초록 close

Until recently, scoring in writing test of Korean language tended to depend on ‘subjective intuition’, and, except for a few evaluation organization, it relied on two or three evaluation criteria such as ‘content and accuracy’, ‘content, format, expression’, or ‘content, format, organization’. Also, evaluation criteria and standard had significant variance, and allocation of scores on criteria has been obscure and subjective. As a result, there have been some doubts regarding reliability and validity of the test. However, just like there is no right answer to ‘what is the good writing?’ which has been debated among philosophers and researchers, there has been little structured discussion regarding ‘how could we define good writing?’ while researches so far has been focusing on analytic scale, criteria description, and reliability and validity, it is time to raise questions regarding which evaluation criteria have bigger impact through the evaluation process. In summary, metacognitive competence mattered much more than overall knowledge in language through the process of writing evaluation. However, considering that objective of Korean language education is to enhance communication capabilities as a second language, to make this evaluation more meaningful, we need to first compare holistic score in writing from native speakers and score in knowledge level of language, and understand the correlation. This could be a theoretical rationale to differentiate importance of various evaluation criteria.