Computers and Composition

25 articles
Year: Topic: Clear
Export:
assessment ×

September 2025

  1. Academic research AND (Google OR Reddit): A librarian-faculty collaboration to improve student source engagement
    Abstract

    Effective source use is a critical skill for first-year writing students because it prepares them for academic, professional, and civic engagement; however, existing research demonstrates that selecting appropriate sources and engaging them insightfully remains a significant challenge. While students struggle with the combined pressures to read, evaluate, and synthesize scholarly sources, we argue that online media including news articles, opinion pieces, and social media posts are a potent but underutilized resource for building students’ competence and confidence with source use. In this article, we present the methods that we have collaboratively developed as an instruction librarian and a first-year writing instructor to propose a new approach to teaching undergraduate research using online media. We detail strategies for teaching advanced search skills using Google and social media platforms like Reddit and X (formerly Twitter), as well as a “reception study” writing assignment that requires students to develop source evaluation and synthesis skills for engaging these online sources. The success of our module highlights that enabling students to build their research skills in the context of these more familiar source formats can lead them to an enriched understanding of the research process—including formulating an authentic research inquiry and engaging meaningfully with real audiences—while also building their skills in accessing, evaluating, and synthesizing diverse sources. Furthermore, by developing research skills in the context of social media platforms and online popular media sources, students gain a practical sense of the relevance of academic research skills to their daily research habits.

    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102949

June 2025

  1. Peer and AI Review + Reflection (PAIRR): A human-centered approach to formative assessment
    Abstract

    • AI can offer useful writing feedback when used combined with peer review. • AI and peer responses were often similar and mutually reinforcing. • When AI and peer responses differed, the perspectives were often complementary. • Evaluating AI feedback fostered student agency and AI literacy. Cycles of drafting and revising are crucial for student writers' growth, and formative assessment plays an important role. However, many teachers lack the time or resources to provide feedback on drafts. While research suggests that AI feedback is high enough quality to be used for draft feedback, especially when assignment-specific criteria are used (Steiss et al., 2024), it must be used in a human-centered process. AI has the potential to reduce educational equity gaps in writing support (Warschauer et al., 2023), but when narrowly implemented, technologies can deepen divides (Stornaiuolo, et al., 2023). Peer and AI Review + Reflection (PAIRR) combines peer review best practices with AI review in an approach that emphasizes student agency and reflection. Using a mixed methods approach, this study examined student perceptions of AI utility in the context of peer review. Results indicate that AI tools offer useful feedback when combined with peer review. Students found the similarity between AI and peer feedback reassuring, while also valuing their complementary perspectives. Moreover, by evaluating AI outputs, students developed AI literacy, gaining familiarity with AI feedback's affordances and limitations while learning ethical ways to use AI in their writing processes.

    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102921

March 2025

  1. Cultivating networked literacy: Second language writers and the development of online source evaluation strategies
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102914

December 2024

  1. Transformative transmediation: Eliciting student self-evaluation of academic writing through the video essay assignment
    Abstract

    • The informality of video essay narration engendered ideation in drafting and script writing for students. • Students felt more responsible and personally invested in their arguments when they narrated and dramatized them in the video making process. • While students admitted that they tended to “gloss over” written drafts when revising, the video making process prompted students to be more self-motivated in the revising process, enabling them to evaluate and develop their arguments. • Unlike oral presentations, as students viewed their video essays as audience members, they could more clearly discern if their arguments lacked coherence or depth. This self-evaluation resulted in students taking the initiative to revise their final written assignments. Although multimodal assignments have increasingly been incorporated into academic writing curricula, research into their impact on student writing remains limited. This study, conducted at a Singaporean university, required students to transform a written essay draft into a video essay and then revise their draft into a written essay assignment. By comparing students’ initial drafts and their final submissions, and analysing interviews and reflective journals, we identified significant benefits stemming from the transmediation between written and multimodal text. Specifically, we found that 1) transmediation enabled students to self-evaluate their writing as they repeatedly listened to their voiceovers, found concrete visuals to illustrate their ideas, and edited their work to fit the concise video format; 2) students broke with habitual, less useful revision practices as they were freed from the conventional and grammatical concerns of written academic text and narrated their arguments colloquially in their voiceovers; 3) students exhibited an improved awareness of audience and medium; and 4) students were more enthusiastic with the course due to the novelty of the multimodal assignment. These findings suggest that including a video essay assignment during the drafting process can serve as an effective tool in advancing students’ abilities to evaluate their own academic writing.

    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102891
  2. Exploring the interaction among writing fluency, writing processes, and external resource access in second language writing assessment
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102888

September 2024

  1. The impact of google-drive e-portfolio assessment on EFL learners’ attitudes and emotions
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102866

March 2024

  1. Writing with generative AI and human-machine teaming: Insights and recommendations from faculty and students
    Abstract

    We share our experiences working with large-language model generative AI for a full semester in a professional writing course, integrating it into all projects. We discuss how we adapted our teaching, learning, and writing to using (or purposefully not using) AI. Issues we discuss include balancing integration of AI to avoid potential overreliance, the importance of centering authorial agency and decision-making, negotiating grading and evaluation, the benefits and drawbacks of AI throughout the writing process, and the relationships we build or could build with AI. We close with recommendations for faculty and students.

    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102833

June 2019

  1. The Community of Inquiry Survey: An Assessment Instrument for Online Writing Courses
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.001
  2. From Opportunities to Outcomes: The Wikipedia-Based Writing Assignment
    Abstract

    Over the past decade, compositionists have made a number of claims about opportunities presented by Wikipedia for teaching writing. The encyclopedia allows for transparent observation of concepts and skills related to process, research, collaboration, and rhetoric. Beyond observation, Wikipedia allows for public writing with an authentic audience, which often results in increased motivation. Much of this early research has dealt in opportunities and possibilities: speculation about how Wikipedia sponsors particular pedagogies and learning outcomes, and there remains a need for more empirical evidence. This article presents select data from a recent large-scale study conducted by the Wiki Education Foundation that begins to meet this need, and that confirms and extends research from the computers and writing community. Key findings from this research include positive evaluations of Wikipedia-based assignments in general, as well as positive evaluations concerning the capacity of Wikipedia-based assignments to teach critical thinking skills, source evaluation and research, public writing, literature review and synthesis, and peer review. This study also adds significantly to our field's knowledge of how contextual factors related to the course and assignment affect students’ evaluation of a Wikipedia-based assignment. Finally, this article suggests key recommendations for teaching with Wikipedia based on these findings.

    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2019.01.008

December 2016

  1. A Critical Interpretative Synthesis: The Integration of Automated Writing Evaluation into Classroom Writing Instruction
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2016.05.001

December 2015

  1. Computerized Writing Assessment Technology: Business Law Students Weigh in on its Use in the College Classroom for Developing Workplace-ready Writing
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2015.09.005

March 2015

  1. Issues in transitioning from the traditional blue-book to computer-based writing assessment
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2015.01.006

March 2014

  1. A Programmatic Ecology of Assessment: Using a Common Rubric to Evaluate Multimodal Processes and Artifacts
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2013.12.005
  2. The National Writing Project's Multimodal Assessment Project: Development of a framework for thinking about multimodal composing
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2013.12.004
  3. The Weight of Curious Space: Rhetorical Events, Hackerspace, and Emergent Multimodal Assessment
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2013.12.002

March 2013

  1. Valuing the Resources of Infrastructure: Beyond From-Scratch and Off-the-Shelf Technology Options for Electronic Portfolio Assessment in First-Year Writing
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2012.12.001

June 2012

  1. Integrating Assessment and Instruction: Using Student-Generated Grading Criteria to Evaluate Multimodal Digital Projects
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2012.04.002

June 2011

  1. Technology-Mediated Writing Assessments: Principles and Processes
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2011.04.007
  2. New Spaces and Old Places: An Analysis of Writing Assessment Software
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2011.04.004

March 2011

  1. Networked Assessment
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2010.09.007

March 2004

  1. Looking for sources of coherence in a fragmented world: Notes toward a new assessment design
    doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2003.08.024

January 1996

  1. Computers and assessment: Understanding two technologies
    doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(96)90012-2

November 1992

  1. NCTE guidelines for review and evaluation of english language arts software
    doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(06)80015-0

April 1992

  1. Evaluating placement exams with a structured decision system
    doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(05)80019-2

November 1990

  1. Computers and writing assessment: A preliminary view
    doi:10.1016/s8755-4615(05)80004-0