Essay Writing In Malaysian Schools

testify Writing In Malayan SchoolsEssay paper is a must for Malaysian encourageary inculcates students. there are few types of try outs that the students need to master. Guided musical composition, summary composing and continuous composition are the collar main types of look for that are well-tried in examination. These three dissimilar types of physical composition test students aptitude to at a lower placestand and social function correct grammar, to apply lyric poem skills for interpersonal purposes, to apply spoken communication skills for informational purposes, and to apply language skills for aesthetic purposes (Malaysian Examinations Syndicate, 2004).Students take to excel in these three types of writing to be able to apply it in real life situation. Students are judgeed on their writing skills in schooling tests as well as in the national standardized test. Different manners of judgment are utilize in evaluating students analyses. At divergent l evels and tests, there tot completelyyow be at least a minor difference in the rule of assessing. In Malaysia vicarious winding school, t distributivelyers are non advancen any unique(predicate) guides to assess students indite works. They assess jibe to their own manners and experiences.Many regularitys nookie be apply for assessing students auditions. Every method has its own specific guidance and teachers burn down riding habit them based on their needs and students performance. For example, holistic hit method is gived to assess students essays in a generalized way that is to look at their works as a satisfying piece without analyzing it in details. Any method is analyticalalal hit method where teachers look at students performance in details. Both methods can be applied by teachers in classroom- based judging.In this think over, only dickens methods of essay gain get out be discussed which are menti iodined above. Holistic and analytic advance meth ods are very contrary and unique in their own way. Therefore, it is important that teachers know how to exercise two(prenominal) of them in assessing students essays. The subjects that forget be chosen for this study are English teachers in secondary schools in Malaysia. They will be studyd on the ways they use to assess their students essay. A few students from their class will in any case be chosen to mother feedbacks nigh their teachers assessment.1.2 Statement of ProblemStudents essays are clamsed without a standard scale in Malaysian secondary schools. Teachers draw their students based on what they think is honest for them. They use mostly holistic rack up method which might not be fair to students (Bloom, Daiker bloodless). The ministry of fostering might be responsible for what had happened. Teachers moderate students essays according to what the ministry suggests.Holistic tally method has long been enforced in schools. Is it the best method for teachers and students? Some problems deport occurred with this method because it is not specific enough. It might also create biasness in the case where students are close to their teachers. This method views the essay as a whole without further analysis on each component. While analytic cross method views the essay in a to a greater extent specific way, it adds details for students to be able to know what is lacking in their essays. analytical leveling method uses a rubric as a standard scale to mark essays. uninflected advance method is regarded as requiring more(prenominal) work and is expensive while holistic scoring method is considered cheaper and more efficient. Holistic scoring method provides less information to students than analytic soring method. Each of the methods has their own advantages except there should be one method that is more suitable for essay scoring.1.3 Purpose of the StudyThis study is aimed at investigating the use of holistic scoring method and analytic rubrics in essay scoring among teachers of Malaysian secondary school. This study is also aimed at discovering the relationship between the two methods. An early(a) purpose of this study is to get down out how analytic scoring method can be applied in Malaysian secondary schools.1.4 Significance of the StudyMethods of essay scoring defecate been discussed by many experts all around the globe. It is important in a sense that it take a hops students ability in writing essay. The wrong method utilize to mark their essays will cause their performance to drop. How students write essays, any(prenominal) seasons guess on how the teachers mark their essay. There is a vital connection between the two.Basically, Malaysian secondary schools teachers mark students essay according to what they believe is correct and suitable for their students and the method they use can be considered as holistic scoring method. It is very important that they know a method in specific so that they can m ark students essay in details.With this study, it is hope that teachers will realized that analytic scoring method is a more suitable method to be used in essay scoring as it will conjure up students writing skills precisely and increase the quality of their essays.1.5 Research QuestionsThe question motions for this study are as detectsHow is holistic scoring method used in brand students essays?How are analytic scoring rubrics used in marking students essays?why is the holistic scoring method mostly used in school?Why is the analytic scoring rubric rarely used for marking essays in school?How far is it contingent to integrate analytic scoring rubric in the platform of Malaysian secondary school?CHAPTER 2LITERATURE REVIEWIntroductionharmonize to Normah Othman (2006), there is no specific scoring strategy implemented specially for a classroom-based assessment of consume writing in Malaysian secondary schools. As it is now, ESL teachers presently use a scoring method adopted from the Malaysian Examinations Syndicate. Therefore, teachers can choose to use analytic or holistic scoring. But most of the teachers use holistic scoring in Malaysian indirect con text edition. Below are the researches done at divergent countries on analytic and holistic scoring method.According to Alharby (2006), studies addressing issues related to performance assessment seem to be taking two relatively disparate directions. peerless if it is to search for the best scoring method that maximizes reliability and validity of assessment. This is usually accomplished by examine two of the most popular scoring methods used with performance assessment, the holistic scoring method vs. the analytic scoring method. According to him again, the holistic scoring method is usually used with rangy scale assessment because it is less time consuming than the analytic method the latter often producing a very large number of responses that need to be evaluated in a short period of time. The analytic scoring method, on the other hand, is usually used with classroom assessments because it provides more detailed feedback on students learning progress for teachers, students, and parents than does the holistic scoring method. In this research paper, the two essay scoring methods will be focused on in Malaysian secondary school context.Moon and Callahan (2001) reported that performance assessments incur mystify more popular within classroom assessments for the ultimately two decades. Methods used in performance assessment are analytic and holistic scoring methods. This two types of scoring methods entertain been concerned by many researches regarding issues much(prenominal) as its reliability (Parkers, Zimmaro, Zappe, Suen, 1998), validity (Kane, Crooks Cohen, 1999), cost (Picus, 1994), and practicality (Baker Aschbacher, 1992). In this research paper, all the mentioned issues will only be dealt as general factors that guess teachers of English in Malaysian second ary context in choosing essay scoring method.Waltman, Kahn Koency (1998) found that the way raters score individual responses affect reliability as well as the validity of an assessment. The two most common ways to score individual responses such(prenominal) as essays written by students are the holistic scoring method and the analytic scoring method. According to Clauser (2000), analytic scoring method is recommended for simple tasks such as tasks to evaluate students ability in spelling and grammar usage. On the other hand, Clauser recommends the holistic scoring method when the tasks are more complicated such as evaluating the adequacy of a haiku. According to Charney (1984), the holistic scoring method tends to be favored by large scale assessment with numerous examinees because it is less time consuming. In contrast, Vacc (1989) claimed that the analytic scoring method tends to be favored by classroom assessment because of the detailed feedback it offers to teachers, students , and their parents in terms of how students performed on the assessment.Holistic Scoring MethodThe holistic scoring method was first introduced in 1960s and was known as the general slump scoring method (Hunter, 1996). Similarly, Ojeda (2004) stated that the holistic scoring approach is an approach where graders read to evaluate an essay as a whole-without foc apply on or overemphasizing any one particular part or aspect. It started to become popular in the middle of the 70s ( wearisome, 2002). Huot (1990) pointed out that the holistic scoring method is a technique in which raters are asked to evaluate individual responses as a whole by their first impression without spillage to specific possible subdomains of the trait being tested. Klein et al. (1998, p.122) stated that this approach holistic scoring method is usually most curb when the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, that is when scores need to be sensitive to general features of conclude quality, such as organi zation, elan, and persuasiveness. In recent year, the holistic scoring method has become even more popular, specially with large scale assessments. In Malaysian secondary schools, this method is widely used.Besides that, many research workers deal also tried to define holistic scoring approach. white-hot (1984, 1985) defined holistic scoring as a global approach to texts, reflecting the idea that a written text is a single(a) entity. White (1984, 1985) maintained that holistic scoring is preferable because it more closely simulates the impression a reader the significance of the text as a whole quite than focus on individual features of the writing, such as grammar. White (1985), Weigle (2002), and Hyland (2002) describe holistic scoring as involving carefully selected and experienced raters who use their skilled impressions to give a paper a single, integrated score that is supposed to represent the writers overall writing ability. Powills, Bowers, and Conlan (1979) explai ned that this holistic approach to scoring essays is an attempt to evaluate wholes rather than parts so that performance on one facet does not determine the judgment of performance on the whole.Different researchers have identified different reasons for the increase of the holistic scoring methods popularity. Some think that it is because the holistic scoring method is the most direct assessment technique (Cooper, 1997) while others think that the reason is that the holistic scoring method is the most economical, limber and applicable assessment (Huot, 1990 Veal Hudson, 1983). As for White (2004), he pointed out that despite disagreements that arise nigh the scorings of some papers this has become the standard way of scoring gatekeeping writing tests in large-scale writing assessments. Findings by Coffman (1968), Freedman (1979), and Breland and Jones (1984) supported that holistic scoring helps focus raters on meaning, showing that holistic raters of essay writing ability seem t o attend more to content features than to mechanics and sentence structure.One emf advantage of holistic scoring methods in the assessment of second language writing ability is that they are more practical. Godshalk, Swineford, and Coffman, (1966), all(prenominal)oway (1978), and Powills, Bowers, and Conlan (1979) all found holistic scoring methods to be more efficient than analytic scoring methods, particularly for large-scale exams, noting the advantages of such an approach in saving time and money. Furthermore, Smith, Winters-Edys, Quellmalz, and Baker (1980) estimated that holistic scoring takes approximately two- terces the time of analytic scoring.Although holistic scoring method is widely accepted as the most appropriate tool for this purpose, many writing practitioners and administrators reportedly view the holistic technique with reservation (Enginarlar, 1991, p. 39). Hamp-Lyons (1996, p. 234) objects to the single point score departing from holistic grading, which she c laims obscures a pattern of consistent overemphasis or underemphasis on basic language control. Another claim is that a higher share of midlevel papers seem to end up with go against scores-scores 2 points apart that must be resolved by a third grader-so holistic scoring may be less effective for evaluating midlevel performances than an analytic method might be (Elbow, 1996b).According to due east (2009), the strength of holistic scoring lies in its practicality, which in large-scale testing contexts is an important consideration. Besides that, Vaughan (1991) argues that researchers looking for at holistic assessment have often assumed that given a scale that describes the characteristics of an essay at each level, trained raters will assess the essays in the kindred way every time (p.112).Despite all the strength of holistic scoring, Prior research has established that there are some problems with holistic scoring method. Charney (1984) speculates that scores in holistic read ings are based on superficial features, such as playscript, essay length, word choice and spelling errors. This is in accord with Stewart and Grobe (1979), who concluded that raters were primarily influenced by essay length and freedom from simple mechanical errors (p. 214).Diederich, French, and Carlton (1961) found that judgments made by essay raters under holistic scoring conditions were unreliable. They recommended that considerable effort should be done to establish and maintain reliable ratings. Diederich (1974) claimed that until holistic scoring procedures were refined, the score an essay received could depend more on who the rater was than on any qualities of the text itself. Charney (1984), Gere (1980), and Odell and Cooper (1980) also questioned the premises on which certain conclusions about the reliability of holistic scoring have been based. Charney observed that the way holistic raters read texts may create an unnatural reading environment in which scores might only reflect agreement on salient but superficial features of writing, such as the quality of the handwriting or the presence of spelling errors.According to Hamp-Lyons (1995), English as blurb Language writers have a special need for scoring procedures that go beyond just the narrow down of a single score because one score does not allow raters to distinguish between mixed aspects of writing, such as language control, range of language, or organizational control. Hamp-Lyons also pointed out that it is problematic for second language (L2) writers since different aspects of writing ability seem to develop at different rates for different writers. Some writers may be strong in expressing content and organization, but limited in well-formed accuracy others may have excellent language control at the sentence level, but be unable to organize their writing. All the aspects mentioned by Hamp-Lyons should be taken into consideration when teachers of English in Malaysian secondary schools sco re an essay.Additionally, holistic scores are not easy to interpret because raters do not necessarily use the same criteria to arrive at the same scores. One rater may offer a score to a writing audition based on content and organization, while another rater assigns the same score on the basis of language control (grammar) and vocabulary. Charney (1984) noted that time constraints affect raters depth of processing. When disbursal only two minutes on a paper, a rater may assign a score that only reflects agreement on salient but superficial features of writing, such as the quality of the handwriting or the presence of spelling errors (p. 78).In another study, Arthur (1979) found that the holistic rankings of second language learners (L2) essays written by lower-intermediate adult learners were related to frequency of spelling and grammar errors, and that the best predictor of rating was the length of composition. In addition, Raforth and Rubin (1984) found that college instructors perceptions of composition quality were most influenced by mechanics. A single holistic score assign to a writing sample may thus represent different aspects of writing ability for different raters.In holistic rating of L2 writing samples, a significantly larger amount of inconsistent textual information must be processed in a limited amount of time, which may affect the ratings. Several studies have suggested that a quick holistic read of an L2 writing sample may not allow the rater the time necessary to accurately assess the writing performance. Huot (1993) noted that when the rater is required to read a text so quickly for a limited set of criteria outlined in a scoring rubric, the need for agreement may hinder a rich, personal response to the text, thus affecting the unity of the scores. Hamp- Lyons (2003) has cautioned that it is difficult to accurately capture the criteria used by raters during the quick read of a holistic scoring. apart(predicate) from that, Grobe (1981) c oncluded from an analysis of essays and correlation with holistically obtained scores that teachers see good writing as being closely associated with vocabulary diversity (p. 85). Sakyi (2001) supports Grobes view that raters decisions on awarding scores are significantly influenced by vocabulary diversity and the extent of grammatical error, but also by the range and sophistication of syntax and the style or format of the writing. Sakyi also notes from his own research that for raters who made a conscious effort to follow the scoring guide, the restrictions imposed on them to assign a single score at the end caused them to depend mostly on only one or two particular features to distinguish between different levels of ability (p. 129).Analytic Scoring MethodThe analytic scoring method was introduced at the same time as the holistic scoring method (Boring, 2002). Hunter (1996) explained that for the analytic scoring method, the domain being tested is subdivided to smaller subdomains. Each of these subdomains is then evaluated by itself. The sum of these subdomains would, by default, reproduce the whole. Proponents of analytic scoring methods (Jacobs, Zinkgraf, Wormuth, Hartfiel, Hughey, 1981 Hamp-Lyons, 1990 Huot, 1993 Weigle, 1999) have found several advantages to this method of scoring.One of the advantages is with multiple scores analytic scoring aims provide more information about a test takers performance than holistic scoring schemes and permit a profile of the areas of writing ability. Analytic scoring methods can provide specific feedback, which is needed in measuring achievement, predicting time to come success, and accurately placing students (Shaw, 2002 Bacha 2001), as well as providing useful diagnostic feedback on writing performance (Jacobs, et al., 1981 Hamp-Lyons, 1991 Cohen, 1994). In the assessment of L2 writing ability, analytic scales are very useful if a students writing ability is evolution at differing rates for situation such as when vocabulary is good, but organizational control is lacking.Hamp-Lyons (1991), Huot (1996) and Weigle (2002) have suggested that analytic-type scales are generally more reliable than holistic-type scales since each candidate gets more than one score, and multiple scores contribute to reliability. Regarding intra-rater reliability, some research has suggested that analytic scoring is more useful than holistic in didactics inexperienced raters. It is argued that the raters can more easily interpret and apply the scoring criteria in separate domains than the criteria as described in one holistic rubric (Francis, 1977, and Adams, 1981, both cited in Weir (1990) Hartog, Rhodes, Burt, 1936 Cast, 1939 Bauer, 1981 and Weigle, 1998). Cumming (1990) suggested that an analytical scale tends to reflect what raters do when rating samples of writing or other language performance that is consider the individual features of writing one by one.According to Vacc (1989), the analytic technique is pre ferred over the holistic scoring method when detailed feedback is needed, especially with classroom assessments. Another reason to use analytic scoring method is that it has been argued that instruct raters to use analytic scoring rubrics is relatively easier than training them to use holistic scoring rubrics (Cohen, 1994 McNamara, 1996). According to Boring (2002), one advantage of the analytic scoring method over the holistic scoring method is that with the analytic technique, it is possible to give various weights to different subdomains based on their theoretical importance. In addition, Kroll (1990) described that it can help meet the need that many ESL learners who fail writing tests have, for feedback on both the deficiencies and the qualities in their writing (Kroll, 1990).There are, however, a number of disadvantages to using an analytic scoring scheme for the assessment of direct writing samples. The primary concern regarding analytic scoring is practicality. As Weigle (2 002) pointed out, it generally takes longer to score a writing sample using an analytic rubric since the rater must make multiple decisions for each writing sample and thus must read the sample multiple times. Some critics doubt whether writing ability can be measured by a composite score based on different aspects of writing. White (1985) argued that writing is more than the sum of its parts, and that the use of an analytic scoring scheme may in effect divert attention from overall essay effect.Weigle (1999) noted information is lost when raters revise their scores on the different scales once they consider the single composite score. Raters may also tend to rate holistically rather than analytically so that the rater ends up assigning a writing sample the same score in every domain (Cohen, 1994).An additional problem with analytic scoring and rater bias surfaced in Cummings (1990) descriptive analysis of raters comments. Cumming (1990) also found that both novice and expert raters tended to analytically evaluate ESL compositions on both language control and writing ability, implicitly attributing separate values to each of these domains.Hamp-Lyons (1989) noted another potentiality problem in the reliability of analytic scoring schemes in that an analytic scoring method may favor essays where performance criteria are easily and quickly extracted from the writing sample. While an analytic scoring method offers the potential of additional information regarding the students L2 writing ability, there are potential problems of reliability and validity derived from the scoring procedures.ConclusionAll the researches had shown that the method used by teachers in assessing students essay will definitely have an impact on students writing skills and ability. It is very vital to use the correct method so that students will improve their performance. From all the researches also, it can be concluded that most of them focus on the reliability, validity and practicality of the two scoring methods from many perspective. There is very few or none research is done on the teachers point of view on the two methods. In this research paper, the teachers opinions will be concern as much as possible.2.2 Definition of termsHolistic scoring method is a method which teachers use to evaluate a piece of students writing for its overall quality. It is a method used in essay scoring whereby a single mark is awarded to an essay from a range of marks categorized in different performance bands in which each band is characterized by descriptors based on the total impression of the essay as a whole. It is widely used in Malaysian schools to mark essays in school-based and existence examinations.Analytic scoring method is a method that teachers use to assess students written works more specifically and in detail. It is usually based on a well structured rubric where all the components that need to be assessed are stated out clearly and in detail. This method views an e ssay in as technical a manner as possible. It is not a common method used in Malaysian secondary schools.CHAPTER 3METHODOLOGY3.1 IntroductionThe first purpose of this study is to investigate the use of holistic scoring method and analytic rubrics in essay scoring among teachers of Malaysian secondary schools. This study is also aimed at discovering the relationship between the two methods. Another goal of this study is to find out how analytic scoring method can be applied in Malaysian secondary school.As for the research questions in this study, the first one is how holistic scoring method is used in marking students essays. The second question is how analytic scoring rubrics are used in marking students essays. The third question is why holistic scoring method is mostly used in school. The fourth question is why analytic scoring rubric is rarely used in marking school essays. The last question is how possible is it for analytic scoring rubric to be integrated in the curriculum of Malaysian secondary school.To fulfill the purpose and research questions for this study, only one method is used. Fifty survey questionnaires were distributed.3.2 race and samplingThe population chosen for this study was teachers of English from Malaysian secondary schools. The population was selected randomly. There was no distinction between gender and races. Fifty teachers from different schools were given the questionnaire. Six schools were chosen to answer the questionnaires. All the teachers chosen to answer questionnaire were teachers of English. All the schools chosen are selected randomly to ensure that there is no bias.3.3 instrumentalityThe instrument used was a questionnaire consisting of 5 sections. The survey is constructed in 5 sections to answer all the research questions. A copy of the survey is attached to appendix A.3.4 Procedure and time frameThis research took about 6 weeks to complete. It started during the 6th week and ended in the 12th week of the semester. During this period of time, the researcher went to sixsome Malaysian secondary schools to give out the questionnaire.First of all, the researcher identified the schools that are suitable for the study. Schools that have at least 8 teachers of English were selected.Secondly, the researcher went to the schools and met with the whizz of each school. The researcher asked permission from the principal to give out the questionnaires. Almost all the schools asked the researcher to leave the questionnaires there for collection the next week. The researcher left the questionnaires there according to the number of teachers of English in each school.Thirdly, the researcher went back to each school the next week and lay in all the completed questionnaires. Some questionnaires were not collected chiefly because teachers were busy with examinations. After collecting all the questionnaires, data were analyzed.3.5 Analysis planAll the data collected from the survey will be analyzed according t o research questions. The first and second sections of the questionnaire are to answer the first two research questions on analytic and holistic scoring. These two sections consist of characteristics on both analytic and holistic scoring. The answers respondents have chosen will reveal their scoring method accurately. Item A1 to A3 will be on analytic marking method, while A4 to A6 will be on holistic marking method. The following graph will present the final result for each item.Figure 3.1 . The outline of the presentation of result for section A of the questionnaireWhereA1I use analytic marking method (mark according to specific criterion)A2I concentrate on one criterion at a time and read the response specifically for that criterion.A3I read the response and mark errors in spelling, sentence structure and coherenceA4I use holistic marking method (mark essay as a whole)A5I read the response and give a mark as a wholeA6After the first reading I assign one band score to the respon se and confirm this after subsequent readings.Another graph will be for section B. The following graph is to summarize the percentage for section B.Figure 3.2. The outline of the presentation of result for section B of the questionnaireWhereB1Is the marking scheme holistic guide?B2Is the marking scheme analytic guide?B3Do you find the marking scheme easy to interpret?B4Do you find the marking scheme easy to apply?B5Do you feel the assessment criteria in the marking scheme provide an accurate and fair assessment?B6Do you think it is necessary to change the current marking scheme?The third section answers the third research question on holistic scoring. This section is to explore the reasons of teachers who use holistic scoring. The fourth section answered the fourth research question on analytic scoring. This section is to explore the reasons of teachers who use analytic scoring. 7 reasons presented in the questionnaires were according to literature review. This is to find out why t eachers ilk to use holistic or analytic scoring. Two graphs as follow will be used to summarize the result.Figure 3.3. The outline of the presentation of result for section C of the questionnaireWhereC1I like to use it.C2It is more convenient.C3It costs less.C4It saves time.C5It is reliable.C6It provides good feedback for students.C7It is fair.Figure 3.4. The outline of the presentation of result for section D of the questionnaireWhereD1I like to use it.D2It is more convenient.D3It costs less.D4It saves time.D5It is reliable.D6It provides good feedback for students.D7It is fair.The last section is to examine the possibility of using analytic scoring in Malaysian secondary context. This answered the last research question. This section is on curriculum of Malaysian secondary school and the use of analytic scoring. If teachers are more positive towards using analytic scoring, it suggests that it is possible to use. The graph used to analyze the result is as follows.Figure 3.5. The ou tline of the presentation of result for section E of the questionnaireWhereE1It is possible to mark students essays based on specific features and criterionin schoolE2I think that teachers are willing to use analytic scoring rubric in schoolE3Analytic scoring rubric is suita