Abstract

This study addressed the question, “How consistently do students perform on holistically scored writing assignments?” Instructors from 13 introductory writing classes at two colleges were asked to provide essay sets written by their students in response to the three to five most important writing assignments in their classes. In all, 796 essays were collected from 241 students. The study drew on a pool of 15 experienced judges to evaluate the essays. Each essay set was scored holistically and independently by 6 of the judges who either ranked or graded the essays in the set. All papers written by a particular student were scored by the same judges. Pairwise correlations of the scores assigned to each essay set were computed for each judge and then averaged across judges. The average of these correlations was 0.16, indicating very low consistency of holistically scored student performance from essay to essay. This result suggests that drawing conclusions from one or even a few writing samples is problematic.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2000-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088300017001001
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

References (14) · 1 in this index

  1. annual meeting of the California Educational Research Association
  2. Assessing writing skill
  3. Generalizability analysis: Principles and procedures
  4. A survey of portfolio practices
  5. Introduction to classical and modern test theory
Show all 14 →
  1. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences
  2. The measurement of writing ability
  3. 10.1207/s15326977ea0103_2
  4. annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association
  5. Written Communication
  6. Reading empirical research studies: The rhetoric of research
  7. 10.2307/1412107
  8. Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence
  9. Primary mental abilities