The Communication Coefficient Method: A New Faculty Grading Tool Designed to Help Engineering Students Improve Their Technical Communication

Edward Londner MIT Lincoln Laboratory ; Matthew Dabkowski United States Military Academy ; Ian Kloo United States Military Academy ; J. D. Caddell

Abstract

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Introduction:</b> Engineering students benefit from understanding the role of technical communication in the professional workplace. This article examines the communication coefficient (CC), a new method for grading student technical communication intended to help students better understand this role. Its goal is to encourage students to treat their communication with the same importance that it has in the professional workplace. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">About the case:</b> The core philosophy of the CC method is that audiences perceive technical work more positively when it is communicated well and more negatively when it is not. The method captures this philosophy mathematically: students’ grades result from multiplying the points earned for technical content by a number—the coefficient—representing how well they communicated that content. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Situating the case:</b> The CC method is rooted in established principles, such as holistic grading and the separate yet simultaneous consideration of content and communication. It is novel in how it combines these principles into a grading technique. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Approach:</b> The CC method was employed in three undergraduate engineering classes at the United States Military Academy during the spring 2020 semester. Student and instructor feedback were collected to gauge the pros and cons of the method and whether it is worth fielding on a larger scale. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Discussion:</b> The CC method was found to encourage better student communication, although mixed student and instructor opinion suggest that changes to the method and the way that it is messaged are necessary. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Conclusion:</b> The CC method warrants further study and consideration of its usefulness in other departments and institutions.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2023-06-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2023.3260479
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
OA PDF Bronze
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (8)

  1. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. Assessing Writing
  4. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Show all 8 →
  1. Technical Communication Quarterly
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Also cites 57 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.18260/1-2--34651
  2. 10.18260/1-2--32343
  3. 10.18260/p.25944
  4. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00828.x
  5. 10.1093/swr/svy026
  6. 10.37514/PER-B.2009.2324.2.08
  7. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523
  8. 10.1109/IPCC.2002.1049098
  9. 10.18260/1-2--6639
  10. 10.18260/1-2--12559
  11. 10.18260/1-2?9890
  12. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00711.x
  13. 10.4324/9780203811269
  14. 10.1080/03634520302457
  15. 10.3138/9781442676695-009
  16. 10.1080/02602930801956059
  17. 10.18260/1-2--31067
  18. 10.1515/9783110255492.331
  19. 10.1109/IPCC.2005.1494188
  20. 10.1080/02702710500400495
  21. 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1969.tb00665.x
  22. 10.3102/00028312003002125
  23. 10.18260/1-2--33079
  24. 10.1109/IPCC.2005.1494208
  25. 10.1109/FIE.2001.963905
  26. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2012.tb00043.x
  27. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00995.x
  28. 10.1080/00221300209602029
  29. 10.1187/cbe.cbe-14-03-0054
  30. 10.1007/s11192-017-2609-2
  31. 10.1177/1049732319889354
  32. 10.1177/1077699017736040
  33. 10.1515/lingvan-2015-0011
  34. 10.1080/15332861.2012.650988
  35. 10.1080/87567555.2011.633287
  36. 10.18260/1-2--29159
  37. 10.18260/1-2--28932
  38. 10.1115/1.4042081
  39. 10.1177/073953291103200205
  40. 10.12735/ier.v2i3p18
  41. 10.18260/1-2?8621
  42. 10.18260/1-2--22315
  43. 10.4135/9781452218649.n8
  44. 10.1080/0969594X.2019.1593105
  45. 10.3200/JRLP.139.5.401-412
  46. 10.1080/00029238.1971.11080840
  47. 10.1037/h0026256
  48. 10.13140/2.1.1828.6084
  49. 10.1002/jee.20161
  50. 10.1201/b17434
  51. 10.18260/1-2--32061
  52. 10.1177/1098214005283748
  53. 10.2307/1914185
  54. 10.4300/JGME-5-4-18
  55. 10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y
  56. 10.1214/aos/1176344552
  57. 10.1016/j.cptl.2015.08.001