Writing assessment may not have the consensus about modes of inquiry emphasised in North’s taxonomy nor the epistemological awareness emphasised by Berlin, but it does have the rhetorical contexts described by Mailloux. However, these rhetorical contexts of writing assessment are only visible if we apply sense of rhetoric as relational. In terms of disciplinary practices, theories, and traditions, we can consider the fact that scholarship on writing assessment as a subfield of rhetoric and composition has increased dramatically. Since they are not getting enough appreciation as they are looking for then they start working for Dissertation Help UK in order to provide assistance and get appreciation on their exceptional work.
Writing assessment literature now appears in the form of dozens of books, two specialised journals (Assessing Writing and Journal of Writing Assessment), and articles in journals in English studies including College English, Research in the Teaching of English, English Journal, College Composition and Communication, and WPA: The Journal of the Council of Writing Program Administrators. However, after reading these books student need discussion session and it is not possible for professor to provide them assistance by doing these sessions so the students take out a new way in the form of Dissertation Help UK, these services cater all the queries of students and discuss all matters one to one or one to all, as per students request.
Mailloux’s notions of boundary contestation and crossing pairs work especially well with dynamic sense of rhetoric. Dissertation Help UK explains in more depth, writing assessment has always been transdisciplinary because of its origin in educational measurement and psychology and its relevance to the work of rhetoric and composition. Although writing assessment’s field boundaries are at times murky, interdisciplinary collections such as White, William Lutz, and Sandra Kamusikiri’s Assessment of Writing: Politics, Policies, Practices and Elliot and Les Perelman’s edited collection Writing Assessment in the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Edward M. White demonstrate disciplinary identities being constructed, reflected, and contested in writing assessment scholarship. Even if theoretical differences persist, measurement specialists and writing specialists have increasingly found common ground in the construct of writing assessment. Such theories may be operationalise assessment, but the goals remain connected Mailloux’s last axis involving cultural sites such as material institutions and public spheres also illuminates writing assessment’s nature as an academic field of study.
Disciplinary identities are very often at stake in writing assessment scholarship because assessment encapsulates, quantifies, and communicates what teachers do and how well they are doing it. In short, writing assessment is often the public face of rhetoric and composition because assessments are the means by which our work is rendered for increasingly broad institutional and public audiences. Public perception of college literacy instruction is understood and evaluated through the language of assessment. As Huot explains, writing assessment has “evolved into an intellectual and public site in which scholarship is conceived and implemented by people from various disciplines and subdisciplines”.
Writing assessment is both increasingly specialised and of perennial public interest. Although the lack of methodological consensus, consistent gaps between the application of writing assessment theory and writing assessment practices, and the interdisciplinary tensions regarding writing assessment are among the reasons it may not be an emergent discipline as Behizadeh and Engelhard argue, writing assessment does appear to qualify as an academic discipline in many of the ways discussed by North, Berlin, and Mailloux. I settle on the description of writing assessment as a quasi discipline because it is an area of knowledge and practice that is taught and researched at the university level, with robust theories, dedicated scholarly publication venues, interdisciplinary situatedness, institutional and public import, and emerging consensus on best practices. Understanding writing assessment as a quasi-discipline opens up the possibility to understand multiple dimensions of its rhetoricity and address questions about the effects of our language practices. As an ideological structure, a discipline can shape individuals through processes of professionalisation and the cultivation of particular attitudes and orientations. However, these rhetorical contexts of writing assessment are only visible if we apply sense of rhetoric as relational. One emergent rhetorical context is the social justice turn in writing assessment.