ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
In assessing performance-based language assessment, the use of a suitable scoring method is crucial to minimize measurement errors that will become threats in the rating process. The scoring method which is widely used in the literature is a rubric as the rubric is proven to be able to provide guidelines for the rater to cognitively construct their understanding of how to assess performance. The appropriate selection of a rubric to be used by a particular rater will ensure the validity and reliability of the scores given to an assessed performance. However, since there are different types of rubrics and each of the rubrics serves a different purpose, teachers must be able to distinguish the differences between these rubrics. Therefore, this paper aims to discuss the different types of rubrics and highlight the potential of primary trait rubrics to be used by second language learners (L2) in one of the performance-based assessment activities particularly self and peer assessment (SAPA). The main idea of this paper is to improve the quality of formative assessment practice in measuring second language performance which is significant to ensure the validity and reliability of the assessed performance. Undeniably, this will provide insights for teachers to conduct the formative assessment in the classroom mainly when self-directed learning is becoming the main aim for students’ development.
Shirazi, A. M. (2019). For a Greater Good: Bias Analysis in Writing Assessment. SAGE Open 9(1): 215824401882237. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018822377.
Andrade, H. L., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria referenced self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 32 (2): 159–181.
Andrade, H. L. (2019). A Critical Review of Research on Student Self-Assessment. Frontiers in Education 4(87). doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
Becker, A. (2016). Student-generated scoring rubrics: Examining their formative value for improving ESL students’ writing performance. Assessing Writing 29: 15–24.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability 21(1): 5–31.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 25(6): 551–575. http://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807.
Brookhart, S. M., & Chen, F. (2015). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review 67(3): 343–368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2014.929565.
Brown, G. T. L., Andrade, H. L., & Chen, F. (2015). Accuracy in student self-assessment: directions and cautions for research. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy and Practice 22(4).
Cohen, A. (1994). Assessing language abilities in the classroom. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Davis, L. (2018). Analytic, Holistic, and Primary Trait Marking Scales. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching 1–6.
Deygers, B., & Van Gorp, K. (2015). Determining the scoring validity of a co-constructed CEFR-based rating scale. Language Testing 32(4): 521–541.
Dickinson, P., & Adams, J. (2017). Values in evaluation – The use of rubrics. Evaluation and Program Planning 65: 113–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.07.005.
Engelhard, G., & Wind, S.A. (2019). Invariant Measurement with Raters and Rating Scales: Rasch Models for rater-mediated assessments. Routledge.
Francis, J. E. (2018). Linking Rubrics and Academic Performance?: An Engagement Theory Perspective Linking Rubrics and Academic Performance?: An Engagement Theory 15(1)
Frey, B. B. (2018). Primary Trait Scoring. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Ghalib, T. K., & Al-Hattami, A. A. (2015). Holistic versus analytic evaluation of EFL writing: A case study. English Language Teaching 8(7): 225–236.
Hamp-Lyons, L. (1995). Rating Nonnative Writing: The Trouble with Holistic Scoring. TESOL Quarterly 29(4): 759.
Holzknecht, F., Huhta, A., & Lamprianou, I. (2018). Comparing the outcomes of two different approaches to CEFR-based rating of students’ writing performances across two European countries. Assessing Writing 37(April 2017): 57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.03.009.
Idris, M., & Abdul Raof, A. H. (2017). The CEFR Rating Scale Functioning: An Empirical Study on Self- and Peer Assessments. Sains Humanika 2(2014): 11–17.
Kaur, P., Zhi, J. (2022). The CEFR-Aligned Curriculum: Perspectives of Malaysian Teachers. Asian Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences 4 (1), 138-145. https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2022.4.1.13
Kayapinar, U. (2014). Measuring Essay Assessment: Intra-Rater and Inter-Rater Reliability. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (57): 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100433.
Martens, K. S. R. (2018). How program evaluators use and learn to use rubrics to make evaluative reasoning explicit. Evaluation and Program Planning 69: 25–32.
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring Second Language Performance.Pearson Education Limited.
Don, M. Z. (2015). English Language Education Reform in Malaysia: The Roadmap 2015-2025. Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Movahedi, N., & Kiasi, G. A. (2021). The Effect of Teacher vs. Learner-Assessment Activities on the Iranian Intermediate EFL Learner’s Writing Ability. International Journal of Research in English Education (2021) 6(1). http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-467-en.html.
Mumpuni, K. E., Priyayi, D. F., & Widoretno, S. (2022). How do students perform a peer assessment? International Journal of Instruction, 15(3), 751-766. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15341a
North, B. (2014). The CEFR in practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ohta, R., Plakans, L.M. & Gebril, A. (2018). Integrated writing scores based on holistic and multi-trait scales: A generalizability analysis. Assessing Writing 38(August): 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.08.001.
Othman, N. (2014). The Primary Trait Scoring Method for Classroom-Based Assessment of Students’ Direct Writing. International Journal of Learning and Development 4(3): 51.
Panadero, E., and Romero, M. (2014). To rubric or not to rubric? The effects of self-assessment on self-regulation, performance and self-efficacy. Assessment in Education. 21, 133–148. doi: 10.1080/0969594X.2013.877872
Rahadi, R. A., Tampubolon, M. N., & Hasanah, E. N. (2018). Students Peer-Evaluation Process: A Case Study in Malaysia. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling 3(15), 7-16.
Reinholz, D. (2015): The assessment cycle: A model for learning through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 41(2), 301-315. DOI:10.1080/02602938.2015.1008982
Nodoushan, S. M. A. (2014). Assessing Writing: A Review of the Main Trends. Studies in English Language and Education 1(2): 118.
Schunn, C., Godley, A., & DeMartino, S. (2016). The Reliability and Validity of Peer Review of Writing in High School AP English Classes. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 60(1): 13–23.
Sidhu, G. K., Kaur, S., & Chi, L. J. (2018). CEFR-aligned school-based assessment in the Malaysian primary ESL classroom. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics 8(2): 452–463. http://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/IJAL/article/view/13311.
Simons, M., & Colpaert, J. (2015). Judgmental evaluation of the CEFR by stakeholders in language testing. Revista de Linguistica y Lenguas Aplicadas 10: 66–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2015.3434.
Trace, J., Meier, V., & Janssen, G. (2016). “I can see that”: Developing shared rubric category interpretations through score negotiation. Assessing Writing 30: 32–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2016.08.001.
Veloo, A., Ramli, R., & Khalid, R. (2016). Assessment Practices among English Teachers in Malaysian Secondary Schools. International Journal for Infonomics 9(4): 1220–1227.
Veloo, A., Aziz, N. H. A., & Yaacob, A. (2018). The Most Suitable Scoring Method to Assess Essay Writing in ESL Classrooms. Advances in Language and Literary Studies 9(4): 19–25.
Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. 2018. Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: the crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 43(7).
Weigle, S. C. (2010). Scoring procedures for writing assessment. (J. Charles Alderson & L. F. Bachman, Eds.) Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (original work published 2002).
Zou, S., & Zhang, W. (2017). Exploring the adaptability of the CEFR in the construction of a writing ability scale for test for English majors. Language Testing in Asia 7(1): 18. http://languagetestingasia.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40468-017-0050-3.
(Asli & Matore, 2023)
To Cite this Article: Asli, N. F., & Matore, M. E. E. M. (2023). Dear Second Language Learners (L2): The Complete Guide of Primary Trait Scoring Rubric for Self and Peer Assessment (SAPA). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(2), 2678–2693.
Copyright: © 2023 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode