---

"theories of writing that inform writing programs"

They present brief overviews of the major writing theories/pedagogies and then correlate the characteristics of writing theories with characteristics of portfolios: "we relate the theoretical side with portfolio theory in order to discover where the two kinds of theory are compatible and where they are at odds" (38).

The theories of writing are: formalism, expressivism, cognitivism, collaborative learning, social constructionism, and process. Of course, one could write a book on the intersection of any one of these theories and portfolio assessment. Hamp-Lyons and Condon do no more than provide thumbnail sketches for each of these theories.

• For Hamp-Lyons and Condon formalism, "AKA current-traditionalism," is associated with "the work of Corbett (1971), Hairston (1982) and Kinneavy (1971)" (38-39). They note that "for differing reasons, the proponents of portfolio assessment and the proponents of formalism might doubt the efficacy of portfolio assessment in formalist writing classes. On the one hand, college-level use of portfolios grew out of the process theory and expressivist traditions, out of the work of people like Elbow (1973) and Murray (1980). So far, those who promote portfolio assessment have done so in terms that appeal to co-practitioners, not those colleagues whose writing theory differs from the promoters' own" (39). This last point seems important not so much because it describes "formalism" but because it reminds us that the resistance to change may be grounded in radically different views of writing. And while post-process social constructionist thought now dominates our scholarly journals, current-traditionalism--or in fact more hybrid pedagogies that are current-traditionalist rhetorics AND process-based--is more common in first-year composition courses.

• "Expressivism emerged primarily from the writings of Murray (e.g. 1980), Britton (1982) and Elbow's (1973) Writing Without Teachers" (40). Hamp-Lyons and Condon believe that portfolio assessment could help expressivists show how their pedagogies move from personal writing to discourses that do in fact engage in public and academic writing activities (41).
• Cognitivism claims that "the cognitive processes involved in conceiving, organizing, and writing a text ... [are] usable as the basis for teaching writing" (42). Portfolios will "aid cognitivists as they establish the effectivenss of their theory" (43).
• Collaborative Learning "assumes that writing and knowledge develop among individuals, not in the individual" (44). According to Hamp-Lyons and Condon "when these [student] groups are working toward a portfolio assessment, the motivation to work harder and longer together in order to improve their written products--and thereby their grades--is even greater as a result of the fact that the moment of grading occurs at the end of the course" (44-45). I really find this claim hard to believe. In fact, for me the brevity of discussion about collaborative learning and portfolios seems to be a key downfall of this chapter or--perhaps more positively--suggests an area for further research.
• Social Constructionism "emerges from the later work of Bruffee (1973), as well as from the writings of Bizzell (e.g. 1986), Swales (e.g. 1990) and Rotry (1982)" (46). I'm going to use a long quotation for Hamp-Lyons and Condon's take on the intersection of portfolio assessment and social constructionist writing theory. This quotation seems to work as an important point of entry for talking further about social constructionist writing theory, collaborative learning and portfolio assessment:

"This emphasis on community, on creating knowledge collaboratively, puts the social constructionist writing class at odds with the institutional constraints of grading, creating the same dilemma here that teachers who employ collaborative learning experience. And portfolios help solve the problems for social constructionists in much the same way they do in collaborative learning classes. That is, no matter how extensively a class collaborates, how dominant the concept of shared creation of knowledge, the portfolio can act as the repository of each learner's work, each individual's progress in acquiring the forms, strategies, and tactics of academic discourse(s). Thus, out of extensive interaction and collaboration comes a collection of writing that each learner can identify as his or her own and that the teacher can use as the basis for assigning a course grade" (47).