Rubric design and self-assessment of EFL writing: A case of Russian undergraduate linguistics students

Capa

Citar

Texto integral

Resumo

This study explores the role of rubric design in enhancing self-assessment practices in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writing, with a focus on fostering metacognitive awareness and self-regulated learning. Self-assessment has been widely recognised for its potential to improve writing quality, learner autonomy, and critical self-reflection, however, its effectiveness largely depends on how rubrics are designed and implemented as pedagogical tools. Despite this, relatively little research has examined the impact of rubric design on self-assessment processes and writing outcomes in EFL contexts. This exploratory study compares the learning outcomes associated with two types of rubrics used in teaching EFL writing: a genre-oriented rubric, which emphasises structural and content conventions specific to text types, and a pragmatics-oriented rubric, which focuses on clarity of communication and audience engagement. The study involved 15 senior linguistics undergraduate students (aged 21–22) at Higher School of Economics in Moscow. They engaged in iterative cycles of drafting, self-assessment, revision, and publication of blog posts, with rubric criteria introduced progressively. Data were collected through self-, peer-, and teacher assessments. The findings suggest that the pragmatics-oriented rubric promoted greater audience engagement, while the genre-oriented rubric helped students better organize their texts and maintain coherence. Variations in self-assessment outcomes underscored the need for targeted training in rubric use to strengthen metacognitive skills. The study points to the importance of aligning rubric design with broader pedagogical goals to develop transferable writing strategies and self-regulated learning skills. 

Sobre autores

Aida Rodomanchenko

HSE University; National University of Science and Technology MISIS

Autor responsável pela correspondência
Email: a.rodomanchenko@gmail.com
ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6545-8256
Código SPIN: 7665-6062
Researcher ID: ABD-2284-2021

Ph.D. in Pedagogics, Associate Professor, School of Foreign Languages, HSE University; Associate Professor, National University of Science and Technology MISIS, Department of Foreign Languages and Communication Technologies

20 Myasnitskaya St, Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation; 4/1 Leninsky Ave, Moscow, 119049, Russian Federation

Oleg Sokolov

Moscow City Pedagogical University

Email: olegsokolov0501@gmail.com
ORCID ID: 0009-0007-6973-2049
Código SPIN: 7329-8435

postgraduate researcher, Institute of Foreign Languages

4 Vtoroy Selskohoziajstvenny proezd, Moscow, 129226, Russian Federation

Bibliografia

  1. Abubakarova, E.V., Zherdeva, O.N., & Shelkova, S.V. (2021). Teaching the formation of a coherent text in the process of learning a foreign language. PNRPU Linguistics and Pedagogy Bulletin, (2), 111–123. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.15593/2224-9389/2021.2.9
  2. Andrade, H. & Du, Y., (2005). Student perspectives on rubric-referenced assessment. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.7275/g367-ye94
  3. Andrade, H., & Valtcheva, A. (2009). Promoting learning and achievement through self-assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577544
  4. Andreeva, I.A. (2022). From the experience of developing discursive competence in teaching of foreign written language. International Research Journal, (9), 31. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23670/IRJ.2022.123.69
  5. Barmuta, K.A. (2023). Influence of using rubrics in higher education on students’ performance and academic motivation. Innovative science: Psychology, Pedagogy, Defectology, 6(1), 43–52. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.23947/2658-7165-2023-6-1-43-52
  6. Barnawi, O. (2011). Finding a place for critical thinking and self-voice in college English as a foreign language writing classrooms. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 190–197. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n2p190
  7. Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85(5), 536–553. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1022
  8. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2012). The reliability of assessments. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and Learning (2 ed., pp. 243–263). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250808.n15
  9. Blanche, P., & Merino, B.J. (1989). Self-assessment of foreign-language skills: Implications for teachers and researchers. Language Learning, 39(3), 313–338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1989.tb00595.x
  10. Brown, G.T.L., Andrade, H.L., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(4), 444–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2014.996523
  11. Butler, Y. G. (2023). Self-assessment in second language learning. Language Teaching, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444822000489
  12. Butler, Y.G. (2023). Self-assessment in second language learning. Language Teaching, 57(1), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444822000489
  13. Council of Europe. (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment — Companion volume. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.
  14. Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
  15. Dawson, P. (2017). Assessment rubrics: towards clearer and more replicable design, research and practice. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1111294
  16. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395-430. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170205
  17. Gardner, J. (Ed.). (2012). Assessment and Learning (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250808
  18. Griffiths, C., & Inceçay, G. (2016). New directions in language learning strategy research: Engaging with the complexity of strategy use. In C. Gkonou, D. Tatzl, & S. Mercer (Eds.), New Directions in Language Learning Psychology (pp. 25–38). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23491-5_3
  19. Harlen, W. (2012). On the relationship between assessment for formative and summative purposes. In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and Learning (2nd ed., pp. 87–102). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250808.n6
  20. Hedgcock, J. (2006). Teaching writing in second and foreign language classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(3), 519–520. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0272263106210234
  21. Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.005
  22. Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.05.002
  23. Kitsantas, A., & Zimmerman, B.J. (2007). Enhancing self-regulation of practice: The influence of graphing and self-evaluative standards. Metacognition and Learning, 1(3), 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-006-9000-7
  24. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203299234
  25. Nadri, Y., & Azhar, A. (2017). Self-assessment of critical thinking skills in EFL writing courses at the university level: Reconsideration of the critical thinking construct. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2895540
  26. O’Brien, T. (2004). Writing in a foreign language: teaching and learning. Language Teaching, 37(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444804002113
  27. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 422. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00422
  28. Panadero, E., & Jonsson, A. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.002
  29. Panadero, E., & Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2013.877872
  30. Pemberton, R., & Cooker, L. (2012). Self-directed learning: Concepts, practice, and a novel research methodology. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for Language Learning (pp. 203–219). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137032829_14
  31. Schunk, D.H., & Zimmerman, B.J. (2013). Self-regulation and learning. In I. Weiner (Ed.), Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 7. Educational Psychology (2nd ed., pp. 45–68). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118133880.hop207003
  32. Scott, K. (2022). Pragmatics Online (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/b22750
  33. Shadzhe, Z.M. (2021). Teaching written foreign language communication in a nonlinguistic university. Vestnik Majkopskogo Gosudarstvennogo Tehnologiceskogo Universiteta, (1), 94–101. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.47370/2078-1024-2021-13-1-94-101
  34. Tierney, R., & Simon, M. (2004). What’s still wrong with rubrics: Focusing on the consistency of performance criteria across scale levels. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 9(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.7275/jtvt-wg68
  35. Vekkesser, M.V. (2020). Technology of formative assessment in teaching philological disciplines in university and school. Science and School, (3), 138–147. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31862/1819-463x-2020-3-138-147
  36. Wang, W. (2017). Using rubrics in student self-assessment: Student perceptions in the English as a foreign language writing context. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1280–1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1261993
  37. Yanning, D. (2017). Teaching and assessing critical thinking in second language writing: An infusion approach. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 40(4), 413–451. https://doi.org/10.1515/cjal-2017-0025
  38. Zhang, X.S., & Zhang, L.J. (2022). Sustaining learners’ writing development: Effects of using self-assessment on their foreign language writing performance and rating accuracy. Sustainability, 14(22), 14686. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142214686
  39. Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2

Arquivos suplementares

Arquivos suplementares
Ação
1. JATS XML
Baixar

Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».