The objectives of this paper are to identify the metadiscourse devices used by English learners at the different levels of language acquisition established by the Common European Framework of Reference and to categorise them to facilitate the assessment and learning of textual and interpersonal devices. First, a learner corpus of essays written by English learners was compiled. Then, the metadiscourse devices were classified in different levels and categories. The results showed the lists and frequencies of metadiscourse devices. The examples aim to make additional and explicit connections between levels of language proficiency and assessment of metadiscourse devices. It can be stated, as a conclusion, that metadiscourse devices portray specific ways of argumentation in essay writing in different levels of EFL proficiency.

Existing writing self-efficacy instruments have assessed the concept through mechanical and process features of writing to the neglect of the influence of situated context. The purpose of this study was to develop and test the Situated Academic Writing Self-Efficacy Scale (SAWSES) based on Bandura’s self-efficacy theory and a model of socially constructed writing. A sequential multimethod approach constituted the methods. A Delphi panel of 15 expert scholars conducted a theoretical evaluation of the scale and the items were piloted with 20 nursing undergraduate students using cognitive interviews. The scale was validated in two studies with independent samples of 255 nursing students (Study 1), and in an interdisciplinary sample of undergraduate (N = 543) and graduate students (N = 264) (Study 2). The three identified factors present a structure to the questionnaire which is developmental and has the potential to detect gaps in student self-assessed ability to master various facets of disciplinary writing: 1) Writing-Essentials – synthesis, emotional control, language; 2) Relational-Reflective – relationship building with writing facilitators (teachers, academic sources) and the self through reflection; and 3) Creative Identity – exploring gaps in student achievement of transformative writing (creativity, voice, and disciplinary identity), where confidence can help identify the most engaged writers.

This study examines the extent to which TOEIC Writing test scores relate to an external criterion: evaluations by linguistic laypersons of the functional adequacy of writing in the international workplace. Test-taker responses to two representative tasks from the TOEIC Writing test (e-mail requests, opinion surveys) were adapted for workplace role-play scenarios that laypersons read and evaluated in an online survey. After reading each role-play scenario, laypersons evaluated the text produced by their imagined interlocutor using functional adequacy scale items (comprehensibility, content adequacy, effectiveness, support and coherence). Overall functional adequacy evaluations were obtained by averaging the ratings for each of the two tasks. Layperson ratings of functional adequacy were strongly correlated with TOEIC Writing test scores (r = 0.76). Results suggested that test-takers’ writing performance is likely to be perceived as functionally adequate for test scores at which important decisions are typically made. Study results are discussed in terms of their implications for claims about the generalizability of TOEIC Writing test score interpretations with respect to those made in the international workplace, as well as the potential benefits, challenges, and limitations involved in this approach to validation.

English writing is a key competence for higher education success. However, research on the assessment of writing skills in English as a foreign language in European upper secondary education (i.e. beyond year 9) remains scarce. The Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) describes language proficiency on a scale of six ascending levels (A1-C2). For writing skills at the end of secondary education in Europe, the common standard is vantage level B2. In this study, experts from Germany and Switzerland linked upper secondary students’ writing profiles elicited in a constructed response test (integrated and independent essays from the TOEFL iBT®) to CEFR levels. Standard setting methodology (a modified examinee paper selection/performance profile approach) was used to establish the linkages. The study reports the methodology and procedure of the standard setting process and discusses the procedural and internal validity of resulting cut scores. It also applies the cut scores to a large sample of upper secondary students in Germany and Switzerland to gain evidence for external and consequential validity.

Numerous studies have examined the relationship between lexical features of students’ compositions and judgements of text quality. However, the degree to which teachers’ judgements are influenced by the quality of vocabulary in students’ essays with regard to their assessment of other textual characteristics is relatively unexplored. This experimental study investigates the influence of lexical features on teachers’ judgements of English as a second language (ESL) argumentative essays. Using analytic and holistic rating scales, English pre-service teachers (N = 37) in Switzerland assessed four essays of different proficiency levels in which the levels of lexical diversity and sophistication had been experimentally varied. Coh-Metrix software was used to manipulate the level of lexical diversity, as measured by MTLD and D, and the Tool for the Automatic Analysis of Lexical Sophistication (TAALES) software was used to obtain differing levels of lexical sophistication, as measured by word range. The results suggested that texts with greater lexical diversity and sophistication were assessed more positively concerning their overall quality as well as the analytic criteria ‘grammar’ and ‘frame of essay’. The implications of this study for classroom practice and teacher education are discussed.