of the re-uirements for a friendly letter.
For*at
6omplies with all 6omplies with the re-uirements almost all the for a friendly letter. re-uirements for a friendly letter.
6omplies with several of the re-uirements for a friendly letter.
Co&te&t a&' a(($ra(
The letter contains The letter contains the ( accurate & accurate facts facts about the about the topic. topic.
The letter contains The letter contains " accurate facts no accurate facts about the topic. about the topic .
+ra**ar a&' "pe##%&g (o&-e&t%o&)
1riter makes no errors in grammar or spelling
1riter makes (5* errors in grammar andor spelling
1riter makes "5& errors in grammar andor spelling.
1riter makes more than * errors in grammar andor spelling
8. Teachers’ expectations +tevens and /evi, &::8A 20TE/ &:"&$
B. Cefine teaching skills 0+1, &:"*$
7. >bective assessment <oodrich, &:":$
D"sa)*a#!a1es o/ !he use o/ !he ru+r"cs 4- Tas'2spec"/"c e*a$ua!"*e cr"!er"a 5Poph%a#( 46678 9- Ge#era$ e*a$ua!"*e cr"!er"a 5Poph%a#( 46678 :- The e0cess"*e $e#1h! "# a ru+r"c ;- Ru+r"c a)%"#"s!ra!"o#
5Poph%a#( 46678
5<oh#( 9==>8
?- Ru+r"cs are #o! se$/2e0p$a#a!or,-
5Goo)r"ch( 9=4=8
.e!ho) 6ase study based on a mix methods exploratory se-uential desing 6resswell, &::7$. This type of approach focuses first on collecting -ualitative data and then collecting -uantitative data in order to test or generali4e the initial findings 6reswell, &:""$
Thank you!
a)op!ers
res"s!ers
supp$"ers
ACTORS "%p$e%e#!ers
Cha#1e a1e#!s c$"e#!s Fra*eor 6
T,pes o/ Soc"a$ Cha#1e Origin of the new idea Recognition of the need for change
Internal to the social system
External to the social system
Internal Cecognition is by members of the social system
2. 2mmanent change
22. +elective contact change
External Recognition may be by change agents outside the social system
222. 2nduced immanent change
2?. Directed contact change
Bae' o& Roger 192) a&' "7oe*a6er 191) or6, Fra*eor 6
Teachers’ &ho a)op!e) !he ru+r"c3 a)op!er
$*& +$) $%& '()
"
eac ers & o so%e %es res s e 3 a11ar
$& ,)
,& -.)
(& ',)
" #hD
Fra*eor 6
6enter5periphery = )roblem5solving models. Coordinator: we were concerned about the number of teachers we had at that time. 1e were thinking that some teachers were very flexible in their grading systems andF that other teachers were F were being too strict and too hard on studentsF and none of the two extremes was fair. Fra%e&or' Fra*eor
Purpose This study based on Markee’s theoretical framework explores the implementation of English writing rubrics by attempting to understand professors’, and students’ different beliefs regarding this implementation.
Research ues!"o#s RQ1: Who proposed the implementation of the writing rubrics in this context? Why and what did they think of the implementation? RQ 2: What are higher education English teachers’ beliefs about the use of rubrics as tools to assess writing? Do they use them? When do they use them? Do they use them to teach writing or only to evaluate? Have they changed them or adapted them? RQ 3: What do students report about the implementation of the writing rubrics?
Theore!"ca$ Fra%e&or'
A) WHO?
F) HOW?
B) WHAT?
C) WHERE? Cu$!ura$( po$"!"ca$( a)%"#"s!ra!"*e( e)uca!"o#a$ a#) "#s!"!u!"o#a$ su+s,s!e%s-
.ar'ee’s Theore!"ca$ Fra%e&or'
E) WHY?
D) WHEN?
1982
Cooper,
Ru+r"cs Descriptive scoring schemes that are developed by teachers or other evaluators to guide the analysis of the products or processes of students’ efforts !rookhart, "###$.
T,pes o/ ru+r"cs ". %olistic rubrics &. 'nalytic rubrics (. )rimary trait rubrics *. Multiple trait rubrics
Pr"%ar, Tra"! Scor"#1 Ru+r"c /or Wr"!"#1 .echa#"cs Tra"! +entences and paragraph s
1ord choice
E0cep!"o#a$ ♦
♦
♦
+pelling
♦
)unctuatio n
♦
Accep!a+$e
sage of sophisticated sentence patterns. )aragraphs indicate shift in thought and are used to make se-uence of events clear.
♦
1ords are used correctly and precisely.
♦
+pelling is correct, including complex and irregular words.
♦
♦
' range of punctuation including commas, apostrophes, colons and semicolons is used accurately and effectively.
♦
♦
+imple and some complex sentences are used. +ome paragraphing to show se-uence of eventsideas.
A%a!eur
U#sa!"s/ac!or,
+entence structure is usually correct. +imple sentences are used. /ittle attempt made to paragraph writing.
♦
♦
+imple vocabulary.
♦
2ncorrect vocabulary.
+pelling is generally accurate.
♦
3re-uent spelling errors.
♦
+pelling errors interfere with understanding.
)eriods and capitals are used correctly and punctuation is beginning to be used within the sentence.
♦
3re-uent punctuation errors.
♦
2nsufficient or lacks punctuation. 2ncorrect use of capital letters.
'cceptable vocabulary. 1ords are technologically appropriate.
♦
♦
♦
♦
♦
+entences do not make sense. 0o paragraphing.
Le!!er2&r"!"#1 3 A)*"s"#1 a /r"e#) a+ou! &or' Categor
!
"a#$tat%o& a&' +alutation and closing have no (#o%&g errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
3 +alutation and closing have "5& errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
2
1
+alutation and closing have ( or more errors in capitali4ation and punctuation.
+alutation andor closing are missing.
6omplies with less than 789 of the re-uirements for a friendly letter.
For*at
6omplies with all 6omplies with the re-uirements almost all the for a friendly letter. re-uirements for a friendly letter.
6omplies with several of the re-uirements for a friendly letter.
Co&te&t a&' a(($ra(
The letter contains The letter contains the ( accurate & accurate facts facts about the about the topic. topic.
The letter contains The letter contains " accurate facts no accurate facts about the topic. about the topic .
+ra**ar a&' "pe##%&g (o&-e&t%o&)
1riter makes no errors in grammar or spelling
1riter makes (5* errors in grammar andor spelling
1riter makes "5& errors in grammar andor spelling.
1riter makes more than * errors in grammar andor spelling
8. Teachers’ expectations +tevens and /evi, &::8A 20TE/ &:"&$
B. Cefine teaching skills 0+1, &:"*$
7. >bective assessment <oodrich, &:":$
D"sa)*a#!a1es o/ !he use o/ !he ru+r"cs 4- Tas'2spec"/"c e*a$ua!"*e cr"!er"a 5Poph%a#( 46678 9- Ge#era$ e*a$ua!"*e cr"!er"a 5Poph%a#( 46678 :- The e0cess"*e $e#1h! "# a ru+r"c ;- Ru+r"c a)%"#"s!ra!"o#
5Poph%a#( 46678
5<oh#( 9==>8
?- Ru+r"cs are #o! se$/2e0p$a#a!or,-
5Goo)r"ch( 9=4=8
.e!ho) 6ase study based on a mix methods exploratory se-uential desing 6resswell, &::7$. This type of approach focuses first on collecting -ualitative data and then collecting -uantitative data in order to test or generali4e the initial findings 6reswell, &:""$
Thank you!
a)op!ers
res"s!ers
supp$"ers
ACTORS "%p$e%e#!ers
Cha#1e a1e#!s c$"e#!s Fra*eor 6
T,pes o/ Soc"a$ Cha#1e Origin of the new idea Recognition of the need for change
Internal to the social system
External to the social system
Internal Cecognition is by members of the social system
2. 2mmanent change
22. +elective contact change
External Recognition may be by change agents outside the social system
222. 2nduced immanent change
2?. Directed contact change
Bae' o& Roger 192) a&' "7oe*a6er 191) or6, Fra*eor 6
Teachers’ &ho a)op!e) !he ru+r"c3 a)op!er
$*& +$) $%& '()
"
eac ers & o so%e %es res s e 3 a11ar
$& ,)
,& -.)
(& ',)
" #hD
Fra*eor 6
6enter5periphery = )roblem5solving models. Coordinator: we were concerned about the number of teachers we had at that time. 1e were thinking that some teachers were very flexible in their grading systems andF that other teachers were F were being too strict and too hard on studentsF and none of the two extremes was fair. Fra%e&or' Fra*eor
