Assessment Across Borders: National Perspectives Explain Differences Between Singaporean and US Evaluators
dc.contributor.author | Rogers, Priscilla S. | |
dc.contributor | Clark, Colin M. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2006-05-22T18:36:15Z | |
dc.date.available | 2006-05-22T18:36:15Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2004 | |
dc.identifier | 901 | en |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/39182 | |
dc.description.abstract | This study suggests that analytical tools to assess writing across genre can be meaningfully used across different countries. However, evaluators' “national perspectives” are likely to impact the assessment of content, particularly as it relates to completing the writing task. We compared Singaporean and American evaluators' assessment of written responses to workplace scenarios, requiring critiquing a superior’s ideas. Two responses were collected from upper-level business school students at a major university in the Republic of Singapore: one response prior to and another at the end of a business communication course. Holistic scores of this corpus were used as a basis for selection of a core sample of 468 responses, which Singaporean and US evaluators independently scored on four analytical tools: task, reasoning units, coherence, and error interference. US evaluators gave significantly higher scores on task fulfillment and reasoning units than did Singaporean evaluators, and only the US evaluators found improvement in the post-assessment compared with the pre-assessment. Subsequent textual analyses suggested that these differences stemmed from content preferences we characterize as national perspectives - US evaluators favored an external “proactive” focus based on potential gains, whereas Singaporeans preferred an internal focus based on avoidance of potential losses. This finding has implications for cross-national education, assessment and training. | en |
dc.format.extent | 326266 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.language.iso | en_US | |
dc.subject | standardized testing | en |
dc.subject.classification | Business Administration | en |
dc.title | Assessment Across Borders: National Perspectives Explain Differences Between Singaporean and US Evaluators | en |
dc.type | Working Paper | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Economics | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Business | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Ross School of Business | en |
dc.contributor.affiliationother | Nanyang Technological University, Singapore | en |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Ann Arbor | |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/39182/1/901.pdf | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Business, Stephen M. Ross School of - Working Papers Series |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.