Ling He
Department of English
Ling He
Ling He
Dr. Ling He is currently a senior lecturer in the Department of English at the University of Illinois Chicago (UIC), where she teaches academic writing to domestic and global undergraduate students enrolled in the First-Year Writing Program (FYWP). She specializes in English writing assessment with a focus on the validity of using standardized English tests to assess the English writing competence of language minority students in universities. Her current research interest is in classroom language assessment and the role such assessment plays in enhancing students’ success in learning and refining instructors’ practices of teaching academic writing. Dr. He has been actively conducting qualitative as well as quantitative studies on assessing university students’ academic writing competence; she has published research articles in top-tier peer-reviewed journals such as Language Testing and Assessing Writing and shared her practices of classroom assessment in FYWP at UIC through her publication in TESOL Connections. Dr. He received the Lecturer Distinguished Teaching Award for the First-Year Writing Program at UIC in both the 2018–2019 and 2024–2025 academic years in recognition of her “innovation in course design, care in lesson planning, excellence in student learning.”
Dr. Ling He received her Ph.D. degree in Teaching English as a Second Language at the University of British Columbia, Canada, where she had also earned a Master of Arts degree in Measurement, Evaluation, and Research Methodology. In addition, she received a Master of Education degree in English as a Second Language and Computer Education at the Memorial University of Newfoundland. Before joining UIC, Dr. He had years of experience teaching English at universities in the US, Canada, and China.
He is a 2024-25 Action Research Scholar.
Ling He
Ling He
Achieving Educational Equity and Promoting Inclusive Pedagogy: Exploring the Impact of Student-Centered Assessment on Engagement and Academic Writing Development
1
Abstract
While college English writing assessment has often been examined through either cognitive or social learning perspectives, it is relatively unexplored in writing studies how classroom practices, as socially situated contexts, shape learners’ cognitive engagement with writing tasks to support their academic writing development, particularly among culturally and linguistically diverse first-year university students. Firmly rooted in sociocultural theories, this study foregrounds the dynamic interplay between social, cultural, and cognitive processes in shaping academic writing competence within classroom-based formative assessment.
2
This study, situated in a first-year writing course, employed a mixed-methods design, integrating qualitative and quantitative data to investigate the impact of socially interactive assessment practices on the development of academic writing competence for genre-specific purposes and targeted audiences. Findings indicate that formative assessment designed as a student-centered and inclusive practice effectively supported students in accomplishing writing tasks by fostering interactions and collaboration with peers, the instructor, and through self-reflection. These results underscore the pedagogical value of embedding formative assessment within collaborative classroom environments and offer practical insights for improving first-year writing instruction and supporting diverse student populations in developing their academic writing competence for academic success.
Project Information
Project Background and Rationale
Background
This study was conducted in a credited 100-level first-year writing course required for all incoming freshmen at UIC, designed to support academic writing development. In addition to summative feedback, I integrate formative assessment into the curriculum to support learning, using multiple forms of formative feedback throughout the writing process. These classroom practices have been well received for providing specific and explicit feedback throughout the writing process, helping to improve the quality of students’ written work. However, I have come to realize that the formative assessment in my previous teaching offered less opportunity for knowledge retrieval. The gap was further complicated by the fact that many students taking my courses were unable to commit adequate time to practice after class as they had part-time jobs or juggled multiple courses. Realizing this gap motivated me to conduct this action research to investigate effective teaching practices during the class time to maximize student learning opportunities and outcomes.
Rationale
The rationale for this action research is bifold. First, this study echoes Vygotsky’s sociocultural learning theory (1978), which states that learning is mostly a social process and innately collaborative, whereby cognitive development occurs as a result of social interactions. Second, little research has explored how social culture and classroom practices jointly promote writers’ cognitive and behavioral engagement in developing academic writing skills. Such investigation is particularly important for writing classes with diverse student populations, like the first-year writing courses at UIC. My research is geared toward this direction focusing on the role of social interactions in promoting the student’s cognition and engagement to develop writing competence through effective scaffoldings in classrooms.
1
This study examines how formative assessment in a socially interactive classroom affects students’ engagement and development in academic writing. The primary research question is as follows.
Which assessment condition leads to better writing quality: receiving only instructor comments on drafts (Assessment A – teacher-centered) or receiving guided peer feedback, instructor follow-up comments, and self-assessment (Assessment B – student-centered)?
Findings/Insights
A total of 65 undergraduates taking ENGL160 in Spring 2024 and 2025 semesters participated in this study. A factorial design using a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure on the data revealed two main findings:
- The innovative assessment approach (Assessment B) produced a 5.74-point increase (12%) in mean total scores on students’ final writing project drafts compared to the prior approach (Assessment A).
- The assessment type affects the total score or statistically significant (p < .05), which is hoped to see.
These results suggest that while the assessment type affects the total score, the country does not, and there is no significant interaction between assessment and country.
Dissemination and Impact
The findings of this study have informed my teaching and actively involved myself in professional development through my engagement at different levels.
- At the individual level: This action research revealed how students truly engaged with my teaching, highlighting gaps between intended outcomes and performance. It prompted instructional refinement, greater responsiveness to learners, and reinforced my identity as a reflective, adaptive teacher. The findings also underscored the value of systematic inquiry, informing practice and shaping future research.
- At the department/program level: In 2025, I shared my UIC action research-informed teaching practices at two departmental events. At an April TeachWrite Series faculty panel, I discussed integrating critical reading into formative assessment for ENGL160. In November, I presented my UIC action research findings at a TeachWrite Series session, demonstrating how my teaching approaches were refined through classroom-based data.
- At the institutional level: The study’s findings were also shared across campus to promote teaching effectiveness by utilizing course data. On September 25, 2025, I presented the primary findings of my action research on the topic “Using Data-Informed Teaching to Drive Student Engagement and Assessment” during an Instructional Panel in a UIC CATE Seminar Series.
- At the state, national, and international levels: I presented a paper on promising preliminary results of this action research at the Conference on College Composition and Communication in Baltimore, Maryland on April 11,2025. The presentation was well received, sparking lively discussions. The complete findings will be presented at the American Association for Applied Linguistics in Chicago in April 2026.
Implications
The findings of this study directly enable significant advancements in three major components of my ENGL160 Academic Writing Instruction:
- First, I have enhanced cognitive development and motivation by making connections and activating the student’s prior knowledge, retrieving, revisiting and revising their work before, during, and after each writing project to deepen student ownership of learning.
- Second, I have incorporated formative assessment approach as a continuous, scaffolding process through frequent, timely, quality feedback, integrating peer feedback, instructor comments, and student self-assessment to build student confidence as well as increase their motivation in writing.
- Third, I have effectively used the class time building a collaborative learning environment to encourages students to co-construct knowledge to achieve their full cognitive potential through dialogic learning activities such as group-opinion share on the Discussion Board.
This study has significantly enhanced my understanding of learning and classroom dynamics, motivating my continued academic involvement within the department.
Through research trainings and social events, I have connected with diverse UIC action research scholars from different departments and colleges, creating potential for future collaboration based on shared interests.
References
Bloom, B.; Engelhart, M. Furst, E. Hill, W. Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company.
Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S., & Souberman, E. (Eds.). (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. L. S. Vygotsky. Harvard U Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambrage, Mass. L MIT.