A study on the bennefits of using portfolios as a means of assessment in the writing development for the third year stdents of english at hanoi pedagogical university no 2

HANOI PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY No. 2
FOREIGN LANGUAGE FACULTY



NGUYEN THI HUE



A STUDY ON THE BENEFITS OF USING PORTFOLIOS
AS A MEANS OF ASSESSMENT IN THE WRITING
DEVELOPMENT FOR THE THIRD-YEAR
STUDENTS OF ENGLISH AT HANOI
PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY No. 2

(A CASE STUDY IN THE FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE,
HANOI PEDAGOGICAL UNIVERSITY No. 2)



SUPERVISOR: NGUYEN THI LE NGUYEN, M.A




Hanoi, May 2014

i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research is the fruit of the labor of mine and my supervisor, who has
committed time, energy, resource and creativity to help me to complete the
research.
I am deeply grateful to my supervisor – Mrs. Nguyen Thi Le Nguyen,
M.A., for her invaluable support and masterful guidance throughout the
process of writing the thesis.
Many sincere thanks to all the lectures at Hanoi Pedagogical University
No. 2, especially to the lecturers in the Faculty of Foreign Language for their
dedicated instructions.
And finally, a word of thanks goes to my family as well as my friends
for their encouragement and enthusiastic support.














ii

ABSTRACT

Since the application of Communicative Language Teaching approach
to EFL teaching, process writing and collaborative learning have been greatly
emphasized as typical features of teaching writing. Writing portfolios is one
of the methods that bear both features above. Reviews on this method have
been seen in a number of books and articles, yet few experimental studies
have been conducted to prove its effectiveness. What is more, it has not yet
been applied widely in Hanoi Pedagogical University No. 2.This encourages
the researcher to investigate the subject matter of what advantages of writing
portfolios are for undergraduate EFL learners.
To describe the characteristics of portfolios, information from materials
have been collected and reflected. Also, the question of how beneficial
writing portfolios are for EFL learners was addressed by means of using the
core method: questionnaire.
The results indicate that students’ perceptions of various aspects of the
portfolio assessment practice are related to their approaches to learning.
Portfolios also help improve students’ practical writing skills. In addition,
students facing several obstacles and their solutions to overcome them were
discussed in details. Those findings are hoped to encourage wider appliance
of writing portfolios to EFL teaching and learning in Vietnam.

iii


STATEMENT OF THE AUTHORSHIP
Title: A study on the Benefits of Using Portfolios as a Means of the
Assessment in the Writing Development for the Third-year Students of
English at Hanoi Pedagogical University No. 2.

(Graduation paper submitted in partial fulfillment for Degree of
Bachelor of Arts in English)

I certify that no part of the above report has been copied from other
person’s work without acknowledgements and the report is originally written
by me under instructions of my supervisor.

Date of submission: May 2014

Student Supervisor
Nguyen Thi Hue Nguyen Thi Le Nguyen, M.A.
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i
ABSTRACT ii
STATEMENT OF THE AUTHORSHIP iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS iv
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
I.1. RATIONALE 1
I.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH 2

I.3. SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH 3
I.4. TASKS OF THE RESEARCH 3
I.5. METHOD OF THE RESEARCH 3
I.6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH 4
I.7. OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH 4
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
II.1 LITERATURE REVIEW IN BRIEF 5
II.2. An overview of assessment 5
II.2.1. Definition of assessment 5
II.2.2. Reasons for assessing students 5
II.2.3. Principles for assessing students 9
II.3. An overview of portfolio 9
II.3.1. Teaching writing 9
II.3.1.1. Product approach 10
II.3.1.2. Process approach 11
II.3.2. Formative and Summative assessment 12
II.3.3. Portfolio as an assessment tool 13
II.3.3.1. Defining portfolio 13
II.3.3.2. Classifying portfolio 14
II.3.3.3. Organizing portfolio content 15
II.3.3.4. Characterizing portfolio writing process 17
II.3.3.5. Assessing portfolio 18
II.3.3.6. Benefits of using portfolios 18
II.3.4. The use of portfolios in writing lessons for third-year students in the Foreign
Language Faculty at Hanoi Pedagogical University No. 2. 20
II.3.4.1. Course objectives 20
v

II.3.4.2. Course assessment 20

II.3.4.3. Portfolio as a formative assessment tool 21
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
III.1. Research design 24
III.2. Setting of the study 24
III.3. Sampling 25
III.4. Participant selection 26
III.5. Data collection instrument 26
III.5.1. Questionnaire 26
III.6. Summary 27
CHAPTER FOUR
FINDINGS
IV.1. Research question 1 and summary of findings for research question 1 29
IV.2. Research question 2 and summary of findings for research question 2 35
IV.3. Research question 3 and summary of findings for research question 3 37
IV.2. Recommendations 38
IV.2.1. Learners’ characteristics 38
IV.2.2. Design of portfolios 39
IV.2.3. Portfolios combined with other types of assignment 40
CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION
V.1. Summary of findings 42
V.2. Implications 43
V.2.1. Teachers 43
V.2.2. Peers 44
V.2.3. (Student) writers 44
V.3. Limitations of the study and suggestions for further research 44
REFERENCES 46
APPENDICES

vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CAE Certificate in Advanced English
CEFR Common European Frame of Reference for Languages
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ESL English as a Second Language
FLF Foreign Language Faculty
HPU2 Hanoi Pedagogical UniversityN
o
2
ULIS University of Languages and International Studies
VNU Vietnam National University

vii

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 2.1
Writing V assessment criteria

21
Table 2.2
Writing portfolio evaluation criteria

22
LIST OF DIAGRAM
Page
Diagram 2.0
Portfolio writing process
17
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1
Students’ interest in making portfolios

29
Figure 4.2
How well students understand and use
portfolios.

30
Figure 4.3
Students ‘awareness of promoting mutual
interactions with teacher by using portfolios
31
Figure 4.4
Student’s abilities to organize academic
information after making portfolios
32
Figure 4.5
Students’ awareness of including references
function by using portfolios
33
Figure 4.6
Student’ awareness of using portfolios in the
next semesters
34

- 1 -

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This part states the research problem, the rationale for the study as
well as aims, significance, scope and methods of the study. Moreover, the
research questions are also clearly stated to act the parameter for the whole
paper.
I.1. RATIONALE
A vast body of research has studied writing portfolios as a form of
assessment tool or in terms of peer written feedback. However, the influence
of portfolio writing process on students’ writing ability has still been a
research field which is waiting for scholars and researchers to investigate and
bring students practical benefits.
Realizing the benefits which portfolios bring about, the Foreign
Language Faculty, Hanoi Pedagogical University No. 2 has started to include
portfolios as an assessment tool for the third-year students of English in recent
years. Aiming at C1 level for those targeted students with reference to the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), the
writing program puts central focus on the Certificate in Advanced English
design (CAE). Thus, portfolio as an assessment tool also involves elements of
CAE marking descriptors. The score from portfolios makes up 35 per cent of
the total assessment. There have been a certain number of studies related to
the topic of portfolios in the scope of Foreign Language Faculty, Hanoi
Pedagogical University No. 2. Several papers and articles have investigated
portfolios from the angle of an alternative assessment tool for traditional
assessment. Unfortunately, they only give theoretical backgrounds with

studying on any particular group of students. Besides, many other theses
exploit portfolios in the aspect of peer written feedback. As a matter of fact,
students’ writing portfolios are to be assessed by specific criteria. However,
there has not been any study which offers an insight into students’ self-
assessment of their own writing ability as a result of portfolio writing process,
- 2 -

guided by those criteria. Especially, the specific impacts of portfolio writing
process on students ‘practical writing ability with all factors considered
together still remains cryptic.
To fill the gaps, this paper purports to (1) investigate the effect from the
students’ self-assessment and (2) to identify the obstacles and solutions on the
writing pieces. Three questions were chosen as the research design. The main
data collection instrument was questionnaire. Results from document analysis
of three questions for the third-year students played an important role in
verifying the findings attained from their self-assessment.
The study yielded fruitful findings in response to the three research
questions. Findings from three research questions revealed a similarity of the
most tremendous progress in coverage of main points and vocabulary. In
analyzing documents collected, it was proven that positive changes were
made from version to version thanks to the teacher’s and peers’ comments
and the writer’s self-correction. Remarkably, there also existed noticeable
discrepancy among findings of the three research questions. Some writing
abilities reported as little improved turned out to be more positively
progressed than the students had thought; whereas some reported as seen
much enhancement but it was contrasted to what their writing pieces revealed.
Based on the findings, implications were made for teachers, peers and
the students themselves with the hope of making the most of the writing
portfolio process.
I.2. OBJECTIVES OF THE RESEARCH

The major aims of the study are:
 To investigate students’ motivations and attitudes towards benefits
of using portfolios as a mean of assessing their writing development.
 To identify the students’ obstacles when writing their portfolios.
 To find out solutions to overcome students ‘obstacles.


- 3 -

I.3. SCOPE OF THE RESEARCH
Portfolios are used in various fields, but within the frame of this paper,
the research only approaches it in educational field.
The study is concerned with using portfolios as a mean of assessing
students’ writing development in Writing course 6 with the third-year
English-major students of the Faculty of Foreign Language, Hanoi
Pedagogical University No. 2.
The population involved in the study contains 60 students from two
groups of the Faculty of Foreign Language, Hanoi Pedagogical University
No. 2.They are in the second semester of the school year 2013-2014.
I.4. TASKS OF THE RESEARCH
The study consists of the following tasks:
1) To research into the definition and reasons for assessing students and
principles of assessing students.
2) To study theoretical knowledge about portfolios including the
definition, classification, organizing portfolios content, characterizing
portfolios, assessing portfolios as well as benefits of portfolios to help
students and teacher get acquainted with them and then develop them.
3) To identify the effectiveness of using portfolios as a mean of
assessing students’ learning process in teaching writing courses so that
teacher could make decisions whether portfolios should be used or not and

how to use them most efficiently.
I.5. METHOD OF THE RESEARCH
To achieve the objectives of study, the following methods have been applied:
 Collecting documents from books listed in the references.
 Consulting the supervisor, experienced teachers and friends.
 Conducting survey questionnaire.



- 4 -

I.6. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH
Once completed, the study would bring about certain benefits to
teachers, students, and other scientists who share the same interest in this
topic.
Firstly, the research findings may offer teachers a closer look at their
students’ perception of the influence of portfolio writing process. Hence, they
can adjust their teaching methods to help develop students’ writing skills as
well as interest in writing lessons.
Secondly, students can benefit from this research by choosing the most
appropriate suggestions to improve their writing skills.
Last but not least, researchers who take interest in the same topic can
refer to this paper as a source of updated and reliable information.
I.7. OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH
This thesis consists of five main chapters:
Chapter one, Introduction, introduces reasons for choosing the topic,
objectives, scope, tasks and significance of the study, the research method as
well as an overview of the thesis.
Chapter two, Theoretical background, lays the theoretical background
for the study.

Chapter three, Methodology, describes the research design,
participants, the data collection instrument as well as the procedure utilized to
carry out the research.
Chapter four, Findings – presents, analyzes, synthesizes and discusses
the findings revealed from the collected data according to the three research
questions.
Chapter five, Conclusion, encapsulates the main issues discussed
throughout the study, the limitations of the paper, several implications and
some suggestions for further studies. This chapter is followed by the
References and Appendices.

- 5 -

CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Chapter 2 – Literature Review – provides the theoretical background
for the whole paper, in which the key concepts are thoroughly elaborated on.
Besides, the review of related studies worldwide and in Vietnam will help to
point out the gaps with the research aims to bridge through this study.
II.1.LITERATURE REVIEW
The notion of portfolio-based assessment began to attract attention
around the mid-1980s as a reaction against the psychometric climate prevailing
educational standards. This atmosphere led to intense pressure to place more
emphasis on testing as a means of raising standards, in accordance with the
belief that the more students are tested, the more they will be motivated to
improve efforts and performance. Elbow and Belandoff (1997), in looking back
on that period, noted that “in retrospect, what was urgent and growing pressure
for assessment, assessment, assessment: test everything and everyone for a
score; don’t trust teachers” (pp.22-23). In fields like composition, in particular,
this view of testing was seen as counterproductive to the whole process of

teaching and learning the complex, multifaceted skill of writing. As a result,
many composition specialists began to search for ways of measuring student
writing that would be more consistent with the emerging process approach to
writing, allowing other views of student writing than the single, timed test,
usually placed at the end of a writing course. In an attempt to find an attractive
alternative approach to writing assessment, many composition researchers
began to experiment with portfolio-based approaches.
In the context of writing instruction and assessment, a portfolio can be defined
as “a collection of texts the writer has produced over a defined period of time”
(Hamp-Lyons, 1991, p.162) and the collection may consist of “selected but not
necessarily polished or finished pieces” (Privette, 1993, p.60).
Yancey (1992) also stated that all portfolios, regardless of the particular
context, share three essential characteristics. Firstly, they are longitudinal in
- 6 -

nature. Secondly, portfolios are diverse in content. Thirdly, portfolios are
atmost always collaborative in ownership.
According to Genese and Upshur (1996), portfolios stimulate student
interaction with peers and student ownership in the learning process. This
felling of ownership is enhanced by the fact that the portfolios experience is
not a brief, one-shot presentation of writing. A greater sense of authority or
ownership, in turn, can increase leaner motivation, since learners felt a greater
personal stake in the work they produce.
Another often cited benefit of portfolios can be used to encouraging students to
reflect on the pieces they write and on the process they use to write them.
Student reflection on their writing in preparation of a portfolio is a key concept
in portfolios pedagogy and an essential aspect of learner-directed assessment.
According to Murphy (1994), portfolios can be used to encourage students to
reflect on the pieces they write and on the processes they use to write them.
There have been a certain number of studies related to the topic of

portfolios in the scope of Foreign Language Faculty, Hanoi Pedagogical
University No. 2. Several papers and articles have investigated portfolios
from the angle of an alternative assessment tool for traditional assessment.
Unfortunately, they only give theoretical backgrounds with studying on any
particular group of students. Besides, many other theses exploit portfolios in
the aspect of peer written feedback. As a matter of fact, students’ writing
portfolios are to be assessed by specific criteria. However, there has not been
any study which offers an insight into students’ self-assessment of their own
writing ability as a result of portfolio writing process, guided by those criteria.
Especially, the specific impacts of portfolio writing process on students
‘practical writing ability with all factors considered together still remains
cryptic.
All the aforementioned reasons motivate the researcher to conduct a research
paper entitled “A study on the Benefit of Using Portfolios as a Means of
Assessment in Writing development for the Third-year Students of English at
- 7 -

Hanoi Pedagogical University No.2” to fill in the identified gaps in the local
literature.
II.2. An overview of assessment
II.2.1. Definition of assessment
There are many definitions of assessment which are listed as follows:
According to Assessing Academic Programs in Higher Education (2004),
assessment involves the use of empirical data on student learning to refine
programs and improve student learning.
Assessment is the process of gathering and discussing information from
multiple and diverse sources in order to develop a deep understanding of what
students know, understand, and can do with their knowledge as a result of
their educational experiences; the process culminates when assessment results
are used to improve subsequent learning (Huba and Freed, 2000).

Assessment is the systematic basis for making inferences about the
learning and development of students. It is the process of defining, selecting,
designing, collecting, analyzing, interpreting, and using information to
increase students’ learning and development (Erwin, 1991).
Assessment is the systematic collection, review, and use of information
about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student
learning and development (Palomba and Banta, 1999).
II.2.2. Reasons for assessing students
The primary purpose of assessment is to improve students’ learning and
teachers’ teaching as both respond to the information it provides. Assessment
for learning is an ongoing process that arises out of the interaction between
teaching and learning.
Assessment can do more than simply diagnose and identify students’
learning needs; it can be used to assist improvements across the education
system in a cycle of continuous improvement:
Students and teachers can use the information gained from assessment
to determine their next teaching and learning steps.
- 8 -

Parents and families can be kept informed of next plans for teaching
and learning and the progress being made, so they can play an active role in
their children’s learning.
School leaders can use the information for school-wide planning, to
support their teachers and determine professional development needs.
Communities and Boards of Trustees can use assessment information to
assist their governance role and their decisions about staffing and resourcing.
The Education Review Office can use assessment information to
inform their advice for school improvement.
The Ministry of Education can use assessment information to undertake
policy review and development at a national level, so that government

funding and policy intervention is targeted appropriately to support improved
student outcomes.
II.2.3. Principles of assessing students
In the book Nine Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student
Learning, there are 9 principles of assessing student learning.
 The assessment of student learning begins with educational values.
Assessment is not an end in itself but a vehicle for educational
improvement. Its effective practice, then, begins with and enacts a vision of
the kinds of learning we most value for students and strive to help them
achieve. Educational values should drive not only what we choose to assess
but also how we do so. Where questions about educational mission and values
are skipped over, assessment threatens to be an exercise in measuring what's
easy, rather than a process of improving what we really care about (AAHE,
1992, p.2)
 Assessment is most effective when it reflects an understanding of
learning as multidimensional, integrated, and revealed in performance over
time.
Learning is a complex process. It entails not only what students know
but what they can do with what they know; it involves not only knowledge
- 9 -

and abilities but values, attitudes, and habits of mind that affect both academic
success and performance beyond the classroom. Assessment should reflect
these understandings by employing a diverse array of methods, including
those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as to reveal
change, growth, and increasing degrees of integration. Such an approach aims
for a more complete and accurate picture of learning, and therefore firmer
bases for improving our students' educational experience (AAHE, 1992, p.2)
 Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have
clear, explicitly stated purposes.

Assessment is a goal-oriented process. It entails comparing educational
performance with educational purposes and expectations - those derived from
the institution's mission, from faculty intentions in program and course
design, and from knowledge of students' own goals. Where program purposes
lack specificity or agreement, assessment as a process pushes a campus
toward clarity about where to aim and what standards to apply; assessment
also prompts attention to where and how program goals will be taught and
learned. Clear, shared, implementable goals are the cornerstone for
assessment that is focused and useful (AAHE, 1992, p.2)
 Assessment requires attention to outcomes but also an equally to the
experiences that lead to those outcomes.
Information about outcomes is of high importance; where students "end
up" matters greatly. But to improve outcomes, we need to know about student
experience along the way about the curricula, teaching, and kind of student
effort that lead to particular outcomes. Assessment can help us understand
which students learn best under what conditions; with such knowledge comes
the capacity to improve the whole of their learning (AAHE, 1992, p.2)
 Assessment works best when it is ongoing not episodic.
Assessment is a process whose power is cumulative. Though isolated,
"one-shot" assessment can be better than none, improvement is best fostered
when assessment entails a linked series of activities undertaken over time.
- 10 -

This may mean tracking the process of individual students, or of cohorts of
students; it may mean collecting the same examples of student performance or
using the same instrument semester after semester. The point is to monitor
progress toward intended goals in a spirit of continuous improvement. Along
the way, the assessment process itself should be valuated and refined in light
of emerging insights (AAHE, 1992, p.2)
 Assessment fosters wider improvement when representatives from

across the educational community are involved.
Student learning is a campus-wide responsibility, and assessment is a
way of enacting that responsibility. Thus, while assessment efforts may start
small; the aim over time is to involve people from across the educational
community. Faculty plays an especially important role; but assessment's
questions can't be fully addressed without participation by student affairs
educators, librarians, administrators, and students. Assessment may also
involve individuals from beyond the campus whose experience can enrich the
sense of appropriate aims and standards for learning. Thus understood,
assessment is not a task for small groups of expert’s but a collaborative
activity; its aim is wider, better-informed attention to student learning by all
parties with a stake in its improvement (AAHE, 1992, p.3)
 Assessment makes a difference when it begins with issues of use
and illuminates questions that people really care about.
Assessment recognizes the value of information in the process of
improvement. But to be useful, information must be connected to issues or
questions that people really care about. This implies assessment approaches
that produce evidence that relevant party’s will find credible, suggestive, and
applicable to decisions that need to be made. It means thinking in advance
about how the information will be used, and by whom. The point of
assessment is not to gather data and return "results"; it is a process that starts
with the questions of decision-makers, that involves them in the gathering and
- 11 -

interpreting of data, and that informs and helps guide continuous
improvement (AAHE, 1992, p.3)
 Assessment is most likely to lead to improvement when it is part of
a larger set of conditions that promote change.
Assessment alone changes little. Its greatest contribution comes on
campuses where the quality of teaching and learning is visibly valued and

worked at. On such campuses, the push to improve educational performance
is a visible and primary goal of leadership; improving the quality of
undergraduate education is central to the institution's planning, budgeting, and
personnel decisions. On such campuses, information about learning outcomes
are seen as an integral part of decision making, and avidly sought (AAHE,
1992, p.3)
 Through assessment, educators meet responsibilities to students and
to the public.
There is a compelling public stake in education. As educators, we have
a responsibility to the public’s that support or depend on us to provide
information about the ways in which our students meet goals and
expectations. But that responsibility goes beyond the reporting of such
information; our deeper obligation - to ourselves, our students, and society - is
to improve. Those to whom educators are accountable have a corresponding
obligation to support such attempts at improvement (AAHE, 1992, p.3)
II.3. An overview of portfolio
II.3.1. Teaching writing
Nunan (1991) affirms that there are various ways in writing teaching but the
two most commonly applied approaches at the present are product and
process, which will be thoroughly discussed in this part.
II.3.1.1. Product approach
Traditional approaches to the teaching of writing focus on the product
(Tran, 2009). Early in the literature review, product approach was described
as grammatical correctness-emphasized (Scarcella & Oxford, 1992). This can
- 12 -

be achieved by keying to a model or following the guidance and control of the
teachers. Additionally, Nunan (1991) reviews that the product approach
emphasizes on grammar exercises and correctness, and focuses on the result
of the final writing paper of learners. Accordingly, Steele (2006) regards

product approach as a traditional approach, in which students are encouraged
to mimic a model text, which is usually presented and analyzed at an early
stage.
In a nutshell, the major features of product approach can be described
as follows:
 The focus is put upon the final product, which is a coherent and
error free text, written in one draft only.
 The tasks that learners have to perform involve primarily imitating,
copying and transforming models provided by teachers/textbooks.
 Teachers tend to view the resulting test as final product to evaluate.
This conveys to the students the message that function of writing is to
produce text for teacher to evaluate rather than to communicate meaningfully
with another person.
(Grabe & Kaplan, 1998; Nunan, 1999; Coffin et al, 2003).
Because of its natures, there have been numerous trenchant censures for
this approach. Firstly, Halsted (1975) and Mahon (1992) criticize that the
over-emphasis on accuracy and form may result in serious “writing blocks”
and “sterile” and “unimaginative” pieces of work. In agreement with them,
Clenton (2006) blames product approach as it neglects the actual processes
experienced by students and then leads to the restriction of creativity.
Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that this approach can help students to
see errors as something that they have a professional obligation to correct and,
where possible, eliminate, as claimed by Tribble (1996).
II.3.1.2. Process approach
Process approach began to replace product approach in the mid-1970s.
Throughout the vast body of research in writing, the concept of process
- 13 -

approach has undergone various transformations. As theorized in earlier
literature review, writing is considered as a multi-stage process and is

evaluated according to how well it can fulfill the writer’s intentions (Reid,
1993). According to Steward (cited in Joe, 2006), writing purports at written
communication between the writer himself and his intended readers.
Therefore, writing is not the form but the idea that can be seen as the
determining factor. In process approach, the final product is only “a
secondary, derivative concern, whose form is a function of its content and
purpose” (Silva, 1990, p. 16). Writing is no longer regarded as a “linear and
fragmented procedure” (Hairston, 1982, p. 78) with the ultimate aim shot an
error free product. It is, instead, “a cyclical process during which writers can
move back and forth on a continuum, discovering, analyzing and synthesizing
ideas”
(Hughey et al. cited in Joe, 2006, p. 48).
As can be seen, by contrast to the product approach, the process
approach possesses the following features:
 The focal point is placed on the steps involved in drafting and
redrafting a piece of work. It is the development of successive drafts of a text.
Therefore, quality is emphasized rather than quantity.
 The tasks performed by learners involve producing, reflecting on,
discussing and reworking successive drafts of a text.
 Teachers assess students’ result through the whole process, not
through one final product.
(Nunan, 1999, p. 127)
Process approach has been receiving greater and greater appreciation
because of its outstanding advantages. Firstly, students are encouraged to
generate ideas freely, share their works with other and get feedback from
peers and teachers. This promotes collaborative group work as well as
enhancing motivation and positive attitudes. Secondly, they are offered
chances to explore a variety of systematic methods of discovery while they
- 14 -

read, write and talk to each other (Raimes, 1987). Then, they are free to
explore the topic of their interest or importance. Additionally, the approach
encourages content information and personal expression rather than final
product grammar and usage (cited in Nguyen, 2007).
II.3.2. Formative and Summative assessment
For other language skills in general and for writing skill in particular,
classroom assessment can be understood as “an on-going process aiming at
understanding and improving students’ learning” (Angelo cited in Nguyen
2007, p. 21) or “an ongoing process in which teachers and learners gather,
analyze data and use them to make educational decisions” (cited in Nguyen,
2007). What is noteworthy from these definitions is the repetition of the word
“ongoing”, which emphasizes continuity as the typical feature of classroom
assessment. Distinction is now routinely drawn between summative and
formative assessment (Hawkey & Barker, 2004). Nonetheless, within the
scope of this paper, focus is deliberately put on the latter assessment form.
According to Johnson and Jenkins (2012), classroom formative writing
assessment refers to continual evaluation, in which the focus is on monitoring
student response to and progress with instructions. When formative
assessments are used in conjunction with summative assessment, the potential
exists to improve outcomes for all students (Stiggins, 2002). One of the
pivotal arguments in favor of developing and extending the practice of
formative assessment in writing classes is put forth by Hawkey and Barker ,
2004. In supporting the practice of formative writing assessment, they claim
that it can enhance learning motivation, foster self-study, clarify desired
outcome, help students identify gaps in knowledge and diagnose specific
understanding.
Classroom formative writing assessment involves several procedures
such as observation, feedback, and journaling. The most common procedures
include the following elements:
- 15 -

 Feedback: The teacher provides oral or written feedback on
students’ discussion or work.
 Curriculum-based measurement: This set of standardized
measures is used to determine student progress and performance.
 Self-assessment: Students reflect on and monitor their progress.
 Observation: The teacher observes and records a student’s level of
engagement, academic and/or affective behavior; develops a plan of action to
support that student; implements the plan; and continues to record
observations to determine its effectiveness.
 Writing portfolios: A growth writing portfolio can be used to
collect evidence of a student’s progress in developing writing skills.
(John & Jenkins, 2012)
Particularly, a body of copious evidence has proven that portfolio is
progressively becoming a promising classroom assessment.
II.3.3. Portfolio as an assessment tool
II.3.3.1. Defining portfolio
In writing assessment, the growing dissatisfaction with timed
impromptu tests and the development of writing instruction have made
portfolios more and more popular. The use of portfolios as a formative
assessment tool has attracted the attention of many researchers, teachers and
students. Most of the portfolio studies are of good quality since investigators
have generated different well-rounded viewpoints on this issue.
“A portfolio is a folder of a student’s work completed during a course
or program” (Coffin et al., 2003, p.88). Likewise, Reid points out that
“portfolio is a collection of texts produced over a defined period of time to the
specifications of a particular context” (1993, p.249).
Another definition to be considered is “Portfolios are a collection of
student papers usually chosen by the student that will then be graded or
assessed at the end of the course” (Clark, 2003). Similarly, Scott describes a

- 16 -

portfolio as “a collection of texts composed over time that serves as evidence
of a writer’s processes and development” (1991, p.1).
Coombe and Barlow (2004, p.19) define portfolio as “a collection of a
student’s writing pieces in a duration of time to show different phases in
completing a writing task and the improvement of the writer over time”.
In another way, Sweet proposes his idea that “portfolio is a
‘purposeful’ collection of students’ work” (1993, p.1). It may be a folder
containing a student’s best pieces of writing or all drafts that illustrates the
creation of a product through various stages. The former is often called a
showcase or exemplary portfolios while the latter is named process portfolios.
Normally, portfolio is a physical folder or box in which three elements
are includes:
 Collection (representative samples of class work)
 Selection (selections chosen by students)
 Reflection (self-evaluation by the students crucial)
(Hamp-Lyon & Condon cited in Apple and Shimo, 2004).
II.3.3.2. Classifying portfolio
In reviewing the literature, a wide range of portfolio classifications has
emerged illustrating its diversity, among which Satskatchewan Professional
Development Unit’s (SPDU) (2011) and Valencia and Place’s classification
(1994) are the most popular. Based on their perception of portfolio’s purpose,
SPDU (2011) categorizes portfolio into four types:
 The showcase portfolio: (1) to promote student control of learning;
(2) to track students’ progress; (3) to respond to individual needs; and (4) to
facilitate student-led conferences;
 The growth portfolio: (1) to demonstrate individual growth; (2) to
show process and product; and (3) to evaluate and report on students’
progress;

- 17 -

 The selected works portfolio: (1) to show process and products of
work; (2) to evaluate and report on students’ progress; and (3) to show
students’ achievements with respect to specific curricular goals; and
 The passportfolio: (1) to show students’ achievements with respect
to specific curricular goals; (2) to accumulate “best work” for admission to
other institution or program; (3) to document achievement for alternative
credit; and (4) for employment purpose.
Unlike SPDU, Valencia and Place (1994) purpose another way of
classifying on the basis of the content of a portfolio:
 The showcase portfolio which includes the student’s best works;
 The evaluation portfolio which includes specified and marked
works;
 The documentation portfolio which includes student works
systematically kept by the teacher but not marked; and
 The process portfolio which contains on-going works and student
self-reflection.
Whatever the type is, it is worth noticing that within each of those
categories, there are dozens of variations. For a particular purpose, each
person may combine categories or invent one type on his own that is unique
in response to his needs.
II.3.3.3. Organizing portfolio content
Crockett (cited in Nunes, 2004) classifies portfolio contents into five
categories:
(1) found samples, or pieces done to fulfill class assignment;
(2) processed samples, which refers to students’ analyses and self-
samples of their edition of a work previously graded by the teacher;
(3) revisions or samples of student work that have been graded and
then revised, edited, and rewritten;

(4) reflections, which are related to the processed samples but are
applied to the portfolio as a whole. This offers students a chance to think