NIFL-ASSESSMENT 2005: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:908] RE: Voice in writing

Share: Share on LinkedIn! Print page! More options

Archived Content Disclaimer

This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.

Date: Tue Feb 15 2005 - 13:21:06 EST

Return-Path: <>
Received: from literacy (localhost []) by (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id j1FIL6C09810; Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:21:06 -0500 (EST)
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:21:06 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <>
Precedence: bulk
From: "" <>
To: Multiple recipients of list <>
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:908] RE: Voice in writing
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Status: O
Content-Length: 6562
Lines: 169

I, too, have been intrigued by the idea of "voice" in the rubric, and while
I intuitively "know" what it means, I'm interested as an emerging writing
specialist as to what elements would constitute voice, beyond more
traditional "academic" ways of "measuring" it. I think of the clarity or
persuasiveness of a point of view supported with meaningful examples, the
personal voice in a narrator struggling with complex questions, forthright
emotion strikingly articulated with imagery or other means, an attempt at
critical thinking, or "learning to learn," self-reflectiveness... I'd be
interested in hearing from others.
Another point I encountered when I was involved with CT's working with the
CASAS writing assessments: the rubric was not meant to distinguish between
ABE and ESL students. As an evaluator, I as an ESL specialist was at a
disadvantage: having attained a certain level of skill in "translating"
English learners' language into meaningful utterances, I'd automatically
bring that to my evaluation: it was extremely difficult to adhere to the
rubric controls and anchors, and not want to commend the ESL learner for
attempting with limited language ability to voice something difficult to
articulate in another language, as having communicated more than in fact
they did. 
Bonnie Odiorne, Ph.D.
Writing Center, English Language Institute
Post University, Waterbury, CT

Original Message:
From: Marie Cora
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:02:28 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:906] RE: Voice in writing

Hi everyone,

A couple of observations:  

First, please do note that this assessment is a fine example of a
performance-based assessment that has been standardized.  So if anyone
still thinks that standardized assessments all look like TABE, consider
your myth debunked.

I think that capturing voice in writing is quite important, and I'm glad
that the REEP rubric includes this area.  If not for voice, the rest of
the examination of the writing is based on the 'academics' of the
writing - and I feel like that leaves out the writer's (emerging)
personality.  I note in looking around a little bit, not a whole bunch
of other writing assessments take voice into account (the GED does not
for example). I also think that because voice is a dimension of the
rubric, students will pay more attention to that area and view it as
equally important as the other dimensions.  (A bit of "what counts gets
counted" there.)

What do others think about voice and the other dimensions?


-----Original Message-----
From: [] On
Behalf Of Suzanne Grant
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 1:38 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:905] RE: REEP Discussion Begins Today!

Greetings from Suzanne and Pat at REEP!

We would like to thank Susan O'Connor for her message, congratulations,
and for getting this writing assessment discussion started. 

The development of our writing assessment, too, was also supported by
the Lila Wallace Foundation. From 1997-2002, the REEP Program was one of
12 adult education programs nationwide funded to study what works in
assessment. The project was called the What Works Literacy Partnership
(WWLP) and was funded by the Lila Wallace Foundation. The lead agency
was Literacy Partners of New York. We had developed the rubric earlier,
but through WWLP, we developed pre and post prompts and carried out
studies to determine the effectiveness of using the rubric to measure

Susan and all on this list, we would be interested in hearing what
writing traits you feel are important to include in writing assessment
rubrics. In our case, the engagement of the writer with the topic was a
factor in how we were assessing the writing, and we, therefore, felt we
needed to include voice as a trait in the REEP Writing Rubric.   

Other writing assessment questions and topics are welcome.

Suzanne Grant and Pat Thurston
REEP Writing Assessment Master Trainers
Arlington Education and Employment Program (REEP)
Arlington Public Schools
Arlington, Virginia

>>> 02/14/05 8:54 AM >>>
 Good Morning:  I wish to congratulate the REEP creators!  Brooklyn
Library Literacy Program moved to writing in the early 90's.  In an
to codify students' gains and with a grant from the then Lila Wallace
foundation we created a writing rubric for non-reading Adults - up to
a fifth grade reading level.  We have been using this successfully for
years.  But because it was not normed we couldn't use it to show gain in
NRS environment.  

I have downloaded your article and handed it off to the folks at the New
York State Education Dept.  I found this all very exciting.

Susan K. O'Connor
Brooklyn Public Library
Literacy Program Manager

-----Original Message-----
From: Marie Cora
To: Multiple recipients of list
Sent: 2/14/05 8:41 AM
Subject: [NIFL-ASSESSMENT:900] REEP Discussion Begins Today!

Good morning, afternoon, evening, and Happy Valentine's Day to you all!

Please join us this week for our discussion of the REEP Writing Process
and Rubric with Suzanne Grant and Pat Thurston, of the Arlington
Education and Employment Program (REEP) in VA.  The full information and
the suggested preview resources for the discussion are listed for you
below.  Also, I wanted you to recall that Suzanne and Pat will be
accompanied by several trainers-in-training of the REEP process.
Welcome colleagues from REEP!!
February 14 - 18
Topic: Assessing Writing, Developing Rubrics, and Developing Effective
Writing Tasks
Guests:  Suzanne Grant and Pat Thurston, REEP Master Trainers
Recommended preparations for this discussion:
"The REEP Writing Story" at
<> &i=1&a=2
which discusses the development of their writing process and the
accompanying rubric.
"Making Sense of the REEP" at 
which discusses one program's experience with and reflections on using
the REEP process.
marie cora
Moderator, NIFL Assessment Discussion List, and 
Coordinator/Developer LINCS Assessment Special Collection at

mail2web - Check your email from the web at .

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Oct 31 2005 - 09:48:45 EST