ED 324 674 TITLE Writing Assessment Handbook, Grade 8. INSTITUTION California State Dept. of Education, Sacramento. REPORT NO ISBN-0-8011-0887-X PUB DATE 90 NOTE 167p. AVAILABLE FROMBureau of Publications, Sales Unit, California Department of Education, P. 0. Box 271, Sacramento, CA 95802-0271 ($8.50, plus sales tax for California res:..dents). PUB TYPE Guides - Non-Classroom Use (055) EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postagi. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS English Instructi.on; Grade 8; Junior High Schools; Language Arts; S.:oring; Writing (Composition); Writing Assignments; *Writing Evaluatim; Writing Exercises; *Writing Skills; *Writing Tests IDENTIFIERS *California ABSTRACT This handbook, intended for English language arts teachers, princi2als, curriculum and testing specialists, superintendents, and all educators interested in nreparing students for the grade 8 California Assessment Program (CAP) writing assessment, provides the practitioner with information about the content of the test, the rationale underlying it, and materials to help administrators and teachers prepare for and respond to the assessment. It is a practical and open-ended docuwent that contains descriptions of the eight types of writing tested in the eighth grade (report of information, evaluation, problem solution, autobiographical incident, firsthand biography, observational writing, story, and speculation about cause or effect), as well as information about the importance, characteristics, and interrelatedness of the various types of writing. In addition, the guide includes the following items: ex,nplary student essays and an example of one student's writing proces; suggestions for classroom writing assignments; samples of a range of students' writing, including essays written for the CAP writing test; examples of published essays; recommended readings for use in the classroom; and a scoring guide for rhetorical effectiveness. (SR) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *******************.-*************************************************** ,74", 'Yo ,t4:.?",04%:;:* "t "4,. 41. I .7% .1,; 4., C ' 5. # ', ,-- ' r''' '.,", I , I , ,3, el,": 3;21 .1. , 5 53 t,`-3 45:. ,-... .0,.' zi .',..,- ,,...,/',', ..,,,-.. 44. ;"':'P+A., ,` s*;.=-?-,`4'',' , ' ,-',sa1.. ' ' , '-,;...c:,71)i;1,,',v5, F d.k Al . ;,".1,-..,-,4., e0,,19.14 ..?^ 4:5 sS %As COAW/US Pr V A4:naWledgments vt Prograrn OVeiView TiMe 4i0o 11.1 Reporting, Mat*** 0.4.011,C! 4 ProposedManagernent Checklist Saqple Letters and Releases 0001 ers Writing Assesv-Oent and the Curriculum v-1 Writing ouktes Report of Information %.4-1 Rhetorical Effectiveness Scoring Guide for Report of Infonnation V143 Evaluafion 1/11-1 Rhetorical Effectiveness Scoring Guide for Evaluation V1142 Problem Solution Vin-1 Rhetorical Effectiveness Scoring Guide for Problem Solution V111-12 Autobiographical Incident Rhetorical Effectiveness Scoring Guide for Autobiographical Incident 1X-13 Firsthand Biography X-1 Rhetorical Effectiveuess Scoring Guide for Firsthand Biography X-12 Obsavational Writing Rhetorical Effectiveness Scoring Guide for Observational Writing X1-14 Story X11-1 Rhetoricai EffectiverieSs.SCoring Guide for Story X1145 Speculation Abont can* Offoop Rhoo.4afttifoodfuits:esogingZulde for Speculation About CausorEffóts X111-11 Students with Special Needs 5 Preface In a landmark study by the National Assessment "Districts and/or schools develop a systematic of Educational Progress (NAEP), Writing Trends writing prngram." (Both the guide and the standards Across the Decade: 1974-1984, two major conclu- are published by the California Department of sions were reported: Educatien.) Under this standard, educators are American students are writing no better in encouraged to increase thefrequeney of writing 1984 than they were ten years earlier. assignments, teach writing as a process, increase the number of types of assignntents, modathe writing Performance of these nine-, tifirteen-, and process, assign types of writing that exist in the real severneen-year-old students was dis- world, andteachwritingaeroSs thecimiculum. tressingly poor. The CAP WrithigassessMent is based on this If one accepts the assumption that a piece of philosophy, which is_ Stated also in the, Department's writing is a reflection of how the writer thinks, then Handbook for Planningan Effective Writing the problem is even more seriousas are the Program &Id the English4.4nguage Arts implice ems for our democracy. Framework. TheWriting A4gessment handbook: In Celifonda prior to 1987 there was no existing Grade Eight is intended fir English-language arts data base to parallel that provided by NAEP. teachers, principals, curriculum and testing Concemed educators and citizens have only been specialists, superintendents, and all tducators able to guess at the present and past levels of student interested in preparing stuaents for the, grade eight writing achievement. CAP writing !ssessment. A committee of machers The California Assessment Program (mandated and writing specialists carefullyprepared this in 1972) has been limited to multiple-choice tests of material to ensure that any preparation for the CAP written expression, which test knowledge about writing test will 'also result itiimproving.writing writing at& ty and emulate moderately with writing instruction for students. This handbook Will provik tests but which fail to test the real thing: actual the reader with information about the content of the stud= writing. Without a statewide writing test, the rationale underlying it, ad materials to help achievement test, we simply cannot answer the administrators and teachers prepare for and respond question: How well do students in California write? to the assessment In Writing Trends Across the Decade: 1974-1984, In the spirit of the Model Curriculum Guide and the authors suggest that to move beyond the current the Model Curriculum Standards, we hope all levels of achievement, a more systematic program members of the educational community will pull of instructioney be neededone focused more together toward this common goal. Woridng to- directly on the valety of different kinds of writing gether, we will surely succeed in helping students be students need to learn to do and span a wider range effective in their use of the written word. As Ernest of levels of complexity. L. Boyer put it, "Clear writing leads to clear think- This suggestion is consistent with the English- ing, clear thinldng is the basis of clear-writing. Language Arts Model Curriculum Guide (K-8) and Pethaps more than any other fonn of communica- Standard Number Ten in the English-4anguage arts tion, writing holds us responsible for our words and section of the Model Curriculum Standards (9-12): ultimately makes us mom thoughtful human beings." Frantic Alexander Director, ,Curriculum, Instruction, lames R. Fmith and Assessment Division Deputy Superintendent Cwrkuluta and Instruction21 Dale Carlson Leadership Anistant Superintexknt CalVornia Assessment Progvam , Acknowledgments To acknowledge all of the people who have Harsh, and Helen Lodge. Also, Marguerite May, coutateted directly or indirectly to California's JoannalaIcKenzie, Jim Musante, George Nemetz, writing assessment requites telling the entire story Dalebicarron, Alice Scofield, Linda Short, Barbara about the evolution of writing assessment in Tomlinson, and Bill Wise. California. Writing aisessment began in 1972 with In spite of the improvements in the multiple- the trailiformalion of the state testing program into choice tests, a need still existed for an assessment of the California Assessment Program. real student writing: In 1984* pilot:projeCt was The first Step was the formation of the CAP iniOatOci at gra, 0.0;0840:000;***** ap- English-Language Assessment Advisory Commit- proa*OP*148:asse.aunCnt. TO044300 and tee. Ms group formulated ba ic principles and idendft OaPedin -6"00 teac4ei441,. 4** Ondent guidelines for the multiple-choice assessment of writing tliibughont Califon*: At thiit tiroeaState- written expression. Those guidelines were germane wide DireetWilting Assesainent Advisory Commit- to the development of the direct writing assessment tee was constituted to guide our effort. Members of That committee, led by elected chairperson Helen that comtnittee Were: Lodge and Department of Education Consultant Jim Diana Adams, Arthur Applebee, Eva Baker, Mary Fulton, also spearheaded a direct writing assessment Barr, Nancy Brownell, Sherryl Broyles, Jacqueline of California high school seniors in 1975. That Malan% and Charleitooper. MO, Karla Dellner, study provided a useful backdrop of experience and Alice Fniry; Mary Lee Glats, Jim Gray, Mel Grubb, information for the more recent developmental work Rosemary Hake, and Wayne Harsh. Also, Marilyn of the 1980s. The names of the members of the Kahl, Katy Kane, Joe Lawaenee, Helen Lodge, original English-Language Assessment Advisory Dorothy Maloney, hordes Myers, Joanna McKenzie, Committee follow: Kathleen Naylor; George Nemetz, Shirley Patch, Edys Quellmalz, Jim &amino, arid Ed White. Rohm Bennett, Shirley Boring, Gwen Brewer, June Byers, Lee Cronbach, Joanne Dale, Dan Donlan, Special leadership on that 1984 pilot project was Maude Edmonson, Tom Gage, Julia Gottesman, and provided by Edys Quellmalz and Alice Furry, who, Al Grommon. Also, Wayne Haish, Barbara Hartsig, worldng with the Writing Assessment Advisory Roger Hyndman, Barbah Lea Johnson, Helen Lodge, Committee, responded efficiently to the arduous Barbara