Writing Assessment WRITING & CRITICAL THINKING ASSESSMENT

WRITING ASSESSMENT

READERS: HONRS 150 INSTRUCTORS  Number of papers read: 41  Number of readers per paper: 2  Number of readers: 8 (Gary Hatch, Joyce Adams, Elizabeth Crowe, Lisa Johnson, Deirdre Paulsen, Kerry Spencer, Kylie Turley)

WRITING RUBRIC Paper #:Title:Course: Traits Fails StandardMeets StandardExceeds Standard Thesis and Support  Lacks a clear, recognizable assertion  Has a clear, recognizable assertion that provides focus and direction to the essay.  Shows recognition of opposing views, multiple perspectives, or location within scholarly literature Organization  Lacks clear, transparent organization. Characterized by lack of flow and coherence  Clear, transparent organization. Characterized by coherence and flow within sections. Transitions may be formulaic or mechanical.  Organized conceptually rather than formulaically. Consistent coherence and flow. Transitions move beyond the formulaic or mechanical. Rhetorical Knowledge  Suggests a lack of awareness of rhetorical situation  Demonstrates an awareness of subject, audience, occasion, and purpose. Stylistic choices are appropriate for rhetorical situation.  Consistent voice (style, tone, and point of view appropriate to subject, audience, occasion, and purpose). Use of Sources  Inappropriate sources that may be poorly integrated. May not consistently give appropriate credit.  Uses appropriate scholarly sources that are well integrated in the essay. Sources are properly introduced. Gives appropriate credit for sources.  Engages the sources. Demonstrates exceptional depth of research, such as primary research data, primary documents, or visual sources. Knowledge of Conventions  Inconsistent in following standards of EAE and citation style.  Generally follows accepted standards of edited American English and details of appropriate citation style.  Consistent in following standards of edited American English and details of appropriate citation style. Notes (only for elements of an essay that aren’t covered by the rubric):

Overall Scores by Standard 6 papers 19 papers 16 papers N = 41

Trait – Knowledge of Conventions 5 papers 22 papers 14 papers N = 41

Trait - Organization 5 papers 16 papers 20 papers N = 41

Trait – Rhetorical Knowledge 8 papers 16 papers 17 papers N = 41

Trait - Thesis 9 papers 21 papers 11 papers N = 41

Trait – Correct Use of Sources 7 papers 18 papers 16 papers N = 41

All Traits N = 41

Reader Agreement Agree1 Split2 Split Conventions41.46%51.22%7.32% Organization46.34%51.22%2.44% Rhetorical Knowledge39.02%53.66%7.32% Thesis46.34%48.78%4.88% Sources43.90%75.61%4.88% OVERALL43.41%56.10%5.37%

Reader Agreement

Critical Thinking Assessment

Critical Thinking Readers Bill Baker, Management Communications Ralph Brown, Sociology Valerie Hegstrom, Spanish & Portuguese John Lamb, General Education & Chemistry Hal Miller, Psychology Karen Pierotti, General Education Robert Seegmiller, Physiology & Developmental Biology

CRITICAL THINKING RUBRIC Trait Fails StandardMeets Standard Exceeds StandardNA Main idea/claim/ argument/hypothesis ● lacks clarity & focus ● fails to clarify ● articulates clearly at early point & once thereafter ● sustains the argument ● maintains focus on theme ● offers insightful, sophisticated point of view Evidence ● lacks sufficient evidence ● citations improperly applied/ inappropriate ● uses appropriate, sufficient, relevant evidence ● cites sources properly ● makes effective use of strong, well-placed, extensive, and relevant resources Logic ● uses weak, narrow, shallow argumentation ● does not make connections ● does not recognize assumptions, inferences ● uses faulty logic ●demonstrates reasonable development, discernible connections, coherent thinking ● recognizes assumptions/ inferences ● brings argument to a logical conclusion ● achieves strongly reasoned development ● provides analysis of assumptions or inferences ● makes strong connections ● provides compelling commentary or synthesis Alternative Points of View ● presents biased, unbalance, or narrow thinking ● reflects poor awareness of critical context ● presents counterarguments/ alternatives ● recognizes weakness(es) of own viewpoint ● shows sensitivity to other perspective ● locates argument within current critical discourse (context) ● reflects mature balance in point of view

Trait - Ideas Main idea/claim/argument/hypothesis 1 paper 2 papers 8 papers N = 11

Trait - Evidence 1 paper 7 papers 3 papers N = 11

Trait – Logic/Assumptions 1 paper 3 papers 7 papers N = 11

Trait – Alternative Points of View 1 paper 3 papers 7 papers N = 11

All Traits

All Traits: Writing & Critical Thinking WritingCritical Thinking N = 41N = 11

Critical Thinking & Writing Assessment In the future

Assessment via Final Exams Collecting final exam information during FGEC Reviews  A copy of a final exam  Student performance on final exam Purpose  Verify that the exams line up with the foundation documents and learning outcomes.

Assessment via Advanced Writing During Fall and Winter semesters, the GE office will collect about 150 papers from different departments who teach advanced writing. Paper Criteria 1. Single-author papers and some collaborative papers (when using collaborative papers we would need to know how the collaboration was set up for the collaborative groups.) 2. A paper using library resources that has real research associated with it 3. The paper should be about 8-15 pages long, double-spaced. 4. There should be no mark up on the papers by instructors 5. Preferably the paper should be in electronic format (Word program is preferred.)

Assessment via Advanced Writing Course Choice  GE office will collect papers from various departments –75% of the papers will come from different sections of courses in the English, Philosophy and Management Communication departments; –the other 25% will come from other departments that teach only one or two sections of a course, e.g. Chem 391. Choosing Papers  GE Office will request a chosen course’s class roll to randomly pick 5 juniors or seniors in the course  GE will provide release/permissions sheets to the chosen students so we have permission to use their papers for the study.

Assessment via Advanced Writing Submitting the Papers  Electronically to Karen Pierotti, Administrative Assistant, General Education Distribution of Papers to Assessment Committee  Student’s name, instructor’s name, and course will be eliminated from the paper  Paper will receive a number before it is given to the committee Assessment  During spring term, two committees will assess the papers for writing and critical thinking

GE Web Site  Statistical Results  Annotated copies of papers for both writing & critical thinking

Writing Assessment WRITING & CRITICAL THINKING ASSESSMENT