Abstract
A process-approach to writing is often overlooked in favour of tests and the products of writing. The Showcase Portfolio Approach was introduced in Hong Kong as a viable alternative to more traditional writing assessments in order to encourage self-reflection, revision and metacognition for writing. Using case studies from two different school levels, this chapter outlines pedagogic practices for the classroom and for creating reflective journals in which students consider the quality of their written work according to prompts provided by the teacher.
Keywords
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Badger, R., & White, G. (2000). A process genre approach to teaching writing. ELT Journal, 54(2), 153–160.
Burner, T. (2014). The potential formative benefits of portfolio assessment in second and foreign language writing contexts: A review of the literature. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 43, 139–149.
Genesee, F., & Upshur, J. A. (1996). Classroom-based evaluation in second language education. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Jones, J. (2012). Portfolios as ‘learning companions’ for children and a means to support and assess language learning in the primary school. Education 3–13, 40(4), 401–416.
Klenowski, V. (2002). Developing portfolios for learning and assessment. Processes and principles. London: Routledge.
Lam, R. (2015). Feedback about self-regulation: Does it remain an ‘unfinished business’ in portfolio assessment of writing? TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 402–413.
Lee, I. (2011). Issues and challenges in teaching and learning EFL writing: The case of Hong Kong. In T. Cimasko & M. Reichelt (Eds.), Foreign language writing instruction: Principles and practices (pp. 118–137). Anderson, SC: Parlor Press.
Lee, I., & Wong, K. (2014). Bringing innovation to EFL writing: The case of a primary school in Hong Kong. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 23(1), 159–163.
Lo, Y. F. (2010). Implementing reflective portfolios for promoting autonomous learning among EFL college students in Taiwan. Language Teaching Research, 14(1), 77–95.
Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. London: University of Chicago Press.
Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43.
Nicol, D., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self-regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199–218.
Yancey, K. B. (1992). Portfolios in the writing classroom: A final reflection. In K. B. Yancey (Ed.), Portfolios in the writing classroom: An introduction (pp. 102–116). National Council of Teachers of English: Urbana, Ill.
Acknowledgements
The work described in this chapter was fully supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (HKBU 22400414).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Questions for Reflection
Questions for Reflection
-
1.
In what ways, if any, do you use features of SPA in your approach to teaching writing?
-
2.
In your work environment, what are the major facilitating factors that support the use of portfolio assessment in general or SPA in particular as one form of writing pedagogy?
-
3.
What challenges are there for your students in using self-reflection for writing portfolios?
-
4.
How would you adapt the procedures of SPA to make them more pedagogically suitable and/or practical for writing instruction in your teaching and learning context?
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lam, R. (2018). Promoting Self-Reflection in Writing: A Showcase Portfolio Approach. In: Burns, A., Siegel, J. (eds) International Perspectives on Teaching the Four Skills in ELT. International Perspectives on English Language Teaching. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63444-9_16
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63444-9_16
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-63443-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-63444-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)