Analytic Measures for Evaluating Managerial Writing
dc.contributor.author | Rogers, Priscilla S. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-04-13T19:57:42Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-04-13T19:57:42Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1994 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | ROGERS, PRISCILLA (1994). "Analytic Measures for Evaluating Managerial Writing." Journal of Business and Technical Communication 4(8): 380-407. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67942> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1050-6519 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67942 | |
dc.description.abstract | The recent addition of a writing performance assessment to the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) means that many students now enter business school with a writing assessment score and perhaps even a heightened awareness that writing matters in some way to the successful completion of an MBA degree. This situation presents teachers of business and managerial writing with a new opportunity and pressure to provide students with writing tools that are directly relevant to their business studies and professional careers. The Analysis of Argument Measure and the Persuasive Adaptiveness Measure introduced here are assessment tools that may be used to explain holistic assessment scores (which students receive on the GMAT writing component) and may assist students in understanding and evaluating their writing, both in school and in the workplace. Designed to evaluate managerial documents that are persuasive and directorial in nature, these measures were developed through a series of pilots and used to assess a selected sample of managerial memorandums that were also scored holistically. Correlating the holistic and analytic scores revealed a positive association, and interrater reliability achieved good agreement beyond chance. These results suggest that the measures may be reliably employed to assess characteristics valued in managerial writing. Examples of how these analytic measures may be employed for teaching and research are also described. | en_US |
dc.format.extent | 3108 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 2900162 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.publisher | SAGE Periodicals Press | en_US |
dc.title | Analytic Measures for Evaluating Managerial Writing | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Communications | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | University of Michigan | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67942/2/10.1177_1050651994008004002.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/1050651994008004002 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Breland, Hunter M., and Robert J. Jones. “Perceptions of Writing Skills.”Written Communication1.1 (1984): 101-119. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena.”Questions and Politeness. Ed. Esther N. Goody. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. 56-232. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Brown, Robert L., and Carl G. Herndl. “An Ethnographic Study of Corporate Writing: Job Status as Reflected in Written Text.”Functional Approaches to Writing: Research Perspectives. Ed. Barbara Counture. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1986. 11-29. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Camp, Roberta. “Changing the Model for the Direct Assessment of Writing.”Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 45-78. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Clark, Ruth Anne, and Jesse G. Delia. “The Development of Functional Persuasive Skills in Childhood and Early Adolescence.”Child Development47 (1976): 1008-1014. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Connor, Ulla. “Linguistic/Rhetorical Measures for International Persuasive Student Writing.” Working paper. Indiana University in Indianapolis, 1988. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cooper, Charles R., and Lee Odell. Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging. Buffalo: State University of New York, 1977. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Delia, Jesse G., Susan L. Kline, and Brant R. Burleson. “The Development of Persuasive Communication in Kindergartners through Twelfth-Graders.”Communication Monographs46 (1979): 241-256. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Diederich, Paul. Measuring Growth in English. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1974. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Driskill, Linda. “Understanding the Writing Context in Organizations.”Writing in the Business Professions. Ed. Myra Kogen. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1989. 125-145. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Fleiss, Joseph L. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: Wiley, 1981. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Hoetker, James. “Essay Examination Topics and Students' Writing.”College Composition and Communication3 (1982): 377-392. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Horton, Marjorie, Priscilla Rogers, Michael Mc Cormick, and Laurel Austin. “Exploring the Impact of Face-to-Face Collaborative Technology on Group Writing.”Journal of Management Information Systems8.3 (1991-92): 27-48. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Huot, Brian A. “The Influence of Holistic Scoring Procedures on Reading and Rating Student Essays.” Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 206-236. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Janopoulos, Michael. “Comprehension, Communicative Competence, and Construct Validity: Holistic Scoring from an ESL Perspective.”Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 303-325. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Liebetrau, Albert M. Measures of Association. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1983. Vol. 32 of Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Locker, Kitty O. Business and Administrative Communication. 2nd ed.Homewood, IL: Irwin, 1992. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Locker, Kitty O., and Michael L. Keene. “Using Toulmin Logic in Business and Technical Writing Classes.”Technical and Business Communication in Two-Year Programs. Ed. W. Keats Sparrow and Nell Ann Pickett. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1983. 103-110. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Murphy, Herta A., and Herbert W. Hildebrandt. Effective Business Communications. 6th ed.New York: Mc Graw-Hill, 1991. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Northey, Margot. “The Need for Writing Skill in Accounting Firms.”Management Communication Quarterly3.4 (1990): 474-495. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Paradis, James, David Dobrin, and Richard Miller. “Writing at Exxon ITD: Notes on the Writing Environment of an R&D Organization.”Writing in Non-Academic Settings. Ed. Lee Odell and Dixie Goswami. New York: Guilford, 1985. 281-307. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Perkins, Kyle. “On the Use of Composition Scoring Techniques, Objective Measures, and Objective Tests to Evaluate ESL Writing Ability.”TESOL Quarterly17.4 (1983): 651-671. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Pula, Judith J., and Brian A. Huot. “A Model of Background Influences on Holistic Raters.”Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 237-265. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Purves, Alan C., Thomas P. Gorman, and Saulie Takala. “The Development of Scoring Scheme and Scales.”The IEA's Study of Written Composition I: The International Writing Tasks and Scoring Scales. International Studies in Educational Achievement. Ed. Thomas P. Gorman, Alan C. Purves, and R. E. Degenhart. Vol. 5. New York: Pergamon, 1988. 41-58. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Rogers, Priscilla S. “Choice-Based Writing in Managerial Contexts: The Case of the Dealer Contact Report.” The Journal of Business Communication 23.3 (1989): 197-216. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Shepherd, Gregory J., and Barbara J. O'Keefe. “The Relationship between the Developmental Level of Persuasive Strategies and Their Effectiveness.”Central States Speech Journal35 (1984): 137-152. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Smith, William L. “Assessing the Reliability and Adequacy of Using Holistic Scoring of Essays as a College Composition Placement Technique.” Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 142-205. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Suchan, James, and Ronald Dulek. “A Reassessment of Clarity in Written Managerial Communications.”Management Communication Quarterly4.1 (1990): 87-99. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Toulmin, Stephen E. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | White, Edward M. “Holistic Scoring: Past Triumphs, Future Challenges.” Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 79-108. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | White, Edward M.. Teaching and Assessing Writing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Williamson, Michael M. “An Introduction to Holistic Scoring: The Social, Historical and Theoretical Context for Writing Assessment.” Validating Holistic Scoring for Writing Assessment: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations. Ed. Michael M. Williamson and Brian A. Huot. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1993. 1-43. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
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.