Attitudinal Aspects Of Assessing Student Writing

For many instructors, regardless of academic field, evaluating student writing is a thankless task, one that requires a seemingly endless amount of time. Consequently, attitudes regarding assessment may be less than positive. This paper explores faculty attitudinal aspects of grading student writing by examining the results of a survey administered to engineering technology faculty at Oregon Institute of Technology, identifying concerns, and offering suggestions. Introduction Grading: it's the bane of many a teacher's existence. After a full day of teaching classes, organizing labs, answering student queries, attending committee meetings, and--just for good measure--working on a professional paper, that stack of student papers looms large at the edge of the desk. Less than joyous epithets arise at the thought of tackling this hours-long project. Furthermore, the excitement and enthusiasm of classroom interaction may pale when an instructor faces the written products of a student's thoughts. If, however, we can recognize and adjust our attitudes towards grading, that enthusiasm might re-emerge. This paper explains the results of a writing assessment attitude survey conducted at Oregon Institute of Technology, identifies areas of concern, and offers suggestions for improvement. The Survey In informal corridor and cafeteria conversation, faculty are not shy about expressing their discontent regarding student writing. As a communications instructor who has frequent contact with technical faculty, I decided to explore these complaints via a survey, in hopes of pinpointing areas of concern and offering suggestions that would help alleviate the frustration of technical faculty as they deal with the paper load. All 43 full-time engineering technology faculty were sent the "Writing Assessment Attitude Survey" (Appendix A), requesting demographic information, course data, and personal opinions on a variety of issues related to evaluating student writing. Of that number, 46.5% (20) were returned. Not all respondents, however, answered all questions, and not all included a sample of graded student writing. Some of the questions also required multiple responses. Demographics Instructors queried represent all engineering technology programs offered at OIT (civil/surveying, mechanical/manufacturing, laser-optics, electronics, computer hardware and P ge 284.1 software). Their teaching experience totals a daunting 259 years, ranging from less than one year to 32 years. Of that aggregate, 169 years are at OIT, with service ranging from less than one year to 30 years. Respondents are fairly equally distributed in rank; six are assistant professors, eight associate, and six full. Twelve are tenured, seven are on tenure track, and one is on annual contract. Course Data The survey asked faculty to select one of the courses they were currently teaching and respond to all questions based on that course. Courses were either lecture, lab, or a combination, and ranged from freshman to senior level, with a total enrollment of 278 students. In regards to writing frequency, half of the instructors indicated that students wrote less than once a week; six asked their students to write once a week, and only one required writing more than three times a week. Students wrote a variety of papers, as indicated by Table 1 below. Most instructors apparently preferred assigning longer papers, requiring some sort of data-gathering, to shorter pieces. Table 1. Types of writing assigned Type of document Raw number Percentage of document types Letters 3 15 Memos 2 10 Technical reports 10 50 Lab reports 8 40 Term papers* 4 20 Field notes 2 10 Specifications 2 10 Essay exams 2 10 Other** 2 10 * Research-based ** Includes math-based homework, design reports All respondents graded all of the work their students submitted and used a variety of methods, indicated in Table 2. Page 284.2 Table 2. Assessment methodologies Method Raw number Percentage of methods used Circle errors 15 75 Revise/edit 8 40 Comments in margin 16 80 Comments at end 15 75 Seek outside input 1 5 Peer review 2 10 Other* 1 5 * Includes review with student All of the respondents, except two, have either maintained or increased the amount of writing they assign. They offer the following rationales for their writing assignments: "It is important and nothing works like practicing." "Students need to know how to write concise, well structured documents." "It is so important for the students to write so I continue to assign it." "Because employers say our graduates are poor writers." "The students need more experience in writing, it is a critical skill!" "[I] think it's important for all students." "I find it a valuable experience for students." Faculty exhibit a range of attitudes (Table 3) when faced with a stack of papers to assess.