Toward a validational framework using student course papers from common undergraduate curricular requirements as viable outcomes evidence

Abstract

Abstract Examining gains in undergraduate writing abilities, Haswell (2000) applied a multi-dimension construct of writing to impromptu writing exams composed at the first- and third years. This project replicates Haswell's original study to impromptu writing exams composed at the same points, and extends that methodology to course papers written for common undergraduate curricular contexts—first-year composition, general education requirements, and advanced undergraduate writing in the disciplines requirements—to consider the use of such assessment scores as plausible and appropriate evidence for outcomes assessment purposes within a validational framework (articulated by Kane, 2006, 2013). This study considers the feasibility of reporting such localized assessment information as an alternative to represent progress for undergraduate writing ability, and reports preliminary evidence suggesting positive effects of distributed writing requirements across undergraduate curriculums on student writing performance.