Explanation of areas of evaluation:
Thesis: stated purpose or main idea of the writing
Audience Awareness: consistency in terms of language and rhetorical strategies used to communicate to a particular audience (i.e.: academic, professional, mature, peer, etc.)
Support: development of the ideas present in writing by use of primary and/or secondary sources
Coherence: overall unity of the ideas presented, use of transitions
Originality: freshness of insight or point of view
Analysis: depth in critical thinking, thoroughness of explication, and validity of conclusions
Comprehension: reasonable interpretation of ideas or sources used
Organization: logical order of paragraphs, use of topic sentences
Mechanics: standard spelling, grammar, punctuation, and syntax
Diction: appropriateness of language choices, standard usage
Documentation: accuracy in documentation style (MLA)
Summary: An evaluating team of three English faculty assessed ten research papers in March 2002. Evaluation results were compiled with the assistance of the Assessment Coordinator on March 26.
The data show that average score for the papers (from all three scorers) is 4.2, in other words, 60% (6/10) of students scored 4 or higher; 90% (9/10) of students scored 3 or higher on the rubric scale of 1-7, the highest average being 4.8 in the category of diction.
The papers show the greatest weakness in the areas of originality, organization, and analysis.
Upon completion of the assessment, results were distributed to the English Department for discussion and action on April 15, 2002.