Abstract

This article presents research from a qualitative study of the way that reflective writing is solicited, taught, composed, and assessed within a state-mandated portfolio curriculum. The research situates reflective texts generated by participating students within the larger goals and bureaucratic processes of the school system. The study finds that reflective letters are a genre within the state curriculum that regulates the substance and tone of students’ reflections. At the classroom level, the genre provides a mode that students adopt with the assurance that their reflections will meet state evaluators’ expectations. At the bureaucratic level, the genre helps to continually validate the state’s portfolio curriculum through its strong encouragement of stylized narratives of progress. The study demonstrates the importance of understanding how large-scale assessments shape pedagogy and students’ writing.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2005-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088304271831
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Reflections: A Journal of Community-Engaged Writing and Rhetoric
  2. Assessing Writing
  3. Assessing Writing
  4. Written Communication
  5. Open Words: Access and English Studies

References (54) · 8 in this index

  1. The ethnographic imagination: Textual constructions of reality
  2. Speech genres and other late essays
  3. 10.2307/378935
     ↗
  4. Genre and writing: issues, arguments, alternatives
  5. The ideology of genre
Show all 54 →
  1. Portfolios: Process and product
  2. New directions in portfolio assessment: Reflective practice, critical theory, and large-s…
  3. Written Communication
  4. Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition, culture, and power
  5. Research in the Teaching of English
  6. Assessing Writing
  7. Writing portfolios in the classroom: Policy and practice, promise and peril
  8. Directions and misdirections in English evaluations
  9. Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: Issues in constructed response, perf…
  10. 10.1080/00098659809599377
     ↗
  11. Portfolios: Process and product
  12. Worlds apart: Acting and writing in academic and workplace contexts
  13. 10.7208/chicago/9780226206851.001.0001
     ↗
  14. An independent evaluation of the Kentucky Instructional Results Information System (KIRIS)
  15. 10.1207/s15326977ea0101_3
     ↗
  16. Learning and teaching genre
  17. High stakes performance assessment: Perspectives on Kentucky’s educational reform
  18. Educational Leadership
  19. The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning
  20. 10.1037/e669882011-001
     ↗
  21. Teaching English in the Two-Year College
  22. Qualitative data analysis
  23. 10.1080/00335638409383686
     ↗
  24. 10.17763/haer.60.4.n4405243p6635752
     ↗
  25. Testing for learning: How new approaches to evaluation can improve American schools
  26. Technical Communication Quarterly
  27. 10.1080/00098659809599376
     ↗
  28. 10.1207/s15326977ea0404_2
     ↗
  29. Writing portfolios in the classroom: Policy and practice, promise and peril
  30. Qualitative research and evaluation methods
  31. Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data
  32. Written Communication
  33. Written Communication
  34. Written Communication
  35. Educational Leadership
  36. 10.1080/00098659809599381
     ↗
  37. 10.1080/00098659809599383
     ↗
  38. The portfolio project: A study of assessment, instruction and middle school reform
  39. 10.1207/s15324818ame0404_6
     ↗
  40. Tales of the field: On writing ethnography
  41. Portfolios: Process and product
  42. Accountability, assessment, and teacher commitment: Lessons from Kentucky’s reform
  43. Phi Delta Kappan
  44. Written Communication
  45. Writing portfolio development teachers handbook
  46. Writing portfolios in the classroom: Policy and practice, promise and peril
  47. 10.2307/j.ctt46nsh0
     ↗
  48. 10.1080/00098659809599378
     ↗
  49. 10.2307/j.ctt46nxw3.19
     ↗