Paradigms and pedagogy: revisiting D'Arcy's critique of the teaching and the assessment of writing

This paper draws on research funded by the Bedford Charity (Harpur Trust) in which the narrative writing of reluctant writers in 10 Lower Schools (pupils aged 5–9) was levelled using, firstly, the Assessment of Pupil Progress (APP) criteria used in English primary and secondary schools and, secondly, criteria devised by the researcher. The latter were specifically designed for the assessment of narrative writing, whereas the APP criteria are generic. Findings resonate with the contrasting paradigms critiqued in D’Arcy’s paper on the teaching and assessment of writing (D’Arcy 1999). Evidence suggests that levels assigned to individual texts can vary between one assessment criteria and another. In many cases, pupils achieved higher levels against criteria designed to evaluate creativity and the ability to tell a story. Appropriate assessment criteria are critical not only to summative evaluations but also to the planning of future teaching and learning. However, it is suggested that the dominant assessment paradigm and concomitant approaches to the pedagogy of writing in England have been influenced by discourses over which teachers have had little control. However, the future for the teaching and assessment of writing necessitates a paradigmatic shift. A retrospective of D’Arcy’s paper may provide teachers and academics with the impetus for change.