SEWS Report
School of Business
2014-15
The purpose of this report is to inform deans, department heads, instructors and assessment
coordinators of the status of their undergraduate students’ writing and information literacy skills as
measured by the SEWS rubric. Results are presented by semester, department, and SEWS class. Brief
discussion of results and limitations follow.
For more about the SEWS program and the SEWS rubric, see here.
For more about information literacy, see here.
School: Business
Departments: Business, Management Leadership Studies
Spring 2015 SEWS Classes:
BUSN350x
BUSN440z
MLS304x
MLS440z-A0 (rubric not scored)
MLS440z-K0 (rubric not scored)
Table 1: Spring 2015 SEWS Rubric Results
SEWS Rubric
Criteria
Writing
Thesis
Analysis
Presentation
Grammar
Organization
Information
Literacy
Source
Selection
Source Use
Bibliography
Style
In-text
citation style
Avoiding
Plagiarism
Mean
All (n=27)
300SEWS
(n=15)
400SEWS
(n=12)
BUSN350x
(n=9)
BUSN440z
(n=12)
MLS304x
(n=6)
4.43
4.33
4.24
4.10
4.05
4.27
3.73
3.40
3.33
3.60
4.75
4.75
4.92
4.67
4.50
4.67
3.89
3.78
3.44
4.00
4.75
4.75
4.92
4.67
4.50
3.67
3.50
2.83
3.17
3.00
4.00
3.87
4.42
4.56
4.42
2.83
3.86
3.67
3.40
3.40
4.33
4.50
3.89
4.44
4.33
4.50
2.67
1.83
3.81
3.27
4.33
3.56
4.33
2.83
4.05
4.21
4.36
5.00
4.36
2.80
4.05 (81%)
3.65 (73%)
4.55
(90.1%)
4.12
(82.4%)
4.55
(90.1%)
2.91
(58.2%)
Benchmarks
Junior: 80% Senior: 85% Junior: 80% Senior: 85% Junior: 80%
Scale: 1=Unacceptable 2=Needs Substantial Improvement 3=Meets Requirements 4=Good 5=Excellent
Prepared by Philip Smith, Information Literacy Librarian
6.12.15
SEWS Report
School of Business
2014-15
Fall 2014 SEWS Classes:
BUSN350x
BUSN440z
MLS309x-K0
MLS440z-SV
Table 2: Fall 2014 SEWS Rubric Results
SEWS Rubric
Criteria
Writing
Thesis
Analysis
Presentation
Grammar
Organization
Information
Literacy
Source
Selection
Source Use
Bibliography
Style
In-text
citation style
Avoiding
Plagiarism
Mean
All
(n=66)
300SEWS
400SEWS
BUSN350x
BUSN440z
MLS309x
MLS440z
4.32
4.24
4.24
4.17
4.36
4.12
3.76
3.72
3.64
3.80
4.44
4.54
4.56
4.49
4.71
4.89
4.22
4.00
3.56
4.11
4.46
4.54
4.65
4.54
4.73
3.69
3.50
3.56
3.69
3.63
4.25
4.50
3.75
4.00
4.50
4.48
4.12
4.71
4.89
4.81
3.69
3.75
4.32
4.31
3.76
3.84
4.66
4.60
4.11
4.33
4.78
4.69
3.56
3.56
3.50
3.75
4.29
3.76
4.61
4.11
4.73
3.56
3.50
4.44
4.16
4.61
4.89
4.62
3.75
4.50
4.32
(86.4%)
3.87
(77.4%)
4.59
(91.8%)
4.31
(86.2%)
4.66
(93.2%)
3.62
(72.4%)
4.00
(80%)
Benchmarks
Junior:
Senior:
Junior:
Senior:
Junior:
Senior:
specified by
80%
85%
80%
85%
80%
85%
the QEP
plan
Scale: 1=Unacceptable 2=Needs Substantial Improvement 3=Meets Requirements 4=Good 5=Excellent
Prepared by Philip Smith, Information Literacy Librarian
6.12.15
SEWS Report
School of Business
2014-15
Table 3: Cumulative (Fall 2011-Spring 2015) SEWS Rubric Results for Arts & Humanities (including also
cumulative ENG210 scores as a point of comparison)
SEWS Rubric
Criteria
Writing
Thesis
Analysis
Presentation
Grammar
Organization
Information Literacy
Source Selection
Source Use
Bibliography Style
In-text citation style
Avoiding Plagiarism
Mean
ENG210 (n=598)
300SEWS (n=206) 400SEWS (n=138) 300-400SEWS
(n=344)
3.4
3.6
3.98
3.7
3.55
4.10
3.88
3.85
3.74
3.99
4.51
4.41
4.43
4.31
4.46
4.26
4.09
4.09
3.97
4.17
3.92
3.60
3.87
3.73
4.28
3.94
3.74
3.89
3.66
4.36
4.35
4.30
4.45
4.47
4.53
4.10
3.96
4.11
3.99
4.43
3.76 (75.2%)
3.91 (78.2%)
4.42 (88.4%)
4.12 (82.4%)
Benchmarks
Sophomore:
Junior: 80%
Senior: 85%
specified by the
75%
QEP plan
Scale: 1=Unacceptable 2=Needs Substantial Improvement 3=Meets Requirements 4=Good 5=Excellent
Discussion: Generally, you should expect to see scores rise by level; 400SEWS should be better than
300SEWS. ENG210 SEWS scores are also reported in table 3 for comparison. According to these results,
upper level students in the Business school do perform better at writing and information literacy than
200 level students, and there is a steady increase from the 300 and 400 levels. The benchmarks from the
QEP provide a target score but are only approximations.
Limitations: This is only one indicator of writing and information literacy. This measures one product,
the SEWS paper, not necessarily the process. Failing SEWS papers are not included (they must be redone). Take note of the number (n) when interpreting results; the higher the number the more
normalized the mean. These data are only useful and accurate if the SEWS rubric is completed by the
instructors. Some SEWS class instructors from the Business school did not complete the SEWS rubric so
there are gaps in the data and the results may not be generalizable to the population. Nonetheless, the
results that have been collected show students’ in the Business school are proficient in writing and
information literacy as measured by the SEWS rubric.
Prepared by Philip Smith, Information Literacy Librarian
6.12.15