NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED228638
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1983-Mar
Pages: 16
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: 0
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Theoretical Roots and Pedagogical Implications for Contextual Evaluation.
Ewald, Helen Rothschild
There are three types of contexts subject to evaluation of student writing; the textual context that influences grammatical acceptability and the rhetorical effectiveness of a sentence; the coded context or cultural constraints such as generic and stylistic conventions; and pragmatic contexts that unite form, function, and setting in a developmental relationship. Current evaluation systems can be categorized according to which context they address. Text-oriented systems view the text itself as entirely sufficient to express meaning and to reveal author intent. Code-oriented systems emphasize the role that conventions and rules play in text interpretation and evaluation, and, although no fully developed system for evaluating pragmatic contexts exists, some methods include reader-response thinking and others use protocol analysis as a means for making judgments about the text as it develops in the writer's mind. What is needed, however, are systems with process-oriented contexts, especially since most evaluation systems have been product-bound. Two possible approaches that can be taken for the development of process-oriented evaluation systems are (1) multiple draft measurements that would analyze the nature and quality of the changes made between drafts and would make "appropriate change" a criterion of evaluation; and (2) writer-reader protocols that would feature articulated response as a criterion of evaluation and assess the stated intent of the author vis-a-vis the effect the author's work actually has on its audience. (HOD)
Publication Type: Opinion Papers; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers: Contextual Analysis; Theory Practice Relationship
Note: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication (34th, Detroit, MI, March 17-19, 1983).