RUNNING HEAD: The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment in English for Academic

Purposes Course in a Sri Lankan University Context

Student Number: 650054322

Candidate Number: 036793
Graduate School of Education
University of Exeter

Essay submitted to in partial fulfilment of the requirements of

EFPM835: Foreign Language Testing and Assessment

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Context

3. Classroom-based Portfolio Assessment: A Conceptual Framework

4. Rationale
5. Design
5.1. Assessment Specifications
5.2. Considerations in Task Design
5.3. Considerations in Rating and Feedback

6. Evaluation: Portfolio Assessment and Test Usefulness

7. Conclusion
8. Bibliography

9. Appendices

Appendix A: Course Syllabus

Appendix B: Assessment Specifications

Appendix C: Sample Tasks

Appendix D: Writing Assessment Scale

Appendix E:

Portfolio Rating Scale

Appendix F:

Self-/peer-evaluation checklist

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

1. Introduction
The significance of assessment in language education cannot be undermined because of its role
as a key factor in indicating the quality of the learning/teaching process and driving educational
reform, by measuring the performance of the learners. This paper discusses the design of a
classroom-based portfolio writing assessment scheme as part of a university-level academic
writing course at the University of Kelaniya. Foremost, I analyze the relevant learning/teaching
context since contextual factors have an impact on the viability of a new assessment system. The
conceptual framework of the study focuses on the concepts of alternative and classroom-based
assessment with an emphasis on portfolios. The rationale for the proposed scheme of assessment
is then explained with reference to the contextual factors and the conceptual framework. The
paper then discusses some key considerations in assessment design, criteria for feedback and
scoring, and evaluates the proposed assessment system vis--vis the principles of construct
validity, authenticity, interactiveness, impact, reliability, and practicality.
2. Context:
The institutional context for the proposed scheme of assessment is the English Language
Teaching Unit (ELTU) of the University of Kelaniya. The main function of the ELTU is to
provide pre-sessional and in-sessional English language courses to the undergraduates from all
the faculties of the University in order to prepare them for their studies and a successful career
upon graduation. In addition, the ELTU offers a first degree in Teaching English as a Second
Language (TESL) to address the dearth of qualified English language teachers in Sri Lanka. The
prerequisite for admission to this degree programme is a pass in Advanced Level English
language literature of an equivalent level of ability. Although the students are operationally
proficient in English, there are complaints from the lecturers about the quality of the written
assignments due to gaps in the academic literacy of the students. The Course, TESL 11213:
Rhetoric and Composition is offered to the undergraduates in TESL during their first semester of
study to introduce them to the conventions of academic writing. (Please see Appendix A for the
syllabus of the course.) Currently, the course is assessed through an extended take-home essay
(20%); an in-class test (20%) to test the students knowledge of the grammar and mechanics of
writing; and an unseen written examination at the end of the semester (60%). As far as I am

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

concerned, some of the key weaknesses in the current scheme of assessment are its overtly
product-oriented approach, the failure to assess writing as a process, and the lack of opportunities
for the students to reflect on the processes of writing and learning to write.
3. Classroom-based Portfolio Assessment: A Conceptual Framework
Although the terms, testing and evaluation are often used indiscriminately to refer to
educational measurement, it is vital to examine how these concepts are differentiated in the
relevant theoretical literature. While a test provides a method of measuring a person's ability,
knowledge, or performance in a given domain (Brown, 2004:3), assessment refers to the
systematic approach to collecting information and making inferences about the ability of a
student or the quality or success of a teaching course on the basis of various sources of evidence
(Richards et al, 2002:35). Therefore, tests can be conceptualized as a subset of assessment that
encompasses a much wider domain (Brown, 2004:4) of educational measurement. Another
significant distinction that is highlighted in the literature is between the summative and formative
approaches to assessment: while summative assessment seeks to summarise or evaluate the
competence or performance of a student at some point in the learning process and represent it in
terms of a final grade, formative assessment takes place throughout the learning process with the
view of helping the student improve their standards by giving constructive feedback (Bloom,
Hasting, & Madaus, 1971; Brown, 2004).
For a considerable period of time, the field of language assessment has been largely concerned
with traditional and large-scale standardized testing that is conducted by regional, national and
international examination boards. However, paradigm shifts in language education such as the
social turn that reconceptualizes language acquisition as a collaborative and sociocultural
activity have resulted in an evolving and increasing interest in classroom-based assessment, i.e.
assessment internal to the classroom and managed by the teacher (Turner, 2012:65).
Classroom-based assessment refers to a broad range of means that are used by teachers to gauge
student learning on an ongoing basis during the process of classroom teaching. This involves
collecting information regarding the language use by students which is then analysed and
interpreted with the view of providing constructive feedback to the students and making
decisions about the learning-teaching process. (Turner, 2012; Genesee & Upshur, 1996). To

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

collect observable evidence of learning in classroom contexts, teachers either use traditional tests
or methods of alternative assessment such as observation, portfolios, conferences, journals,
interviews, task-based performance tests, or tools of self and peer evaluation. In alternative
assessment, the focus shifts from the product to the process of learning. Feedback goes beyond a
final grade to include giving detailed and descriptive accounts of the students performance, with
the view of integrating assessment into the process of learning (Fox, 2008).
A viable tool of the alternative classroom-based assignment is the portfolio, a purposeful
collection of students work that demonstrates to students and others their efforts, progress, and
achievements in given areas (Genesee & Upshur, 1996:99) of an instructional programme.
Portfolios can either include examples of the students performance in all aspects of language
learning or exclusively focus on one aspect such as writing. Carefully planned portfolios provide
systematic and reliable longitudinal evidence of learning which can be used by the teacher and
the students to measure the progress of learning during the instructional programme and for
determining/negotiating measures to enhance the quality of the learning/teaching experience.
4. Rationale:
Writing plays a pivotal role in the English language teaching curriculum at university level, as
the students are expected to produce various genres of writing such as essays, reports,
summaries, etc. on a daily basis as part of their studies. At the same time, both researchers and
practitioners affirm that writing is the most difficult skill to teach in second/foreign language
classrooms (Richards & Renandya, 2002:303; Smith, 1982:27). This is mainly because of the
extremely high level of skills required in planning and organizing writing as well as the focus on
accuracy that develop gradually over a period of time.
Traditional product-oriented tools of assessment such as one-off tests often fail to assess writing
as a recursive process of planning, drafting and revising, i.e. how writing is taught and practised
in the classroom. At the same time, a single writing sample cannot be reliably used for assessing
a students overall ability to produce various genres of writing for various audiences and
purposes. (Weigle, 2002). Alternatively, classroom-based approaches to assessment can be used
by teachers to reflect the writing process more accurately and provide constructive and relevant
feedback to students.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

For the purposes of the present study, my reasons for selecting portfolio-based assessment of
academic writing include its strengths such as enabling the student to demonstrate the ability to
produce a range of documents, closely reflecting the learning needs in the given context; giving
the students the opportunity to revise written products before final evaluation; fostering learner
autonomy and control; emphasizing the importance of reflection and self-assessment by
students; and measuring continuous growth over time along specific parameters such as
accuracy, organization and argumentation (Hamp-Lyons & Condon, 2000). At the same time, I
prefer portfolio-based assessment because it empowers the teacher to provide more constructive
and formative teacher feedback (Burnham, 1986) that the students are likely to benefit from as
they have additional opportunities for revision based on my feedback. However, I understand
that this process can be time-consuming and laborious for the teacher.

5. Assessment Design
a.

Assessment Specifications

The development of specifications plays a central and crucial role in the assessment design
process since they provide the official blueprint for the content and delivery of the assessment.
For the purposes of the present design, I have used the guidelines provided in Brown (2004)
which recommends stating objectives clearly; providing instructions on what materials or content
to include; communicating assessment criteria; designating time within the curriculum for
portfolio development; establishing periodic review for review and conferencing; and providing
positive washback-giving final assessments (Brown, 2004:256-259). (Please see Appendix B for
the proposed assessment specifications.)

The aim of the academic writing portfolio is to provide the students with an opportunity to
demonstrate their progress and achievement in writing skills during the course. The portfolio
assesses their ability to produce five selected genres of writing for academic purposes: summary,
synthesis, essay-type answer, critical review, and extended coursework essay, using their
knowledge of the conventions, mechanics and strategies of academic writing. It also expects
them to understand and reflect on writing as a recursive process of planning, organising, drafting,
revising and redrafting. In addition, the students demonstrate their ability to work collaboratively

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

by producing an extended piece of writing in small groups and continuing to peer-evaluate each
others writing throughout the semester. The teachers role is to facilitate and assess the progress
of the students throughout the process of learning, offer constructive feedback and collect
information about the students learning, which will be useful for classroom decision making and
future lesson planning purposes.

In addition to the aims and objectives, the specifications clearly identify the writing tasks, the
periodic schedule for submission, procedures, and the assessment criteria. By explicitly stating a
periodic schedule for the submission of the multiple drafts, the students are encouraged to
manage their time effectively during the 16 week semester. The unassessed diagnostic writing
task, which is completed during the first lesson, allows the teacher to identify the strengths and
developmental needs of the students vis--vis their academic writing skills. While tasks 1-3 are
completed as in-class assignments, tasks 4-5 are completed as take-home assignments. For each
task, the students submit two drafts, thereby making assessment a genuinely formative
experience. The students are encouraged to use teacher and peer feedback for the first draft as
well as their reflections to improve the quality of the second draft. (Please see Appendix C for a
collection of sample tasks.) The reflective statement, which is submitted with the completed
portfolio, is an on-going activity, and the aim is to give the students an opportunity to reflect on
and evaluate their overall learning experience. The students should focus on what they have
learnt in the course, their strengths, developmental needs, and how they will continue to develop
their academic writing skills in future.

5.2 Considerations in Task Design

One of the key considerations in designing this portfolio is the need to link its content closely
with the learning objectives of the curriculum and the process of teaching, thereby reflecting the
dynamic quality of classroom-based assessment. As a result, assessment becomes an interaction
between an examiner-as-intervener and a learner-as-active participant, which seeks to estimate
the degree of modifiability of the learner and the means by which positive changes in cognitive
functioning can be induced and maintained (Lidz, 1987:4). For example, the procedures for the
administration of tasks; which include the submission of multiple drafts, peer and self-

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

evaluation, and reflection; closely complement the introduction of writing as a process rather
than a product, which is one of the key goals of the instructional programme.

Furthermore, the process of linking learning and assessment has been achieved by the careful
selection of relevant topics and tasks that match with the learning objectives and content of the
course in question. Unlike standardized national and international tests that target a wider
population of test takers with heterogeneous interests, classroom-based assessment enables the
teacher to select topics with narrower or more targeted appeal that are more accessible and of
interest to the students (Shaw & Weir, 2007). As explicitly stated in the task prompts and
illustrated through the sample tasks, writing topics in the present assessment are closed linked to
language studies and English language teaching in order to ensure that they are relevant and of
interest to the students. Also, this link between the topics and the discipline also reflects the
integration of a discipline-specific approach to teaching and testing academic writing that goes
beyond teaching general academic literacy.
Expert opinion is divided regarding who should have control over determining portfolio content.
Although Hamp-Lyons & Condon (2000) advocates that students should be able to decide what
include in the portfolio as this practice will intrinsically motivate them to revise their writings
and take pride in their work, Weigle (2002) notes that students may not always make the best
choices. Given that there are only five assessed tasks, I expect the students to include all these
tasks and drafts in the portfolio so that it provides a more comprehensive picture of their progress
during the semester. In Tasks 1-4 they work on pre-designated topics while they are allowed to
choose a topic for Task 5 and negotiate it with the teacher. In addition to the writing tasks, the
students are expected to enclose the self and peer assessment checklists, teacher feedback forms,
self-reflection forms and mid-semester counselling notes since they provide evidence of the
students participation in the process of writing. At the same time, the information in these
documents will enrich the image of the students performance during the course that is created
through the portfolio.
As in the case of the topics, the choice of tasks also reflects the curriculum requirements and
learning needs of the students closely. The prescribed genres of writing represent the range of
documents that undergraduates are expected to produce at the early stage of their studies. The

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

diversity of the tasks vis--vis how they are administered is also noteworthy. The unassessed
diagnostic task at the beginning serves as a meaningful lead-in to the assessed tasks by helping
the students understand their strengths, weaknesses, and developmental needs. While in-class
tasks seek to train the students to produce quality writing under the pressure of examination
conditions, the take-home assignments allow them more time and flexibility to gather
information through research and incorpate them in their writing. Also, the final extended
writing task enables them to experience writing as a collaborative activity and make use their
ability to work in groups.

9.1.Considerations in Rating and Feedback

The portfolio adopts a criterion-based approach to assessment that rates the students
performance according to a pre-designated set of criteria. The test taker must reach the required
level of performance, which is interpreted according to the identified criteria, and the
performance of the other students does bear any significance as in the case of norm-referenced
assessment. This approach fosters accountability in terms of student performance, transparency
and negotiability in assessment, an acknowledgement of individuality and the exercise of
professional judgement in marking (Dunn, Parry, & Morgan, 2002). The students are judged
against themselves on what they can do rather than against others on what they cannot do. This
enables a clearer picture of an individual students performance during a course. At the same
time, this approach creates a safe and student-friendly classroom atmosphere, as the students are
not under pressure to compete with each other to perform well on the course.
Although the establishment of appropriate objective criteria is considered an essential step in
assessment, the literature indicates that there is no consensus over a single set of criteria. A
distinction is often made between holistic criteria that evaluate a piece of writing as a whole
rather than as distinct parts and multi-trait/analytical criteria that evaluate the different aspects
of the writers performance thereby allocating separate scores to each aspect (Brown, 2004:24147).

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

10
Student Number: 650054322

For the purposes of the present portfolio, I have tried to strike a balance between the holistic and
analytical approaches by combining them in the process of evaluation. The first draft of the
writing tasks is assessed using a multi-trait analytical rating scale that considers five criteria, i.e.
task achievement, organization, style, linguistic range and linguistic accuracy. (Please see
Appendix D for the Writing Assessment Scale.) This writing scale has been influenced by the
Academic Writing Task 2 Band descriptors of International English Language Testing System,
but the criteria have been expanded and redefined to suit the requirements of the portfolio and
the teaching context. The purpose of this rating scale is to assess the ability of the students to
use an appropriate academic style and a considerable range of linguistic resources to plan,
organize and produce a piece of writing with a degree of accuracy. The use of a multi-trait
analytical score enables highlighting differences in performance across the different aspects of
writing. For example, a student who has an excellent style of academic writing may not manage
to fully achieve the task due to irrelevant content. The scale does not focus on the students
knowledge of the content areas explicitly although choosing relevant content is part of task
achievement.
The refined second draft, one the contrary, is awarded a numerical score. However, this score
reflects how the student has performed throughout the process of planning, organizing, drafting,
revising and re-drafting based on teacher and peer feedback. In awarding the numerical score, the
teacher should take into account both the feedback for the first draft and the improvement in the
quality of the second draft based on feedback and action points. If a student has taken feedback
seriously and attempted to make a significant improvement in the quality of the essay, the
score should be one step above what he/she should have received for their first draft.
A holistic rating scale is used to evaluate the completed portfolio particularly vis--vis the
evidence of the students ability to reflect on his or her performance, strengths, developmental
needs and how he/she will continue to improve writing skills in future. (Please see Appendix E
for the Portfolio Rating Scale.) In addition to teacher feedback, there are opportunities for selfevaluation and to evaluate each others writing using pre-designed checklists, although these
forms of evaluation are not considered in determining the final summative grade of the writing
tasks. (Please see Appendix F for the Self-and Peer-Evaluation Checklist.)

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

11
Student Number: 650054322

10. Evaluation: Portfolio Assessment and Test Usefulness

A key consideration in developing or evaluating a new assessment tool is its potential usefulness.
Bachman & Palmer (1996) proposes a model for evaluating test usefulness, which includes six
qualities: construct validity, reliability authenticity, interactiveness, impact, and practicality.
Although this model was initially meant for standardized tests, Weigle (2002) suggests that these
qualities of test useful can also be used for developing and evaluating alternative classroombased assessment tools such as portfolios.
Construct validity can be defined as the meaningfulness and appropriateness of the
interpretations that we make on the basis of the test scores (Bachman & Palmer, 1996:21). In
other words, it refers to "the degree to which a test measures what it claims, or purports, to be
measuring" (Brown, 1996:231). According to Weigle (2002), high construct validity is the most
significant strength of a writing portfolio as it has the potential for offering a broader and more
realistic picture of a students ability to write for academic purposes, in comparison to traditional
timed writing texts. In the case of the present portfolio design, a number of measures seek to
enhance construct validity which include: featuring a variety of writing genres, encouraging the
students to experience writing as a process; instructing them to submit multiple drafts of their
writing, and striking a balance between timed in-class assignments and take-home assignments
that evaluate writing under different conditions. Also, there is a high degree of authenticity as the
content as well as the procedure closely reflect how students use writing skills in their real
academic contexts.
Vis--vis test usefulness, interactiveness is the the extent and type of involvement of the test
takers individual characteristics in accomplishing a test task (Bachman & Palmer, 1996:25).
Portfolios have greater potential than traditional timed writing tests to enable students to use their
writing skills along with their subject knowledge, affective schemata and metacognitive
strategies such as the ability to plan, organize, revise, and reflect (Weigle, 2002).

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

12
Student Number: 650054322

Another criteria for measuring the usefulness of an assessment tool is its impact or washback
which refers to the negative or positive effect that an assessment tool has on the students,
teachers, programs of study, institutions and education systems (Bachman & Palmer, 1996:29).
The writing portfolio is likely to have a positive impact on the students by enabling them to
reflect on their own learning process, monitor and exercise judgment about their progress and by
providing them with an opportunity to present their work to others. The positive impact on the
teacher includes the opportunity to collect information about the learners' progress and use them
for planning the instructional process more efficiently. At the same time, the teachers do not
need to teach to the test as assessment is integrated into the learning process in a more
authentic and meaningfully beneficial manner. The institution or the course will also be benefited
by the increase in the quality of the learning-teaching experience.

Despite a significant number of advantages, there may be some concerns about the reliability of
portfolios as tools of assessment vis--vis the consistency of measurement across the different
characteristics of a testing situation. Ideally, if a test is given to the same student or matched
students, the test should yield similar results (Brown, 2004). However, such consistency cannot
be guaranteed in the case of teacher-led classroom-based assessment as the conditions of
assessment are likely to vary significantly, particularly due to fluctuations in learner
performance, in scoring or the administration of the assessment. Some measures have been taken
to address this issue, at least to some degree by providing clear assessment specifications and
instructions about design and administration, and clear marking criteria.

Practicality refers to the feasibility of implementing an assessment tool, particularly vis--vis the
availability and allocation of resources. Portfolios are sometimes likely to be less practical due to
the massive amount of time and effort they require. In addition to their regular teaching load, it
would be challenging to allocate extra time to mark multiple drafts of the essays. However, for
an individual teacher who works with one group of students, as in the case of the present
scenario, the implementation is unlikely to pose many challenges since coordination with other
teachers regarding standard-setting, content, and inter-rater reliability is not required unlike in
the case of standardized testing (Weigle, 2002).

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

13
Student Number: 650054322

11. Conclusion:
In this paper, I have discussed some of the key considerations in designing and implementing a
portfolio-based assessment scheme in an academic writing skills course for the undergraduates of
a Bachelor of Arts programme in TESL. Portfolio-based assessment has a number of key
strengths in evaluating the writing skills of students, particularly in a university context where
writing plays a crucial role in the curriculum. Portfolios help students understand writing as a
recursive process and unlike traditional tests, they become a part of the learning process, thereby
creating a positive washback effect. For teachers, they become rich sources of information such
as the students strengths, weaknesses, and progress in a course, which can be used to enrich
classroom decision making and lesson planning. There are concerns about the reliability and
practicality of portfolio-based assessment, but these weaknesses can be minimized by developing
clear instructions for students as well as teachers and by setting realistic goals about the
workload.

12. Bibliography:

Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (1996). Language Testing in Practice: Designing and Developing
Useful Language Tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bloom, B., Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and
assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York:
Longman.
Bloom, B., Hasting, T., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook of formative and summative evaluation
of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brown, D. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. New York:
Longman.
Brown, J. (1995). The Elements of Language Curriculum: A Systematic Approach to Programme
Development. Boston, Mass.: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Brown, J. (1996). Testing in language programmes . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Regents.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

14
Student Number: 650054322

Burnham, C. (1986). Portfolio evaluation: room to breathe and grow. In C. (. Bridges, Training
the New Teacher of College Composition (pp. 125-139). Urbana: National Council of
Teachers of English.
Dunn, L., Parry, S., & Morgan, C. (2002). Seeking quality in criterion referenced assessment.
Learning Communities and Assessment Cultures Conference. Newcastle: University of
Northumbria. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00002257.htm
Fox, J. (2008). Alternative assessment. In E. Shohamy, & N. Hornberge, Enyclopedia of
Language and Education. Volume 7, Language Testing and Assessment (pp. 97-108).
New York: Springer Science.
Genesee, F., & Upshur, J. (1996). Classroom-Based Evaluation in Second Language Education.
Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Hamp-Lyons, L., & Condon, W. (2000). Assessing the Portfolio: Principles for Practice, Theory,
and Research. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Lantolf, J. (2000). Introducing sociocultural theory. In J. (. Lantolf, Sociocultural Theory and
Second Language Learning (pp. 1-26). Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Lidz, C. S. (1987). Dynamic assessment: An interactional approach to evaluating learning
potential. New York: Guilford Press.
Richards, J. C., Schmidt, R., Kendricks, H., & Kim, Y. (2002). Longman dictionary of language
teaching and applied linguistics. New York: Longman.
Richards, J., & Renandya, W. (2002). Teaching Writing: Introduction. In J. Richards, & W.
Renandya, Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice (pp.
303-304 ). New York: Cambridge University Press .
Shaw, S., & Weir, C. (2007). Examining Writing: Research and Practice in Assessing Second
Language Writing. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
Smith, F. (1982). Writing and the Writer. London : Heinemann.
The British Council, Cambridge ESOL, & IDP. (2010). Official IELTS practice materials 2.
Cambridge, U.K.: University of Cambridge, ESOL Examinations.
Turner, C. (2012). Classroom assessment. In G. Fulcher, & F. (. Davidson, The Routledge
Handbook of Language Testing (pp. 65-77). Oxford: Routledge.
Weigle, S. (2002). Assessing Writing . Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

15
Student Number: 650054322

Appendices

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

16
Student Number: 650054322

Appendix A: Course Syllabus

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

17
Student Number: 650054322

Appendix B

Assessment Specifications

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

18
Student Number: 650054322

English Language Teaching Unit- University of Kelaniya

TESL 11213: Rhetoric and Composition

Writing Portfolio (100%)

Assessment Specifications
Introduction:
The purpose of the writing portfolio is to provide the students with an opportunity to demonstrate
their progress and achievements in writing skills during the course. In addition to being a
formative and summative assessment tool, it also offers a solid learning experience in academic
writing as a recursive process of planning, writing, revising and redrafting.
Portfolio Objectives:
For the learner:
The objectives of the portfolio are to give the students an opportunity to:

collect a body of their academic writing, organize it and present it in an efficient and
professional format

demonstrate their knowledge and understanding of the grammar, vocabulary, genre,

stylistics, mechanics of writing for academic purposes.

apply their knowledge and skills to produce different genres of academic writing

understand the process of planning, organizing, producing, revising and reproducing

writing for academic purposes

edit and evaluate their own writing and those of their peers.

reflect on their progress and achievement during the course of study

develop their autonomy in the learning process

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

19
Student Number: 650054322

For the teacher:

Using the portfolio, the teacher should be able to

assess the progress and achievement of the students during the course

link assessment with the process of learning

collect relevant information about the students learning and use it for classroom decision
making and future lesson planning

offer constructive feedback to help students improve their writing skills

foster autonomy, motivation, responsibility, and ownership of learning among students

facilitate critical thinking, self and peer-assessment and revision process

Portfolio Content:
Tasks
Task Type

Word limit

Diagnostic Writing

Approx. 300
words

Assessed Writing Task 1 (inclass):

Summary of a short article of
approximately 900 words
Assessed Writing Task 2 (inclass):
Synthesis of two articles
Assessed Writing Task 3 (in
class)
Exam Essay-type answer

Allocated
Time (for the
first draft)
30 minutes

Deadline for
first draft

300 words

1 hour

Week 4

Week 5

500 words

1 hour and 15
minutes

Week 6

Week 8

Week 8

Week 11

First lesson

Deadline for
second/ final
draft
No deadline
(Optional)

1 hour
Approx. 600
words

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

20
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 4

(take-home assignment ): A
critical article of a journal
article or book chapter

Approx. 1000
words

72 hours
(4 days)

Week 11

Week 14

Assessed Writing Task 5: (

Collaborative Extended
Essay)

Approx. 1500
words

Approximately

Week 15

During study
leave

Reflective Statement

Approx. 1000
words

ongoing from
week
12

On the day of the

submission of the
portfolio (during
study leave)

3 weeks

Flexible/
ongoing

In addition to the writing tasks, the portfolio should contain the following documents:

Cover page

Contents Page

Self and/or peer-review checklists (Each task should come after the relevant task)

Teacher Feedback Forms (Each form should come after the relevant task.)

Self- reflection Forms (Each form should come after the relevant task)

Mid-semester counselling notes

Task Prompts:
Short Essay: A piece of written composition that consists of approximately five paragraphs: an
introduction, a body of three paragraphs and a concluding paragraph.
Summary: A piece of writing that encapsulates the main ideas of a larger piece of writing. For the
purposes of the present portfolio, the students are expected to produce a 300 word summary of a
900-word article or extract from a book on a topic in linguistics or English language teaching.
Synthesis: For the purposes of the present portfolio, a synthesis is a piece of explanatory writing of
approximately 500 words that draws on two sources (articles) about the same topic/subject. The
students should be able to explicate the relationship that they have inferred between the two
sources.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

21
Student Number: 650054322

Essay-type answer: Exam-style essays that students are expected to produce during timed exams
in response to a question. The question should be on a topic that the students should have studied
in one of their other courses in the TESL programmes. The overall theme/area of the question
should be given to the students in advance so that he could prepare in advance and the focus of the
assessment is the students ability to form an argument, organize content and write academically
under examination conditions.
Critical review: a piece of writing of approximately 1500 words that summarizes the main content
of an article or book chapter and then provides a critical evaluation of this content.
Extended Essay: A coursework essay that requires the students to present an argument in
response to a question or issue. It should be similar to assessed coursework essays that students
submit for other courses of the TESL programme. The essay should make reference to secondary
sources and provide a bibliography of the works cited.
Reflective Statement: A piece of reflective writing that expects the students to provide a selfappraisal of what they have learnt during the course, their strengths, weaknesses, developmental
needs and how they will continue to improve their academic writing skills.
Procedure:

In their first lesson, the students complete a diagnostic writing task. The aim of this task is
to allow the teacher to identify the strengths and developmental needs in the students
writing. The students spend approximately 40 minutes to write a 300-word essay on a
given topic which is related to their field of study. When correcting the essay, the teacher
should underline some key issues to focus on, state at least one strength and weakness, and
provide an impressionistic grade to help the students plan their learning in advance. This is
a one-off writing task that does NOT contribute towards the final grade and therefore, the
second draft is not compulsory. Ideally, there should be a teacher-led plenary session on
common problems that were diagnosed through this writing task. Based on the feedback,
the students should complete their reflection form and identify their action points.

Assessed writing tasks 1-3 are in-class assignments. The students plan and write the first
draft in class, and their writing will then be self- and peer reviewed using standard
checklists. When correcting the first draft, the teacher uses a correction code to highlight/
annotate the issues to focus on and provide feedback using an analytical (multi-trait)

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

22
Student Number: 650054322

scoring rubric with some written comments. Based on the feedback, the students complete
their reflection form and identify action points for a the final/second draft. The students
work on the second draft at home and submit it to the teacher, which will then be given a
summative grade/ mark.

Assessed Writing task 4 is a take-home assignment. The students are excepted to write a
critical review of an article or book chapter that is provided to them. Since this is a takehome assignment, the review should be typed and formatted according to the guidelines of
the APA Style Guide (6th Edition). Handwritten reviews will not be accepted. In addition to
submitting a hard copy on or before the deadline, a soft copy of the assignment should be emailed to the teacher as a Microsoft Word Document as a plagiarism check will be run.
When correcting the first draft, the teacher uses a correction code to highlight/ annotate the
issues to focus on and provide feedback using an analytical (multi-trait) scoring rubric with
some written comments. The feedback should focus on issues of plagiarism (both
intentional and unintentional) if there are any. Based on the feedback, the students
complete their reflection form and identify action points for the final/second draft. The
students work on the second draft and submit it to the teacher, which will then be given a
summative grade/ mark.

Assessed Writing Task 5 is an extended collaborative essay which will be written in groups
of 3-4. This essay should resemble a coursework essay that students are likely to submit as
part of their other courses in the TESL degree programme. The students are given the
choice to decide the topic but this choice should be discussed/negotiated with the teacher in
advance. Ideally, the students should submit a brief outline of their essay. The essay should
be typed and formatted according to the guidelines of the APA Style Guide (6th Edition). In
addition to submitting a hard copy on or before the deadline, a soft copy of the assignment
should be e-mailed to the teacher as a Microsoft Word Document as a plagiarism check will
be run. When correcting the essay, the teacher uses a correction code to highlight/ annotate
the issues to focus on and provide feedback using an analytical (multi-trait) scoring rubric
with some written comments. Also, a final grade/mark will be issued for the first draft.
Marks will be deducted for plagiarism. Based on the feedback, the students complete their
reflections complete their reflection form and identify action points for the final/second
draft. The students work on the second draft and submit it to the teacher, but their grade
WILL NOT change.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

23
Student Number: 650054322

The reflective statement is an on-going task, and the aim is to give the students an
opportunity to reflect on and evaluate their overall learning experience. They should focus
on what they have learnt in the course, their strengths, developmental needs, and how they
will continue to develop their academic writing skills in future.

The finished portfolio should include all the writing tasks other relevant documents such as
self and peer-review checklists, teacher feedback forms, self-reflection forms, and mid-term
counseling notes.

Mid-semester counseling:
In Week 10 of the course, there should be a one-to-one tutorial with the student to discuss his/her
progress during the course. The students should have completed a pre-counselling self-evaluation
checklist before the counseling session begins so that the teacher would know about the students
views about his/her own progress. The session should focus on the students performance in the
first three writing tasks as well as the students strengths and developmental needs regarding
language ability, skills and academic style in general. The discussion should be teacher-led, but the
participation of the students should also be encouraged. In particular, the student should be able to
reflect on his own strengths, weaknesses, and progress. During the tutorial, the student should take
notes about the important points and at least three action points should be identified. At the end of
the tutorial, the teacher should provide some written feedback and a provisional mid-semester
grade. Both the notes that the student has taken and the teacher feedback form should be included
in the portfolio.
NB: The students who are not meeting the required performance standards should be informed
about their problem during the mid-semester counselling session. In such situations, the teacher
and the student should discuss the issue thoroughly and suitable action points should be agreed
upon. There should not be any surprise failures at the end of the course.
End-of-Semester Counselling:
The end of term counselling session is optional but recommended. For the students who have
successfully met the requirements of the course, end-of-term counselling can be conducted in small
groups of 3-4. For students who are likely to fail the course, the issues should be discussed in a
one-to-one tutorial, if they have to re-submit some or all parts of the portfolio.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

24
Student Number: 650054322

Forms of Assessment:

Teacher Feedback

Self-assessment

Peer-assessment

Assessment Criteria for Teacher Feedback:

For giving feedback, the teacher will use a multi-trait analytical rating scale that consists of the
following criteria.

Task Achievement

Style

Organization

Language Range

Language Accuracy

Marking:
a) Individual Writing Tasks:
As mentioned above, the first draft will be marked using a multi-trait analytical rating scale. (See
Appendix D) The second/final draft will be given a numerical score/ grade out of 20 based on the
criteria outlined in the rating scale. The numerical score/ grade should be based on the overall
process of writing and NOT on the final finished product. In awarding the numerical score, the
teacher should take into account (a) feedback for the first draft and (b) the improvement in the
quality of the second draft based on feedback and action points. Generally speaking, if the students
have taken feedback seriously and attempted to make a significant improvement in the quality of
the essay, the score is likely to be one step above what the student should have received for their
first draft.
Reflective Statement and the Overall Quality of the Portfolio
For the assessment of the overall portfolio along with the reflective statement, a holistic rating scale
will be used. Based on the rating scale, a numerical score out of 15% will be provided. (Appendix
E)
Calculation of the Final Grade:
Each assessed writing task and the overall quality of the portfolio along with the reflective
statement contributes towards the calculation of the final grade for the portfolio. The contribution
of each task and the overall quality of the portfolio towards the final grade can be summarized as
follows. For example, Task 1-3 will initially be marked out of 20 and then converted into a mark

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

25
Student Number: 650054322

out of 15. Writing Tasks 1-3 will initially be marked out of 20 and then converted into a mark out
of 20%. The overall quality of the portfolio along with the reflective statement will receive a mark
out of 15.
Component

Weight towards
the final grade

Assessed Writing Task 1: Summary

15%

Assessed Writing Task 2: Synthesis

15 %

Assessed Writing Task 3: Essay-type answer

15%

Assessed Writing Task 4: Critical Review

20%

Assessed Writing Task 5: Extended Essay

20%

the overall assessment of the portfolio and the reflective statement

15%

Grading System
The final mark for the course unit will be graded according to the following grading system. A grade
point value as indicated below is assigned to each grade. This grading system is stipulated by the
university regulations. ( The Students Handbook, 2015/2016)

Grade
A+
A
AB+
B
B-

Range of Marks
85-100
70-84
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54

Grade
C+
C
CD+
D
E

Range of Marks
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
00-24

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

26
Student Number: 650054322

Appendix C:

Sample Writing Tasks

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

27
Student Number: 650054322

English Language Teaching Unit- University of Kelaniya

TESL 11213: Rhetoric and Composition
Sample Tasks

Diagnostic Writing Task:

Time: 30 Minutes

You should write a short essay about the following topic.

The real gulf in Sri Lankan Society is not based on religion, ethnicity, money or caste: it is based on
language. The gap between those who know English and those who dont know English denotes the gap
between the haves and the have-nots.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
DO NOT write more than 300 words.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

28
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 1: Summary

Time: 1 hour

Write a summary of the following article by Barbara Seidlofer.

Use your own words as much as possible.
DO NOT use more than 350 Words.
Indicate the word count at the end of your essay.

Source: Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT Journal, 59(4), 339-341.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

29
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 1: Synthesis

Time: 1 hour 15 minutes

Read the following texts and write a synthesis using the information in the articles to answer the
following question:
What factors should be considered in developing the creativity of EFL students?

Do NOT use more than 500 words.

From: Maley, A., & Bolitho, R. (2015). Creativity. ELT Journal ELTJ.J, 69(4), 434-436. doi:10.1093/elt/ccv036

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

30
Student Number: 650054322

From: Read, C. Seven Pillars of Creativity in Primary ELT. Maley, A., & Peachey, N. (2015). Creativity in the English
language classroom. London: British Council.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

31
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 3: Essay Type Answer

Time: 40 Minutes.

Although the role of modern linguistics is to describe how people actually use language without making
value judgments, the prescriptive approach to language study cannot be undermined in the context of
language teaching. Discuss.

Use about 600 words.

If you use information from secondary sources, they should be cited at the end of the essay.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

32
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 4: Critical Review (Take Home Assignment)

Write a brief critical review of the following journal article.

Ellis, G. (. (1996). How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach? ELT Journal, 50
(3), 213-218.
In your review, you should:

identify the author, source, title, date of publication and other details that seem important to
your readers

state the purpose and focus of the review

a brief synopsis of the contents, arguments and the scope of the article

discuss approximately 2-3 key issues raised in the article/ chapter

identify any gaps in the author's treatment of the topic,

evaluate the overall contribution that the article/ chapter has made to your understanding of the
topic

state whether you would recommend this article to a student who will offer the relevant module
in future.

provide a reference list or bibliography of the sources that you have used. Use the referencing
format appropriate to your discipline.

You are expected to spend at least 20 hours on this assignment at home.

Your assignment should be typed and formatted according to the guidelines provided in APA Style Guide
(6th Edition).
The hard copy of the assignment is due June 21, 2016 at 1:30 pm at the beginning of class.
A soft copy of the article should be emailed to rusiru.chitrasena@kln.ac.lk on or before the deadline. The
student will lose 10% of the marks for each day it is late.
DO NOT write more than 1000 words. If you exceed the word limit, marks will be deducted.
Plagiarism is an academic offence. If you refer to content from the article or other sources, please cite
them in your bibliography.

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

33
Student Number: 650054322

Assessed Writing Task 5: Collaborative Extended Essay

You will do this assignment in groups of 3-4 Students. More than 4 students are not allowed in
one group.

Students work in groups 3-4.

For the purposes of this assignment, you should produce an extended coursework essay based on
one of the topics covered in one of your core courses in the TESL programme.

You can negotiate topic among yourselves but the topic you have chosen should be approved by
the tutor.

Your essay should include an introduction, a thesis statement, a well-developed set of arguments
that supports the thesis statement, a conclusion and bibliography of the works you have cited in
your essay.

Since this is a collaborative writing task, all the group members should actively take part in the
process of writing.

You are expected to spend at least 40 hours on this assignment at home.

Your assignment should be typed and formatted according to the guidelines provided in APA
Style Guide (6th Edition).

The hard copy of the assignment is due August 21, 2016 at 1:30 pm at the beginning of class.
A soft copy of the article should be emailed to rusiru.chitrasena@kln.ac.lk on or before the
deadline. The student will lose 10% of the marks for each day it is late.

DO NOT write more than 1500 words. If you exceed the word limit, marks will be deducted.

Plagiarism is an academic offence and will be penalized. If you refer to content from the article or
other sources, please cite them in your bibliography.

If you have any further questions about the assignment, please do not hesitate to ask your
teacher or e-mail them to rusiru.chitrasena@kln.ac.lk.

34

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

Appendix D: Analytical Rating Scale for Assessing Individual Tasks

Writing Portfolio

English Language Teaching Unit- University of Kelaniya

TESL 11213: Rhetoric and Composition

Writing Assessment Scale

Students Name:

Student ID:

Task:

Draft: FIRST/ SECOND

Criteria

Task Achievement

The task is fully

understood, completed
and developed
appropriately.
Excellent argumentation,
description, analysis or
synthesis

Organization

The text is organised

logically and coherently.
The text is cohesive and
facilitates a smooth and
effortless reading.
Ideas are developed
very well.

The task is understood

sufficiently and
appropriately. However,
there is still room for
further development, or
there is some
unnecessary content.
Good analysis, description
argumentation or
synthesis

The task is completed

adequately, but there are
significant gaps.

Overall the text is logical

and clear though there
may be some breakdown
in cohesion.

The organisation of the

text is sometimes unclear
and cohesion breaks
down.

In general, ideas are

developed well.

There are some problems

with linking ideas across
sentences

Adequate analysis,
description, argumentation
or synthesis

The task is attempted but

not adequate due to
incomplete/inappropriate
content.
Inadequate analysis,
description, argumentation
or synthesis

The task has not been

achieved or instructions
have been misunderstood
completely resulting in the
non-achievements.
The writing is totally out of
the topic.
No analysis, description or
synthesis

Most or some ideas are

developed clearly.

It is difficult to understand
what the writer wants to
communicate.
The text is confusing and
fails to be cohesive.
Significant problems
linking ideas within and
across sentences.

It is almost impossible to
understand what the
student wants to
communicate.
No attempt is made to
order or structure the text.

35

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

Style

Language Range

Language Accuracy

An excellent academic
style of writing is
maintained throughout.

A good academic style of

writing is maintained
despite occasional minor
stylistic lapses

The student attempts to

use an appropriate
academic style but there
are some stylistic lapses
(e.g. colloquialism,
clichs)

Excellent range of
appropriate grammatical
structures and academic
vocabulary

Good range of appropriate

grammatical structures
and academic vocabulary

Adequate range of
Appropriate grammatical
structures and academic
vocabulary

Fully accurate use of

grammar, spelling and
mechanics of writing.

Fairly accurate use of

grammar, spelling and
mechanics of writing.
Occasional slips or
mistakes.

Adequately accurate use

of grammar, spelling and
mechanics of writing.

Little attempt has been

made to maintain an
appropriate academic
style of writing. There are
frequent stylistic lapses.
Inadequate lexical and
grammatical range at an
appropriate level for
academic purposes

There are a many

language errors. The text,
for which reason, the text
fails to communicate.

No attempt has been

made to maintain an
academic style of writing.

Poor lexical and

grammatical range.

The amount of errors

makes the text almost
impossible to understand.

Comments:

Teachers Signature: ______________________________

Date: ___________________________

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

36
Student Number: 650054322

Appendix E: Portfolio Rating Scale

Band
Excellent

12-15

Good
8-11

Satisfactory

5-7

Description
The portfolio provides evidence of excellent recording keeping skills. The student has a
comprehensive knowledge of the mechanics, strategies and genres of academic writing.
The reflective statement and the reflection forms for each task shows an outstanding
level of self-reflection. There is evidence of excellent editing and proof-reading skills.
Throughout the course, the student has actively participated in the process of learning
at an outstanding level with a high degree of autonomy and motivation.

The portfolio provides evidence of good recording keeping skills. The student has a
highly satisfactory knowledge of the mechanics, strategies and genres of academic
writing. The reflective statement and the reflection forms for each task show a very
good level of self-reflection. There is evidence of good editing and proof-reading skills.
The student has actively participated in the process of learning with a considerable
degree of autonomy and motivation.

The portfolio provides some evidence of good recording keeping skills. The student has
an adequate knowledge of the mechanics, strategies and genres of academic writing.
The reflective statement and the reflection forms for each task show and an adequate
level of self-reflection to pass the course. There is some evidence of editing and proofreading skills. The student tried to participate well in the process of learning but tend to
lack autonomy and motivation.

Unsatisfactory The portfolio does not show evidence of good recording keeping skills The student does
not have an adequate knowledge of the mechanics, strategies and genres of academic
writing to be able to pass the course. The reflective statement and the reflection forms
do not provide evidence of the students ability to reflect on his/her (lack of) progress.
0-4
There is no evidence of adequate editing and proof-reading skills. The student has
failed participate in the process of learning but tends to lack autonomy and motivation.

37

The Integration of Classroom-based Portfolio Writing Assessment

Student Number: 650054322

Appendix F: Self- and Peer-Evaluation Checklist

Name: _________________________
Question:
Have the instructions for the task been understood?
Has the task been completed?
Does the response have most of the relevant information?
Is there anything important that is missing in the response?
Is there any inaccurate information in the response?
Is there an argument/point that you do not agree with, or think is
not accurate?
Is the response structured logically?
Do the structure and organization enable a smooth read?
Has the writer used discourse markers and linking words
appropriately?
Has the writer used an academic style of writing?
Is there any inappropriate use of language (e.g. slang,
colloquialisms or clichs)?
Is the style of writing precise or too wordy?
Are there any language problems in the response? Can you
underline at least three of them?

Task ________________________
Self-Evaluation

Peer Evaluation