I've heard it from both my placement experiences--first grade at one school, and sixth grade at another...writing assessments are a BEAR! And the rubrics provided are over-the-top long and ambiguous.
While assisting my supervising teacher in the sixth grade class, I was confronted with a stack of students' responses to the district writing prompts for assessment. I stared (for quite a while) at those glorious pieces of effort and thought to myself: Where do I start? How can I begin to evaluate these when I know students tried so hard? I do know that the teacher provides a rubric on which they will be assessed. I am overwhelmed!
In my first grade class recently, right before conferences, I was able to peruse the folders of student work of which the teacher was going to review with parents during conference time. The teacher carefully collected samples of their writing (even while often messy and brief!) from the beginning of the year through current practice. To me, it seemed a pretty valid indication of how those students were successful in making progress in the right direction--even though they may not be at grade level expectations.
Routman stresses the importance of assessing the "validity" of students' writing rather than the narrow focus on a checklist (the rubric). I agree with Routman when he talks about making sure we use rubrics which are age-appropriate. Time spent on test preparation will decrease with good teaching of writing and simply doing a lot of it. As teachers, we can't be hyperfocused on test prep; the joy will be sucked right out of writing. Routman provides many examples of how to teach writing well so that we can reduce the stress felt by students, teachers and parents. Both my supervising teachers incorporate writing into their teaching every day. This routine practice lessons the hardship of the required writing for the students; they expect it daily. The other magic to getting kids to concentrate on the quality of their writing is to get them to the point of self-assessment, or at least peer-assessment. These students will be much more prone to good learning. Routman believes in the need for assessment--but not solely from testing.
Routman would agree with Elbow's contention that assessment/ranking is being incomplete and unreliable. I've heard from more than a few teachers who concur with the C.S. Lewis quote, "People are obviously far more anxious to express their approval and disapproval of things than to describe them." Seems everyone would agree that we need better ways to measure a child's writing efforts and success. We are in danger of shifting focus from writing as individual expression to writing as meeting someone else's expectations in order to assign a grade.
Elbow seems to like the term, evaluation, better than ranking/grading. Evaluation, he implies, forces the reviewer to more thoughtfully determine what works well and what does not work for a piece of writing. Similar to Routman's wishes for assessment--evaluation should not be an act of just filling in blanks with numbers; it needs to include some pondering on the part of the teacher. As with many teachers, this pondering should occur more often than just testing time. It needs to happen daily or at least frequently as students become more relaxed with writing and as they receive encouragement and positive feedback from the teacher.
Okay--I had to re-read the Elbow's "liking" hypotheses more than once. I believe what Elbow points to is developing the skills of discernment (and/or discrimination). We, and our students, need to be taught to delve deep into writing, to read a piece multiple times, with different sets of eyes, in order to establish the good and bad of that piece. Routman does not express this kind of evaluation in so many words, although he gives us a sense of this in explaining how to get students into self-assessment. I get the impression that Routman feels evaluation, aka grading, aka assessment, is inevitable, but that there are ways in which we can work to make them more meaningful for student learning.
The two writers, Routman and Elbow, provide us with great perspectives on judging our students' writing. Routman seems to offer more concrete methods or strategies to vary our means of assessment. Elbow's article more thoroughly explains the variations in the art of judgment. As teachers, we may need to post our grades on students' writing accomplishments, but we can also take it many steps beyond and look more closely at what makes their writing good. The more desired descriptive form of evaluation can then be used in conferences with parents and the students themselves so they know what they need to work on and for what we are praising them.