GENERAL EDUCATION LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR WRITING MTSU ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

advertisement
GENERAL EDUCATION LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR WRITING
MTSU ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FINAL DATA ANALYSIS for SPRING 2009
ASSESSMENT RUBRIC RESULTS
from May, 2009 EVALUATION SESSION
Drafted by: Dr. Allison D. Smith, adsmith@mtsu.edu
CRITERIA:
Less than
Adequate
(D or F
level)1
Adequate
(C level)
More than
Adequate
(B or A level)
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
67/198=33.8%
120/198=60.6%
11/198=5.6%
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
65/198=32.8%
125/198=63.1%
8/198=4.0%
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
83/198=41.9%
106/198=53.5%
9/198=4.5%
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
54/198=27.3%
128/198=64.6%
16/198=8.1%
The student writer is able to distill a primary
argument into a single, compelling statement.
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.71
SD: 0.48
Inter-rater reliability: 0.65
The student writer gives a clear purpose and
audience.
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.71
SD: 0.46
Inter-rater reliability: 0.61
The student writer is able to order major points in
a reasonable and convincing manner based on
primary argument.
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.63
SD: 0.46
Inter-rater reliability: 0.46
The student writer is able to develop his/her ideas
using appropriate rhetorical patterns (e.g.,
narration, example, comparison/contrast,
classification, cause/effect, definition).
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.81
SD: 0.48
Inter-rater reliability: 0.60
The student writer is able to manage and
coordinate basic information gathered from
multiple secondary sources.
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.64
SD: 0.48
Inter-rater reliability: 0.59
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
81/198=40.9%
108/198=54.5%
9/198=4.5%
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
71/198=35.9%
117/198=59.1%
10/198=5.0%
Less than
Adequate (1)
Adequate (2)
More than
Adequate (3)
46/198=23.2%
151/198=76.3%
1/198=0.5%
The student writer is able to employ correct
diction, syntax, usage, grammar, and mechanics.
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.70
SD: 0.46
Inter-rater reliability: 0.49
The student writer has written a minimum of
1,000 words or four typed pages at 250 words per
page (please estimate).
Sample rating pool: 99 X 2 ratings each
Mean rating: 1.77
SD: 0.39
Inter-rater reliability: 0.75
Scores used (Less than Adequate, Adequate, and More than Adequate) are anchored by the department’s
grading guidelines for A-F grades on 1010 and 1020 papers.
1
DATA COLLECTION:

Student anonymity

Faculty anonymity

Representative sample
(100 students in spring 09 English 1020/only 99 essays could be used due to clerical
copying error):

Gender:
F
M
Not specified

Age:
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
29
35
42
Not specified



50.00% (50)
49.00% (49)
1.00% (1)
5.00% (5)
61.00% (61)
16.00% (16)
5.00% (5)
3.00% (3)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
2.00% (2)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
1.00% (1)
Ethnicity:
American Indian
Black, not of Hispanic Origin
Hispanic
Not Specified
White, not of Hispanic Origin
1.00% (1)
16.00% (16)
2.00% (2)
1.00% (1)
80.00% (80)
Student Classification:
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
78.00% (78)
17.00% (17)
2.00% (2)
3.00% (3)
Faculty Rank:
Graduate Teaching Assistant
Adjunct
Full-Time Temp (FTT) Instructor
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
Full Professor
18.00% (18)
20.00% (20)
33.00% (33)
13.00% (13)
9.00% (9)
9.00% (6)
Final 1020 Grades for Selected Students in Study:
Grade Given by 1020 Teacher:
A
31% (31)
B+
10% (10)
B
29% (29)
B7% (7)
-------------------------------------------------- 77% (77) More Than Adequate
C+
6% (6)
C
10% (10)
C3% (3)
-------------------------------------------------- 19% (19) Adequate
F
3% (3)
N
0% (0)
-------------------------------------------------- 3% (3) Less Than Adequate
Download