Teaching and assessment of persuasive writing: Juggling the language features and grasping the metalanguage

References

• ACER. (2008). Reporting and comparing school performance. Canberra, ACT: Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs. Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/ACER_Report_on_Reporting_and_comparing_school_performances.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F. (2000). Modern language testing at the turn of the century: Assuring that what we count counts. Language Testing, 17(1), 1–42.
   Google Scholar
• Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, T. L., Glasswell, K., & Harland, D. (2004). Accuracy in the scoring of writing: Studies of reliability and validity using a New Zealand writing assessment system. Assessing Writing, 9, 105–121. Retrieved from http://www.clal.org.cn/personal/testing/MA/writing/brown2004.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Carrell, P. L., & Connor, U. (1991). Reading and writing descriptive and persuasive texts. The Modern Language Journal, 75(iii), 314–324.
   Google Scholar
• Chall, J. S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, F., Chang, T., & Chuang, Y. (2007). Using NETPAW to advance senior high school students’ English acquisition in the context of the Common European Framework. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, UICEE, 6(2), 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. (2005). The learning strategies of Taiwanese university students: English majors and males versus females. Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(2), 203–219.
   Google Scholar
• Chuang, Y. (2004). The national English test in proficiency for all on the web in Taiwan (NETPAW). Retrieved from www.fas.nus.edu.sg/cls/clasic2004/clasicprog_ss4.htm
   Google Scholar
• Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1990). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Freebody, P. (1992). A socio-cultural approach: Resourcing four roles as a literacy learner. In A. Watson & A. Badenhop (Eds.), Prevention of reading failure (pp. 48–60). Sydney, NSW: Ashton-Scholastic.
   Google Scholar
• Freebody, P., & Luke, A. (1990). Literacies programs: Debates and demands in cultural context. Prospect: Australian Journal of TESOL, 5(7), 7–16.
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher, G. (2010). Practical language testing, London, England: Hodder Education.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, J. M., & Noppe, I. C. (1976). Cognitive development and learning. In J. F. Adams (Ed.), Understanding adolescence: Current developments in adolescent psychology (pp. 199–232). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (2006). Improving the writing, knowledge, and motivation of struggling young writers: Effects of self-regulated strategy development with and without peer support. American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 295–340.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, R. (1989). How does writing restructure thought? Language and Communication, 9(2/3), 99–106.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2003). Genre-based pedagogies: A social response to process. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 17–29.
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, D. E., Kono, M., O’Neill, S., & Sasaki, M. (2008). Fostering positive cross-cultural attitudes through language teaching (pp. 1–244). Teneriffe, QLD: Post Pressed.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, M. (2007). Genre-based approach to teaching writing. Language Sciences, 29(5). 621–632. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2007.01.005
   Google Scholar
• Kohonen, V. (1997). Authentic assessment as an integration of language learning, teaching, evaluation and the teacher’s professional growth. In A. Huhta, V, Kohonen, L. Kurki-Suonio, & S. Luoma (Eds.), Current developments and alternatives in language assessment: Proceedings of LTRC 96 (pp. 7–22). Jyväskylä, Finland: University of Jyväskylä.
   Google Scholar
• LTTC. (2005). LTTC Annual Report. Retrieved from http://ebookbrowse.com/lttc-2005-report-final-prntpdf-d126438598
   Google Scholar
• Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1999). Further notes on the four resources model. Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/research/lukefreebody.html
   Google Scholar
• McCutchen, D. (1986). Domain knowledge and linguistic knowledge in the development of writing ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(4), 431–444.
   Google Scholar
• McQueen, J., & Aldous, C. (1994). Diagnostic English Language Tests (DELTA): Assessment of listening, reading and writing skills for non-Englishspeaking background students. Melbourne, VIC: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER).
   Google Scholar
• Menary, R. (2007). Writing is thinking, Language Sciences, 29(5), 621–632.
   Google Scholar
• My School. (2011). Fact sheet. Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority (ACARA) Retrieved from http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Reliability_and_validity_of_NAPLAN.pdf
   Google Scholar
• NAPLAN. (2010). The National Assessment Program Literacy and Numeracy, achievement in reading, writing, language conventions and numeracy report. Canberra, ACT: MCEETYA.
   Google Scholar
• NAPLAN. (2011a). NAPLAN facts sheet. Retrieved from http://www.naplan.edu.au/verve/_resources/NAPLAN_2011_Writing_Fact_Sheet.pdf
   Google Scholar
• NAPLAN. (2011b). Persuasive writing marking guide, Australian curriculum, assessment and reporting authority. Retrieved from www.naplan.edu.au/verve/_resources/Marking_Guide_2011.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Nippold, M. A., Ward-Lonergan, J. M., & Fanning, J. L. (2005). Persuasive writing in children, adolescents, and adults: A study of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic development. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36, 125–138.
   Google Scholar
• Oatley, K., & Djikic, M. (2008). Writing is thinking. Review of General Psychology, 12(1), 9–27. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.12.1.9
   Google Scholar
• Paltridge, B. (1996). Genre, text type, and the language learning classroom. ELT Journal, 50(3), 237–243.
   Google Scholar
• Pan, Y. (2007a). Test impact: English certification exit requirements in Taiwan. TEFLIN Journal, 20(2), 119–139.
   Google Scholar
• QDOE. (1994). A guide to genres in English. English in Years 1 to 10: Queensland syllabus materials. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Shih, C. (2007). A new washback model of students’ learning [Electronic version]. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64(1), 135–162.
   Google Scholar
• Stemler, S. E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment Research & Evaluation, 9(4). Retrieved from http://pareonline. net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=4
   Google Scholar
• TOEFL. (2011). Test of English as a foreign language. Retrieved from www.ets.org/toefl
   Google Scholar
• Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wollman-Bonilla, J. E. (2004). Principled teaching to(wards) the test? Persuasive writing in two classrooms. Language Arts, 81(6), 502–512.
   Google Scholar