Tuesday, December 5, 2017

The Horse, Fertilization, and Screws: Re-imagining Assessment FROM Writers

I'm reading Maja Wilson's Reimagining Writing Assessment: From Scales to Stories. 

While there are SO many ideas that you need to know from this book, I have happened upon some ideas that will help your teaching practice. (You should get the book to fully understand the theoretical perspectives behind these ideas, but most teachers want to go directly to the "good stuff" they can actually use in practice. Be careful, doing that turns into taking an innovative idea and doing the same old crap that didn't work in the first place. Wilson tells us it's like using a hammer to to screw a screw. "Something gets screwed, but it's not the screw" (2018, p. 26).

I'll also be combining my comments here with the concept of Hattie and Timperley's (2006) four levels of feedback. Doing so fits well with Wilson's approach because what she describes in her book is a practical application of THE element that Hattie realized is most neglected. We often think that feedback is something that we give to students. While that is powerful, that's putting the cart before the horse. It's like incubating and egg that has not been fertilized. FIRST, feedback must come FROM the learner TO the TEACHER. Then the teacher must begin to make decisions about how to make a decision about the level of feedback that can then be returned to the learner.

So, on with the horse, fertilization, and screws.

You'll have to get the book to read about the insights Wilson learned from Bob's composition. Truly brilliant. That experience led her to realize that stories "can become a tool for inquiring into a writer's development" (Wilson, 2018, 41).  By eliciting the stories of how Bob composed, Wilson identified how teachers get feedback FROM students that they can use, "forming writers even as it helps them understand them and their work" (Wilson, 2018, p. 41).

She uses the framework of story to establish a form for her inquiry and preparation to help the writer. I'll pose each section, italicizing her exact words, but reshaping them in format. (Wilson put them in paragraphs.) Then I'll follow each section with commentary on how the ideas intersect with the four levels of feedback. Wilson provides excellent questions that teachers could use to begin their thinking before working with students in a writing conference.

Setting:
  • Where and when does ____ compose?
  • What are the circumstances of his composition?
    • Immediate
    • Rhetorical
    • Cultural backdrop
  • How does the writer use these circumstances to cull materials, purposes, and “forms”? (Adapted from Wilson, 2018, p. 41)

I used to think about the types of feedback as different kinds of responses that the teacher could give to the student. Wilson's framework begins with setting. The teacher is gathering both TASK level and PROCESS level feedback about the writer. Wilson helps teachers examine elements of the TASK itself, the physical location and time of the act of writing. By examining the circumstances, the teacher has further specifics about the context of the task that impact the performance: the process of writing itself. In the last question, Wilson provides the teacher with a question that helps the teacher gather PROCESS level feedback from the writer about the process the writer uses to accomplish the written task.


Character:
  • Who is ___ as a composer?
  • What is the story of his development?
  • Why does he compose?
  • What are his intentions?
  • What is he thinking and feeling as he composes?
  • What previous experiences and relationships does he bring to bear on his composing?
  • What relationships does  he foster through his composing - and his compositions? (2018, p. 41)


After the teacher has examined the setting in which the student composes, Wilson suggests that we look at who the writer is as a character. I would characterize her questions as SELF level feedback, although differently than Hattie. Hattie (2012) found associations with ineffective SELF level feedback when it was delivered as praise. As I have responded to student writing and have read about giving feedback to writers, there is always a dead level awareness that these writers are HUMAN. I must acknowledge who they are as writers in a way that is not associated with praise. Wilson offers an effective heuristic here to help us gather feedback from the writer that honors them as living and breathing people. 


Action:
  • What does ____do?
  • With what and with whom does he interact?
  • What obstacles does he encounter?
  • How does he attempt to overcome these obstacles?(Wilson, 2018, p. 41)

Now the teachers have considered the student's writing in terms of setting and character, Wilson suggests that we gather feedback about what the writer does: Action. This involves considering what the writer DOES (TASK level feedback) and HOW the writer goes about doing so (PROCESS level feedback). Wilson's first three questions prompt the teacher to gather TASK level information from the writer. The fourth question prompts the teacher to gather PROCESS level feedback from the writer. After examining the student and his/her writing in terms of a narrative, the teacher is more prepared to give feedback that has greater impact.

I'm not a big fan of conclusions, because I don't think most people read them. But I would like to reinforce two concepts here: 1. Wilson gives us tools to significantly improve how we respond to writers more productively and humanely. She shows us where we should begin. 2. Wilson's ideas work because they center on the most effective type of feedback: feedback the teacher gathers from the student. 3. And I lied. Three concepts: Teachers gather ALL of the types of feedback mentioned in Hattie's studies. Developing a teacher's awareness of these levels to consider should help the teacher make better decisions about how to help writers grow and thrive.


Hattie, J. A. C., & Timperley, H. (2006). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

Hattie, J. A. C. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. New York, NY: Routledge.

Wilson, M. (2018). Reimagining writing assessment: From scales to stories. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.







No comments:

Post a Comment