This classroom-based action research (CBAR) corroborated our belief in the valuable role rubrics play in a tertiary L2 writing context where English is the medium of instruction. The three-stage CBAR involved ongoing discussions between us, two writing teacher-researchers, as we adapted our teaching and assessment strategies to explore the potential of rubrics as formative tools. This study confirmed the proactive role rubrics could play in teaching writing and promoting successful partnerships between teachers and students during the assessment process. The multifaceted function of rubrics as driver of change in practitioners’ approaches to teaching and assessing writing as well as a tool that enables students to take ownership of the different stages of their writing was a major finding of our study.
AbramP.ScarlossB.HolthuisN., et al. (2002) The use of evaluation criteria to improve academic discussion in cooperative groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22, 16–27.
AndradeH.L. (2010). Students as the definitive source of formative assessment: Academic self assessment and the self-regulation of learning. NERA Conference Proceedings, 2010, 25.
4.
AndradeH.L.DuY.WangX. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement, Issues and Practice, 27, 3–13.
5.
AndradeH.L.WangX.DuY.AkawiR.L. (2009). Rubric-referenced self-assessment and self-efficacy for writing. The Journal of Educational Research, 102, 287–302.
6.
Assessment Reform Group. (2002). Assessment for learning: 10 principles. Cambridge University Press.
7.
BarrR.B.TaggJ. (1995). A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change, 27, 13–25.
8.
BeckerA. (2016). Student-generated scoring rubrics: Examining their formative value for improving ESL students’ writing performance. Assessing Writing, 29, 15–24.
9.
BlackP.HarrisonC.LeeC.MarshallB.WiliamD. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 9–19.
10.
BorgS.AlshumaimeriY. (2019). Language learner autonomy in a tertiary context: Teachers’ beliefs and practices. Language Teaching Research, 23, 9–38.
11.
BoseJ.RengelZ. (2009). A model formative assessment strategy to promote student-centered self-regulated learning in higher education. US-China Education Review, 6, 29–35.
12.
BroadB. (2003). What we really value: Beyond rubrics in teaching and assessing writing. Utah State University Press.
13.
BroadB.Adler-KassnerL.AlfordB., et al. (2009). Organic writing assessment: Dynamic criteria mapping in action. Utah State University Press.
14.
BrooksG. (2013). Assessment and Academic writing: A look at the use of rubrics in the second language writing classroom. Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review, 17, 227–240. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10236/10548 (accessed May 2022).
15.
BurnsA. (2009). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge.
16.
CoghlanD.Brydon-MillerM. (2014). The Sage encyclopedia of action research. Sage.
17.
CockettA.JacksonC. (2018). The use of assessment rubrics to enhance feedback in higher education: An integrative literature review. Nurse Education Today, 69, 8–13.
18.
DannR. (2014). Assessment as learning: Blurring the boundaries of assessment and learning for theory, policy and practice. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 21, 149–166.
19.
DeCorteE. (1996). New perspectives on learning and teaching in higher education. In BurgenA. (Ed.), Goals and purposes of higher education in the 21st century (pp. 112–132). Jessica Kingsley.
20.
EarlL.M. (2013). Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. 2nd edition.Corwin.
21.
FraileJ.PanaderoE.PardoR. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 69–76.
22.
GhaffarM.A.KhairallahM.SalloumS. (2020). Co-constructed rubrics and assessment for learning: The impact on middle school students’ attitudes and writing skills. Assessing Writing, 45, 100468.
23.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
24.
HealeyM.FlintA.HarringtonK. (2016). Students as partners: Reflections on a conceptual model. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 4, 1–13.
25.
HuangS.-C. (2016). No longer a teacher monologue: Involving EFL writing learners in teachers’ assessment and feedback processes. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 13, 1–31.
26.
HylandK.HylandF. (2006). Feedback on second language students’ writing. Language Teaching, 39, 83–101.
27.
JonssonA. (2014). Rubrics as a way of providing transparency in assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 39, 840–852.
28.
JonssonA.PanaderoE. (2017). The use and design of rubrics to support assessment for learning. In CarlessD.BridgesS.ChanC.GlofcheskiR. (Eds.), Scaling up assessment for learning in higher education (pp. 99–111). Springer Singapore.
29.
KhairallahM.R.FleonovaO.NicolasM.O. (2020). Understanding students’ resistance to autonomous learning in an L2 English language. European Journal of Education, 3, 20–38.
30.
KleinJ.ConnellN.A. (2008). The identification and cultivation of appropriate communities of practice in higher education. In KimbleC.HildrechP.BourdonI. (Eds.), Communities of practice: Creating learning environments for educators: Volume 1 (pp. 65–81). Information Age.
31.
KlenowskiV. (2009). Assessment for learning revisited: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Assessment in Education, 16, 263–268.
32.
KwoO. (2013). Professional learning as a moral drive from critical discourse. In ZhuX.ZeichnerK. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for the 21st century (pp. 263–279). Springer.
33.
LeeI.MakP. (2018). Metacognition and metacognitive instruction in second language writing classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 52, 1085–1097.
34.
LeeI. (2007). Assessment for learning: Integrating assessment, teaching, and learning in the ESL/EFL writing classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 64, 199–214.
35.
LeeI. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48, 201–213.
36.
LeeI. (2016). Teacher education on feedback in EFL writing: Issues, challenges, and future directions. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 518–527.
37.
McGarrO.McCormackO.ComerfordJ. (2019). Peer-supported collaborative inquiry in teacher education: Exploring the influence of peer discussions on pre-service teachers’ levels of critical reflection. Irish Educational Studies, 38, 245–261.
38.
NicolD.MacFarlane-DickD. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 199–218.
39.
OrsmondP.MerryS.CallaghanA. (2004). Implementation of a formative assessment model incorporating peer and self-assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 4, 273–290.
40.
OxfordR.L.AmerstorferC.M. (2018). Language learning strategies and individual learner characteristics: Situating strategy use in diverse contexts. Bloomsbury.
41.
PanaderoE.JonssonA. (2013). The use of scoring rubrics for formative assessment purposes revisited: A review. Educational Research Review, 9, 129–144.
42.
PanaderoE.AndradeH.BrookhartS. (2018). Fusing self-regulated learning and formative assessment: A roadmap of where we are, how we got here, and where we are going. Australian Educational Researcher, 45, 13–31.
43.
PanaderoE.BroadbentJ.BoudD.LodgeJ.M. (2019). Using formative assessment to influence self- and co-regulated learning: The role of evaluative judgement. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 34, 535–557.
44.
PerrenoudP. (1998). From formative evaluation to a controlled regulation of learning processes: Towards a wider conceptual field. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice, 5, 85–102.
45.
PophamW.J. (1997). What’s wrong – and what’s right – with rubrics. Educational Leadership, 55, 72–75.
46.
PophamW.J. (2008). Transformative assessment. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
47.
RagupathiK.LeeA. (2020). Beyond fairness and consistency in grading: The role of rubrics in higher education. In Shea SangerC.GleasonN.W. (Eds.), Diversity and inclusion in global higher education: Lessons from across Asia (pp. 73–95). Palgrave MacMillan.
48.
ReddyY.M.AndradeH. (2010). A review of rubric use in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35, 435–448.
49.
RussR.S.SherinB.L.SherinM.G. (2016). What constitutes teacher learning? In GitmoerD.H.BellC.A. (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 391–438). 5th edition.American Educational Research Association.
50.
SatoK.MutohN.KleinsasserR.C. (2019). Longitudinal research on EFL teacher professional development in (Japanese) contexts: Collaborative action research projects. Language Teaching Research, 26, 477–503.
SerafiniF. (2000). Three paradigms of assessment: Measurement, procedure and inquiry. The Reading Teacher, 54, 384–393.
53.
StigginsR. (2007). Assessment through the student’s eyes. Educational Leadership, 64, 22–26.
54.
SundeenT.H. (2014). Instructional rubrics: Effects of presentation options on writing quality. Assessing Writing, 21, 74–88.
55.
TayH.Y. (2015). Setting formative assessments in real-world contexts to facilitate self-regulated learning. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 14, 169–187.
56.
TurleyE.D.GallagherC.W. (2008). On the ‘uses’ of rubrics: Reframing the great rubric debate. English Journal, 97, 87–92.
57.
WarringtonA.GraeberL.WhiteH.SaxtonJ. (2018). Finding value in the process: Student empowerment through self-assessment. English Journal, 107, 32–38.
58.
Wyatt-SmithC.AdieL. (2019). The development of students’ evaluative expertise: Enabling conditions for integrating criteria into pedagogic practice. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 53, 399–419.
