Creative Writing Rubrics

882 Words4 Pages

3.2.2 Creative Writing Rubrics: To measure creativity in writing, the Creative Thinking Value Rubrics developed by faculty experts of colleges and universities across the United States was used (Rhodes & Finley, 2013) (Appendix C). It is divided into 9 parts: creative thinking, critical thinking, information literacy, inquiry and analysis, oral communication, problem solving, reading, teamwork and written communication. Creative thinking is further divided into 6 parts :( 1) acquiring competencies, (2) taking risks, (3) solving problems, (4) embracing contradictions, (5) innovative thinking; (6) and connecting, synthesizing, and transforming. The learners’ creativity in writing was scored as benchmark, milestones and capstone. If …show more content…

The instructor first provided students with some information regarding dynamic assessment. The test- train- retest model of dynamic assessment was used. During the semester students were provided with some topics which were based on their course book and they were asked to write about them. Each writing included 20 minutes of intervention in the classroom which lasted for 14 sessions. While they wrote about each topic, the participants were supplied with some training regarding the complexity, vocabulary, and formality of their writings, which was conducted the session after the pre-test. After writing the first draft, each student was requested to submit their draft to the instructor. The students' drafts were scored based on the PET writing scoring rubric and some comments were provided. Finally, the students received the first drafts with comments on them. Becoming aware of their weak and strong points, the students revised the first drafts and then were requested to bring the revised drafts to the class. The total number of writings they had throughout the semester was 5. At the end, after the treatment was conducted, the writing section of PET (2004) was administered to see how the students had benefited from this kind of …show more content…

2 groups served as the experimental group and received treatment (portfolio assessment and dynamic assessment) while the other group served as the control group and received only the routine instruction. To ascertain the homogeneity of the three groups PET language proficiency test was employed. Each group consists of 40 intermediate EFL students from a private English Language Institution. In order to measure the effectiveness of the treatment, the pretest posttest design was selected in this case, the control group took the same pretest and posttest as did the experimental group, but did not receive the

Open Document