“We Don’t Teach to the MCAS”: Contextualizing Standardized Testing within College Writing Development

The teaching process of English writing in the colleges can be carried out with more effective and innovative approaches in the network milieu, and the concept of collaborative learning can also become the basic teaching philosophy of English writing. The teaching conditions of English writing in some colleges and universities were analyzed. In general, the overall teaching conditions suffer from many deficiencies, which become the aspects for developing English writing teaching activities based on collaborative learning in the network milieu. Achieving the teaching outcomes of either collaborative English writing or English writing on the basis of collaborative learning is not easy. This paper will analyze the difficulty of college English writing teaching based on collaborative learning in the network milieu, and put forward specific suggestions for teaching.

Official documents narrate normatively public affair processing and administrative decisions of universities. Training of official document writing is of great significance, because it both prompts university staff to study and implement new requirements for official documents put forward by higher authorities and is beneficial to quality promotion, unified regulation and efficiency increase. Diversified positions and different training needs put forward new and high requirements for training of official document writing in universities. By introducing a series of individuality principles according to features of official document writing in universities, we can organize classified training with innovation in contents, modes and systems, so as to improve competence of university staff to better serve construction of world-class universities and disciplines.

This paper recognizes the importance of argumentative writing education and attempts to discuss the existing operation method and improvement plans by examining it through argumentative writing instructional methods. As a result, W University's 'University Writing' curriculum, unlike other college writing curricula, focuses on theory and practice related to argumentative writing for one semester to specifically improve learners' argumentative writing skills. However, it was found that by focusing only on argumentative writing education, the problem of a lack of basic writing skills such as spelling and spacing, arises. Therefore, while following the common curriculum, it is possible to improve the argumentative writing ability by using the short assigned practice and task-related feedback time to supplement the learner's abilities and repeat the instructor's feedback based on it. This method was found to be a net positive as it increased the satisfaction of the learners much more than when the common curriculum process was applied as is.

Drawing on recent decades, literature in college writing that theorizes the importance of Critical Language Awareness (CLA) curricula for African American Language (AAL)-speaking students, this article offers empirical evidence on the design and implementation of a college writing curriculum centered on CLA and its influence on AAL–speaking students’ language ideologies with respect to both speech and writing. Qualitative analyses of students’ pre- and-post-Questionnaires and the researcher’s field notes demonstrate that the curriculum helped students view AAL as an independent, natural, and legitimate language and view themselves as critically conscious thinkers and writers—more likely and willing to develop their academic writing skills and the strategies that support employing their native language in writing—for example, code-meshing strategies. This study offers important implications for college writing instruction.

Until recently in France, fairly little attention has been paid to studying university students' writing, although research about K-12 writing and about disciplinary knowledge, writing and epistemology is richly developed. Attention has been paid to specific aspects of university writing: note-taking, source use and integration, and error have been well-developed domains of inquiry. This chapter presents results from a recent study of students' writing in five disciplines at three French universities, exploring students' experiences at each stage of the curriculum. The study we are engaged in, funded by the French National Research Agency, is entitled 'University Writing: Inventory, Practices, Models'. The pieces of writing considered as representative of their discipline by the students vary clearly according to the university discipline. Students in Educational Sciences overwhelmingly cite Masters theses and course project work. Linguistics students are more likely to cite internship reports. Keywords: Educational Sciences; France; Linguistics students; university writing

In the context of economic globalization, as an international language, English plays an increasingly essential role in the communication and exchange of ideas. As an output skill that fully reflects one’s linguistic and cultural literacy and logical thinking ability, English writing is undoubtedly the most difficult of the four basic skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Writing is a form of expression that enables human thoughts to communicate and exchange across time and space, and it is also a powerful witness to the collision of ideas. However, most college students treat English writing with contempt. The reasons for this situation are related to the traditional teaching methods and assessment methods of English writing in universities. After all, today, many universities focus on the development of learners’ input skills or on the training of translation skills in the workplace. However, the development of English writing skills is weak. As a result, a great number of learners’ English writing skills lag behind other skills. This is because, for many years, the English writing curriculum and teaching mode in universities have only emphasized students’ learning of passive language input and rarely highlighted the importance of language output skills and activities. As a result, the imbalance in the interaction between language input and output has led to a lack of students’ writing skills. The teaching model of college English writing is mostly that teachers teach the theory and skills of writing through model essay analysis, and then, they are responsible for assigning writing tasks. The new standards promulgated by the Ministry of Education in 2001 also clearly state that the evaluation system should reflect the diversity of evaluation subjects and the variety of evaluation methods. In other words, both outcome evaluation and process evaluation should be considered. The focus of formative assessment is on students’ learning process. The evaluation content focuses on students’ performance, emotions, attitudes, and learning strategies in the learning process. The subjects of evaluation are teachers, students, and peers, which coincide with the requirements of the new curriculum reform. After more than 20 years of lightning-fast development in the Internet era, China’s Internet industry has achieved unprecedented success and is playing an unprecedented role on the world stage. Under the guidance of relevant policies, China is steadily moving toward becoming a cyber power. Education is the main means of training talents in China, but the traditional teaching mode is bounded by time and place. Therefore, teaching through the Internet is convenient and unconstrained in this era. In addition, the convenient connection of mobile Internet anytime and anywhere has facilitated the rapid integration of online and offline education. Education, as a future-oriented business, is bound to bring about a change. In this study, an improved collaborative filtering automatic assessment system for teaching English writing in college is designed.

Theoretical Possibility and Practice of Dialectical Writing－Focusing on Teaching Cases of Practical Writing in College－

The study asked first and second-year students enrolled in a liberal arts course at A University to write in a Friendly and Emotional Expression Writing course. It then analyzed the feedback patterns between their peers, and examined the results of evaluating their feedback factors. Finally, it drew some implications for university liberal arts writing education. Peer feedback on friendly and emotional expression writing can be divided into four higher areas: total subject, composition, expression, and reader, with a total of nine detailed types: purpose, entire text, paragraph, sentence, personality, error, attractiveness, understanding, and realism. Among these factors, peer feedback in the independent area was the most common, especially when looking at sub-detail types, where feedback on ‘factiveness’ (do you mean “attractivness”?) was the most common. However, all peer feedback types are important factors when it comes to the humanities and in culture writing. To be sure, friendly and emotional expression writing is at the center of this field. These results allowed us to derive the following three implications: First, it is necessary to apply and practice social and emotional expression writing in university writing education by developing and expanding it in a connective manner. Second, when writing in a friendly and emotionally expressive manner, it is necessary to instruct the reader to pay particular attention to the “reader area,” which is considered the most essential requirement, and to approach the reader in an honest way so that his or her writing can be easily understood. Third, peer feedback of friendly and emotional expression writing is basically diverse in terms of topics, composition, and the expressions (or level of expressiveness) needed to write. Thus, it is necessary to work in university liberal arts education to ensure that these requirements are well established.

It must be tiresome and burdensome for college freshmen to write, the Z generation, most of whom get information and communicate through hypertext, digital media. In order to conduct writing education for learners with low confidence in writing, educators should start by trying to increase their student’s writing efficacy. In the preliminary survey of K University’s writing subject, it was found that the confidence of learners in writing was low.As part of the review, this paper presents a three-stage writing curriculum operation plan based on Fisher & Frey’s framework (2021:4) for effective education. In the first step, learning goals and achievement standards are set and presented clearly to learners. In the second stage, examples that meet achievement standards are presented to guide and educate, and feedback is provided to support learning. In the third step, learners must complete individual learning and instructors should present them with feedback.In the course of operating the three-stage curriculum, the feedback of the instructor is very important. Therefore, this paper examined that feedback, taking into consideration that the emotional aspects of learners is necessary to improve their writing efficacy. In addition, specific feedback procedures were presented for this approach, and cases of students enrolled in the writing curriculum of K University were also examined. As can be seen from the survey results of K University’s writing students, I think that the discussions in this paper will help improve writing skills by improving the efficacy of writing learners.

That the English language is male-oriented can scarcely be denied. For centuries the human race has been called man, the individual he, everyone himself-with the constant reassurance that of course man, he, his, him, and himself are generic terms which include women as well as men. But do they? Although the sentence Every student should bring his book to class does not necessarily evoke mental picture of thirty uniformed boys, I believe that such sentences subtly reinforce the sex role stereotype that most students (writers, readers, professors, doctors, executives, individuals-persons worthy of note) are male. Such linguistic bias should be of particular concern to teachers of composition, whose job it is to emphasize the subtle rhetorical powers of language, the connotative complexities of the words we use. main concern in this paper is the way sexist language manifests itself in the college classroom, particularly in freshman composition courses. In 1976 H. Lee Gershuny conducted detailed investigation of dictionaries and textbooks to determine the extent to which they reinforce sexual stereotypes. Gershuny concluded that although sexist language was common in dictionaries and public school textbooks, it was not as prevalent in recent college composition manuals: My own informal examination of representative sample of college English handbooks and rhetoric texts published after 1972 indicated that English language texts are far ahead of other disciplines in 'de-sexing' illustrative sentences and prose passages.' Yet while praising number of these texts for specific achievements in reducing or eliminating sexist offenses, Gershuny also asserts that have way to go. Many texts fail to depict women in traditionally male roles and professions, and when they do, Gershuny suggests, a woman's work is often trivialized or described as dependent on that of others (p. 157). Also, Gershuny mentions only one work, Suzanne E. and Roderick A. Jacobs' The College Writer's Handbook, as alternating she and he each time in generic use; presumably most of the rely upon the more conventional generic he. In similar study, Candace Helgeson refuses to give authors of freshman composition texts as

An increasing number of students graduate from U.S. high schools and enter college while still in the process of learning English. This group--the "1.5 generation"--consisting of immigrants and U.S. residents born abroad as well as indigenous language minority groups, is rapidly becoming a major constituency in college writing programs. These students defy the existing categories in most college writing programs, and in the research literature. Experienced in American culture and schooling, they have characteristics and needs distinct from the international students who have been the subject of most research and literature on ESL writing. Furthermore, in studies of mainstream college composition, basic writing, and diversity, these students' status as second-language learners is usually left unaddressed or even misconstrued as underpreparation. Nevertheless, research and pedagogical writings have yet to take up the particular issues entailed in teaching composition to this student population. The intent in this volume is to bridge this gap and to initiate a dialogue on the linguistic, cultural, and ethical issues that attend teaching college writing to U.S.-educated linguistically diverse students. This book is the first to address explicitly issues in the instruction of "1.5 generation" college writers. From urban New York City to midwestern land grant universities to the Pacific Rim, experienced educators and researchers discuss a variety of contexts, populations, programs, and perspectives. The 12 chapters in this collection, authored by prominent authorities in non-native language writing, are research based and conceptual, providing a research-based survey of who the students are, their backgrounds and needs, and how they are placed and instructed in a variety of settings. The authors frame issues, raise questions, and provide portraits of language minority students and the classrooms and programs that serve them. Together, the pieces paint the landscape of college writing instruction for 1.5 generation students and explore the issues faced by ESL and college writing programs in providing appropriate writing instruction to second-language learners arriving from U.S. high schools. This book serves not only to articulate an issue and set an agenda for further research and discussion, but also to suggest paths toward linguistic and cultural sensitivity in any writing classroom. It is thought-provoking reading for college administrators, writing teachers, and scholars and students of first- and second-language composition.

No published studies have sufficiently focused on essay topic writability from the perspective of college writers of the new millennium including native English speakers and ESL speakers. In this study, 500 college writers in Metro Toronto in Canada were interviewed to uncover if they found some essay topics easier than other topics. The results indicate that over 90% of them did. The interviewees explained that factors determining the writability of an essay topic include knowledge, interest, experience, and data availability. The positive responses are examined along with the negative ones. Cross-comparison confirms consistency between the two groups. In agreement with previous studies, through a statistical approach and by focusing on essay topic writability, this study alerts frontline teachers as well as language testing administrators to the issue of consistency of difficulty of essay topics in examinations, which can lead to improved validity of such writing tests and examinations across disciplines.

The purpose of this research was to investigate five audience-related constructs impacting on the written expression of adult writers who demonstrate varying degrees of literacy competence. Four specific groups of adult writers were targeted for this study, including 35 college-able writers demonstrating learning disabilities, 22 writers with learning disabilities attending a rehabilitation vocational training program, 35 remedial English college writers, and 35 normally achieving college writers. A primary trait scale was developed to investigate five major constructs identified in the literature as impacting on audience. These constructs included general characteristics, organization of text, analyzing/constructing the audience, construct differentiation of voice, and execution. The results of this research indicate that the population of adult writers demonstrating learning disabilities have difficulties with certain aspects of the writing process that may impact on the audience (reader). Implications for assessment and instruction are discussed.

This paper sheds light on the necessity of engaging critical thinking skills in teaching college writing to EFL students at university. The study investigates students’ attitudes towards writing, the challenges they face when writing paragraph assignments in terms of generating and organizing ideas. It has been noticed that students’ performance in English college writing is not satisfactory not just for linguistic reasons but for lacking critical thinking skills. Many studies focused on the grammatical and vocabulary problems that face Arab EFL learner’s when writing in English. Albeit, this research takes us a step further and even more pedagogical than just linguistic. It addresses the difficulties that students face when writing assignments that require them to argue, analyze, infer and judge. Results show that students’ inefficient writing is due to their lack of critical thinking skills which are neglected throughout their writing experience at high school.

Every first-year college composition course shares one purpose: to help beginning college students become better writers. We shape our courses and our instruction around the assumption that we know what constitutes good college writing or what skills good college writers should have. More specifically, as instructors we want to help students learn to write the academic prose that is expected and required in the discourse community of the university. We also have a sense that the recent high school graduates who inhabit our classes are not yet prepared to enter that discourse community, that their writing is quantitatively and perhaps even qualitatively different from that of seasoned college writers. We assume that between high school writing and college writing exists a boundary that is real, if undefinable, and it is across that boundary that our students must travel.