NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Back to results
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1305125
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2021
Pages: 12
Abstractor: As Provided
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-0307-5079
EISSN: N/A
Available Date: N/A
The Whole Is More than the Sum of Its Parts -- Assessing Writing Using the Consensual Assessment Technique
Zahn, Daniela; Canton, Ursula; Boyd, Victoria; Hamilton, Laura; Mamo, Josianne; McKay, Jane; Proudfoot, Linda; Telfer, Dickson; Williams, Kim; Wilson, Colin
Studies in Higher Education, v46 n9 p1907-1918 2021
Evaluating the impact of Academic Literacies teaching (Lea and Street [1998. "Student Writing in Higher Education: An Academic Literacies Approach." "Studies in Higher Education" 23 (2): 157-72. doi:10.1080/03075079812331380364]) is difficult, as it involves gauging whether writers: (1) gain better understanding of what influences written social interactions; and (2) improve their ability to manipulate language to address readers. Self-report can assess the first; the second can only be evaluated by examining texts and their effect on readers. Texts are commonly assessed with rubrics-based tools focussing on textual features, but their insensitivity to communicative context and readers' perception makes these inappropriate for an Academic Literacies framework (Canton [2018. "'It's Hard to Define Good Writing, but I Recognise it When I See it': Can Consensus-Based Assessment Evaluate the Teaching of Writing?" "Journal of Academic Writing" 8 (1): 13-27. doi:10.18552/joaw.v8i1.450]). Consensual assessment used by Amabile ([1996. "Creativity in Context." Boulder, CL: Westview Press]) for creativity, offers a potential solution (Canton [2018. "'It's Hard to Define Good Writing, but I Recognise it When I See it': Can Consensus-Based Assessment Evaluate the Teaching of Writing?" "Journal of Academic Writing" 8 (1): 13-27. doi:10.18552/joaw.v8i1.450]). This paper presents a new instrument based on consensual assessment and empirically tests it. Intra-class Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) found moderate (Koo and Li [2016. "A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research." "Journal of Chiropractic Medicine" 15 (2): 155-63. doi:10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012]) to good (Cicchetti [1994. "Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment Instruments in Psychology." "Psychological Assessment" 6 (4): 284-90. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/50d7/f68422d0c0424674f6b235ac23be8300da38.pdf]) agreement among raters, which offers proof of concept for capturing the readers' perception of the complex interactions in writing.
Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research; Tests/Questionnaires
Education Level: Higher Education; Postsecondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Location: United Kingdom
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A
Author Affiliations: N/A