Written Communication (2013-2014)

Analysis of Results for Written Communication

The Committee blind read more than two hundred (n=229) artifacts from across the campus and the following was tabulated for the results:

Statistical Data

 Line of Reasoning
(Critical Thinking)
Organization and Structure
(Critical Thinking)
ContentLanguage and Grammar
Valid (n)229229229229
Missing0000
Mean2.71612.69142.77552.8536
Mode2.502.502.803.00
Mode3.003.003.003.00
Std Deviation .65779.63993.69551.62962
Minimum1.001.001.001.00
Maximum4.004.004.004.00

 

Initial statistics reveal that students are exhibiting difficulty with the two higher cognitive skills required for writing: Line of Reasoning and Organization and Structure. This suggests students are struggling to sustain a coherent argument throughout the length of their papers and therefore may be having difficulty synthesizing materials into their thought processes.

Committee members also reported: (1) paper quality seems directly tied to the coherency of the assignment—many papers that were found problematic were done in response to assignments that were vague or nebulously worded; (2) there seemed to be varying standards of “quality” information needed for assignments and that the usage of poor information coincided with uneven expectations for writing performance.

Data was reported back to departments and each department was left to formulate responses to the educational quality assessment in this activity. Their responses are recorded individually within their matrices (see below).

In addition, the head of the freshman composition program has started work to better address both in all ENG 100 and 100T courses starting with mandatory embedded tutoring for the “T” designated courses.

Submitted by Seri I. Luangphinith
May 2014
Chair of Assessment Support Committee (AY 2013-2014)
Accreditation Liaison Officer

Program Specific Reports