Jung, Hee-mo.Kim, Sung-hee The aim of this study is to analyze texts which freshmen write. To do such, applying some concepts, we divide them into skillful writers' and immature writers'. These concepts are t-unit, topic, topical structure, cohesive ties, and etc. Firstly, we gave 53 students' papers to three raters who are instructors in writing, and asked them use general and specific method of assessment. The score assigned by three raters were used to form two groups, one a “low score” group(N=15) and one a “high score” group (N=14). Then, we analyzed the texts by six features:number of t-units, sentence topics, cohesive ties, words, and asyntactic sentences. Using these raw data, we created nine variables for subsequent analysis:X1=number of t-units; X2=number of sentence topics;X3=number of words;X4=percentage of t-units sequential in parallel progression / -units;X5=percentage progression/t-units;X6=percentage parallel progression;X7=number asyntactic sentences / number of of of cohesive t-units of t-units in ties;X8=number sentences;X9=number of in extended of t-units / number of sentence topics. This experimental research was carried out through summing up each scores and computing correlation coefficient between the total scores and each variables, executed through contrasting low score group's with high score group's. The result of experiment is as follows;first, the rate was influenced by neither “number of cohesive ties (X7)” nor “number of asyntactic sentences / number of sentences (X8).” It results from the facts that freshmen, object to analyze, had awful proficiency in writing and unlike English, cohesive ties in Korean don't contribute to cohesion. Also, the assessment was not influenced by “percentage of the three types of topical progression.” As consequence of that, we don't conclude which progression is advisable. We should have considered qualitative compounding of three types of topical progression, not quantitative percentage of them. Finally, meaningful conclusion came from only two variables of nine ones. First, an average X3(number of words / number of t-units) of “high score” group is 17.33, and one of “low score” group is 14.30(t=2.54, p=.017). The difference between two groups of texts in X3 approaches statistical significance(p<.05). Second, X9 (number of t-unit / number of sentence topic) is one of the most obvious differences between the high score and low score(p<.05). An average X9 of high score group is 3.51, and one of low score group is 2.40(t=2.194, p=.037). We, from these results, conclude that volume of knowledge may influences assessment of writing;students who have much knowledge about a theme can get high marks.