This new part of the English Study design may have been well intentioned but really fails to provide an opportunity to teach quality writing. The concept here was to focus on the writing process and use a series of mentor texts within different frameworks to inspire students’ own work. Sounds ok in theory although a little too much like context the similarity here becomes more pronounced with the fact that students can choose four purposes of writing (to express, to explain, to persuade and to reflect) this creates a lot of possibilities for student work. All in all, this is still not necessarily the issue but then students need to complete two pieces for the School Assessed course work and the crafting text section will also be included in the exam. This is where the intention falls apart.

Too many options to actually teach writing craft

I feel like a lot of these study designs are developed by people without any creative interest or actual knowledge of writing as there is hardly time to really teach quality craft. Of course, a good teacher will unpack the structure and style of the mentor texts, but students may still be choosing to write a different form of piece drawing on the ideas for inspiration. It is impossible to teach every style effectively in such a crowded assessment calendar. The answer is the best we do lip service to a few.

The only way to really build any sense of craft is through editing, feedback, peer revisions and redraft which was of course the main idea however this is another skill which needs to be taught. An important one but something that a lot of students find difficult and often fail to engage in. In addition, the ability to edit their work effectively still requires a strong understanding of the style and craft. Something that all those options mean it is impossible to achieve even if students have developed enough understanding of their chosen form do, they really process insight to critique another student’s work that is completely different. This can be something some teachers would struggle with if they have limited experience with scripts, poems, podcasts and so on. The scope is simply too board.

Teaching two year 11 classes and tutoring a year 12 student at the same time really highlighted these issues. The inability to work one on one with students in class for any significant length of time and the need to spread my instruction over so many different forms meant it was impossible to cover the nuance of writing. Meanwhile working in a tutoring context, we were able to quickly narrow down the style of his two pieces, plan them out, draft, redraft and really pull apart all the stylistic elements of his writing. It is something I tried to bring into the classroom but in no way was it as effective and I will be refining things next year to try to bridge this gap to something I feel comfortable with but it is never going to be the same.

The assessment problem

The idea of putting this on the exam is for me complete counterproductive based on the theory behind the section of the study design. It means one of two things. Students will have developed their pieces throughout the year as expected and they will memorise them for the exam, which is going to lead to a lot of work that has limited links to the stimulus material and reads like something that is prepared. This has been frowned upon in past study designs so it will be interesting to see if the mindset changes. Alternatively, schools may really ditch the idea of the writing process and focus on implementing SACs that mimic the exam and ask students to respond on the spot in the exam. This may of course lead to better exam outcomes, but it hardly works to emphasis the writing process. Either way by putting it on the exam it creates issues for assessors and undermines the concept.

The other part of the assessment problem is of course the same situation we had with context, the task requires teachers to compare multiple diverse types of writing and assign grades. This meant that often narrative and other creative forms were the big loses firstly because they are often harder to write well really show where students don’t have a proper understanding of the form but also, they are often more subjective. Considering English marking is always subjective it adds a huge layer of complexity putting pressure on moderation practices but unless teachers are going to cross mark entire cohorts of hundreds of students there is going to be discrepancies. Something that like context while no doubt be a problem with the exam. Afterall, it is impossible to remove the subjective from marking creative in the same way we approach informative pieces of writing.

Writing an answer to this dilemma

Realistically, after teaching crafting texts this year for the first time the answer is going to be for teachers to narrow their focus and student choice. Clearly identifying a few different text styles that work well with the framework and mentor texts. Teach the options and really go to town on the nuances and elements of these specific styles of writing. Almost enforcing students to work within the restrictions we impose on the area of study so that they can develop a greater knowledge of specific writing craft which they can in turn implement in the review and peer marking process.

In terms of assessment style, the solution is to have students prepare and workshop several pieces using the SAC as part of this process. However, the key will be to continually challenge and build their ability to make these fit unseen stimuli through at least one of the SACs and exam revision. This way students have practiced this flexibility and have a polished piece they can attempt to recreate on the exam rather than something extremely rough. Although prepared essays and alike have been critised in many past examiners reports they still tend to score okay.

Final thought

All in all, as a writer plugging away on my blog and trying to write a few short stories I love the aim of crafting text. I just don’t see it working terribly well and would not be suprised if it goes the same way as context.