UM  > Faculty of Arts and Humanities
Status已發表Published
Affiliated with RCfalse
Voice in high-stakes L1 academic writing assessment: Implications for L2 writing instruction
Cecilia Guanfang Zhao; Lorena Llosa
2008-11
Source PublicationAssessing Writing
ISSN1873-5916
Volume13Issue:3Pages:153–170
Abstract

Despite the debate among writing researchers about its viability as a pedagogical tool in writing instruction [e.g., Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265; Stapleton, P. (2002). Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: Returning spotlight to ideas. Journal of Second Language Writing, 11 (3), 177–190], voice remains one of the constructs commonly addressed in learning standards and assessed in high-stakes English Language Arts tests. It is assumed, therefore, that the presence of a strong authorial voice plays an important role in the evaluation of the overall quality of students’ writing. In reality, however, there is a critical lack of empirical research that explores the nature and characteristics of the relationship between voice and overall writing quality. The present study builds on and extends the work of Helms-Park and Stapleton [Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265] and examines such a relationship in the context of an L1 high-stakes academic writing assessment. Results show a positive and significant relationship between voice intensity and writing quality, which contradicts what Helms-Park and Stapleton [Helms-Park, R., & Stapleton, P. (2003). Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12 (3), 245–265] found in the context of L2 argumentative writing. This study therefore contributes to the exploration of the role of voice in writing instruction and assessment.

KeywordVoice Academic Writing Secondary Level High-stakes Assessment
DOI10.1016/j.asw.2008.10.003
Language英語English
Fulltext Access
Citation statistics
Document TypeJournal article
CollectionFaculty of Arts and Humanities
Corresponding AuthorCecilia Guanfang Zhao; Lorena Llosa
AffiliationNew York University's Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development
Recommended Citation
GB/T 7714
Cecilia Guanfang Zhao,Lorena Llosa. Voice in high-stakes L1 academic writing assessment: Implications for L2 writing instruction[J]. Assessing Writing,2008,13(3):153–170.
APA Cecilia Guanfang Zhao,&Lorena Llosa.(2008).Voice in high-stakes L1 academic writing assessment: Implications for L2 writing instruction.Assessing Writing,13(3),153–170.
MLA Cecilia Guanfang Zhao,et al."Voice in high-stakes L1 academic writing assessment: Implications for L2 writing instruction".Assessing Writing 13.3(2008):153–170.
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Related Services
Recommend this item
Bookmark
Usage statistics
Export to Endnote
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[Cecilia Guanfang Zhao]'s Articles
[Lorena Llosa]'s Articles
Baidu academic
Similar articles in Baidu academic
[Cecilia Guanfang Zhao]'s Articles
[Lorena Llosa]'s Articles
Bing Scholar
Similar articles in Bing Scholar
[Cecilia Guanfang Zhao]'s Articles
[Lorena Llosa]'s Articles
Terms of Use
No data!
Social Bookmark/Share
All comments (0)
No comment.
 

Items in the repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.