great benefit to all those involved. Individual students also found themselves saying and writing things. They might not have come up with their own and
the group’s research was broader than an individual’s normally. Cooperative writing approach is the combination of process and
genre based approach. Writing in groups, whether as a part of long process or as part of a short game-like communicative activity, can be greatly
motivating for students. 5. Using Computer
Schools which are completed with computers that can be accessed by their students give many advantages in the writing teaching and learning
process. A computer screen frequently allows students to see their writing more objectively.
e. Assessing Writing
Writing has become an essential tool for all people in today’s global community. It plays a vital role not only in conveying information, but also in
transforming knowledge to create new knowledge Weigle, 2007. It is, thus, of central importance of students in academic to learn how to write in English
as an international language. Hence, the assessment of writing ability is of critical importance. In assessing writing, teachers need to assess how well the
students can communicate in writing. Writing assessment is the most problematic thing for the teacher. It is not only because the teacher must
consider about vast diversity of writing purposes, styles and genre in writing
but also the teacher has to assess the writing as objective as possible. Although sometimes the subjectivity of the judgment is involved in assessing writing,
the teacher must minimalize the subjectivity. There are many ways to assess writing and one of them is by using scoring rubric.
Scoring is perhaps the area where experience from large-scale testing can most benefit classroom teachers. The use of explicit scoring rubrics and
training to score has a number of benefits for the classroom teacher. Weigle 2007: 182 states three advantages of using scoring rubric to assess writing;
first, the students can be given the rubric in advance and are made aware of what the criteria are on which their writing will be judged. In this sense, the
rubric becomes a teaching tool as well as the testing tool. Second, use of a scoring rubric provides the instructor with a standard by which to score papers
consistently. Then, the other advantage is that it can simplify the grading process, as teachers can use checklists or numerical scores rather than writing
lengthy comments or correcting every stylistic or grammatical infelicity. A scoring rubric that gives students an overall sense of their performance, and
that is easy for instructors to use and for students to understand, is a helpful tool for the writing teacher and may be preferable to other less systematic
forms of feedback Weigle, 2007. Related to this study, the researcher adapts the grading scales from
Brown and Bailey 1984, 39-41 in Brown 2004. The criteria are classified into five individual parts: content 30, organization 20, vocabulary
20, language use 25 and mechanism 5.
The researcher would only use these assessing criteria to assess the students’ final products of writing in 1 genre of the text being taught during
the research, which is procedure text. Below is the scoring scheme that would be used to assess the students’ final writing.
Table 1: Scoring Scheme of Writing in Five Components Adapted from Brown and Bailey 1984, 39-41 in Brown 2004
Aspect of Writing
Level Score
Criteria Content
Logical development
Excellent to
very good
24-30 Relevant to assigned topic
and give detail information Matches the social purposes
of the text. Good to
average 16-23
Mostly relevant to topic but lacks of detail information
Matches the social purposes of the text but lacks of detail.
Fair to
poor 8-15
Inadequate development of topic
Almost matches the social purpose of the text
Very poor
1-7 Not related to the topic
Does not match the social purpose of the text
Organization Introduction,
body, conclusion
Excellent to
very good
16-20 Well organized the text’s
structure
Good to average
11-15 Loosely organized of the text
but main ideas stand out Fair
to poor
6-10 Confusing ideas or
disconnected Very
poor 1-5
No organization
Vocabulary Excellent
to very
good 16-20
Uses effective words Word form mastery
Good to average
11-15 Occasional errors or word
form, choice, or usage but meaning not obscured
Fair to
6-10 Frequent errors of word
poor form, choice, or usage
Meaning obscured Very
poor 1-5
Little knowledge of English vocabulary and word form,
choice, or usage
Language use Excellent
to very
good 19-25
Few errors of agreement, tense, word order, articles,
pronoun, preposition Good to
average 13-18
Several errors of agreement, tense, word order, articles,
pronoun, preposition Meaning seldom obscured
Fair to
poor 7-12
Frequent errors of agreement, tense, word order, articles,
pronoun, preposition Meaning obscured
Very poor
1-6 Dominated by errors
Does not communicate or not enough to evaluate
Mechanics
Excellent to
very good
5 Demonstrates mastery of
convention Few errors of spelling,
punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing
Good to average
4 Occasional errors of spelling,
punctuation, capitalization, and paragraphing
Fair to
poor 3
Quite many errors of spelling, punctuation,
capitalization, and paragraphing
Poor handwriting Very
poor 2
No mastery of convention Dominated by errors of
spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and
paragraphing Illegible handwriting
f. Feedback on Written Work
