Assessment of writing ability for LI 112
First assessment
At the beginning of spring 2010 semester, sixty-four students attending Beginning II Italian
courses were assessed. They were tested on whether they were able to complete the task at hand
and the degree of comprehensibility of their message. Furthermore, particular attention was paid
on the level of discourse and appropriateness of the vocabulary used in their writing, as well as
their degree grammatical accuracy. Students were asked to write TWO essays in Italian as
indicated below:
1. Your new Italian friend would like to meet your cousin. Write an e-mail message in Italian to
your friend describing your cousin.
You may include:
 Your cousin’s name and age
 His/her personality
 His/her appearance
 Activities for them.
2. Your new Italian pen-pal would like to know more about you and your life. Write an e-mail
message in Italian to your friend describing what your typical day is like.
You may include:
 Time you get up and go to bed
 Whether you have breakfast and what you eat and drink
 Time you go to school/work
Results
Data indicate that only eighteen students were writing at the required level. Nine of them were
writing slightly below the standards, and five of them were not meeting the minimal
requirements. On the other hand, the remaining thirty-two students were writing at a higher level
than the one required by the course (see Table 1 below)
Table 1
Average number of students in each performance level for the two tasks combined
Students (n = 64)
5
Below Level
9
Almost below
18
Level
32
Above Level
Table 2
Number of students in each competency type and level for assignment I
Meets the standards
Levels
Task Completion
Comprehensibility
Level of Discourse
Vocabulary
Grammar
Mechanics
4
29
29
31
30
25
24
Total
Avg.
168
26.3
3
17
13
14
9
6
8
2
13
13
11
17
18
17
67
12.8
89
14.8
1
5
9
8
8
15
15
Total
64
64
64
64
64
64
60
10.0
Table 3
Number of students in each competency type and level for assignment II
Meets the standards
Levels
Task Completion
Comprehensibility
Level of Discourse
Vocabulary
Grammar
Mechanics
4
27
25
28
27
22
22
Total
Avg.
151
25.1
3
19
19
16
14
12
12
2
12
13
14
16
16
17
92
15.3
88
14.6
1
6
7
6
7
14
13
Total
64
64
64
64
64
64
53
8.8
Second assessment
The same group of students was assessed after 20 hours of instruction to see whether there had
been some improvement in their writing performance. The number of students was slightly less
given that five of them had withdrawn from the course. The fifty-nine students were tested on the
same six parameters, but with a different assignment. They were asked to write an 80-word
journal entry where they would describe the most significant moments of their childhood. They
could include information about the location where they lived, the school they attended, their
favorite subject(s) and teacher(s), sports and hobbies.
Results
Data has reported similar outcomes as the previous evaluation. In fact, eighteen students were
able to write at the required level. However, the number of those writing slightly below was a
little higher (12). The number of students of those unable to meet the minimal standards was
slightly lower (3). Thirty-one students exceeded the required performance level (see Table 4
below).
Table 4
Number of students in each performance level
Students (n =59)
3
Below Level
12
Almost below
28
Level
31
Above Level
Table 5
Number of students in each competency type and level for assignment III
Meets the standards
Levels
Task Completion
Comprehensibility
Level of Discourse
Vocabulary
Grammar
Mechanics
4
29
22
22
23
16
16
Total
Avg.
128
21.3
3
11
10
11
11
12
12
2
13
20
20
16
15
17
67
11.1
101
16.8
1
6
7
6
9
16
14
Total
59
59
59
59
59
59
58
9.6
The profile of results obtained suggests that additional instruction does not determine an overall
improvement in performance. Although the number of students not meeting the standards
decreases while the one of those almost meeting it increases, their overall writing performance
does not improve significantly. It appears that students need a long exposure to their target
language before showing some visible changes.