Comments on lab reports by mechanical engineering teaching assistants: Typical practices and effects of using a grading rubric

Journal of Business and Technical Communication

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 402-424

  Taylor, Summer Smith ^a  

^a CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Assessment; Engineering; Grading rubric; Lab reports; Teaching assistants

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548379132     PISSN: 10506519     EISSN: 15524574     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1050651907304024     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Bert, R. (1999). What do assistant professors want ? ASEE Prism. Retrieved July 26, 2005, from http://www.prism-magazine.org/mayjune/html/ asstprof.html
2. Brinkman, G., & Van der Geest, T. (2003). Assessment of communication competencies in engineering design projects. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12, 67-81.
3. Cohen, A.D. (1987). Student processing of feedback on their compositions. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning (pp. 57-69). New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Feisel, L., & Rosa, A. (2005). The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 25, 121-130.
5. Gruber, S., Larson, D., Scott, D., & Neville, M. (1999). Writing4Practice in engineering courses: Implementation and assessment approaches. Technical Communication Quarterly, 8, 419-440.
6. Huot, B. (1993). The influence of holistic scoring procedures on reading and rating student essays. In M. Williamson & B. Huot (Eds.), Validating holistic scoring for writing assessment: Theoretical and empirical foundations (pp. 206-236). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
7. Mayleth, B. (1998). Do we do what we say? Contradictions in composition and grading. In F. Zak & C. C. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of grading writing: The problems and possibilities (pp. 31-36). Albany: State University of New York Press.
8. Miller, P., Bausser, J., & Fentiman, A. (1998). Responding to technical writing in an introductory engineering class: The role of genre and discipline. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7, 443-461.
9. National Association of Graduate and Professional Students. (2000). 2000 national doctoral program survey. Retrieved July 20, 2005, from http://survey.nagps.org
10. Norris, P., & Palmer, S. (1998). Effectiveness of the Woodruff School doctoral teaching intern program. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 223-226.
11. Patton, M. (2003). Research or faculty development? A study of WI faculty commenting practices. Journal of the Council of Writing Program Administration, 27 (1 / 2). 75-91.
12. Reave, L. (2004). Technical communication instruction in engineering schools: A survey of top-ranked U.S. and Canadian programs. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18, 452-490.
13. Sherwood, J., Petersen, J., & Grandzielwski, J. (1997). Faculty mentoring: A unique approach to training graduate students how to teach. Journal of Engineering Education, 86, 119-123.
14. Smith, S. (2003 a). The role of technical expertise in engineering and writing teachers' evaluations of students' writing. Written Communication, 20, 37-80.
15. Smith, S. (2003 b). What is "good" technical communication? A comparison of the standards of engineering and writing teachers. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12 (1). 7-24.
16. Sommers, N. (1982). Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 33, 148-156.
17. Straub, R. (1996). The concept of control in teacher response: Defining the varieties of "directive" and "facilitative" commentary. College Composition and Communication, 47, 223-250.
18. Straub, R., & Lunsford, R. (1995). Twelve readers reading: Responding to college student writing. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
19. Taylor, S.S., & Patton, M. (2006). Ten engineers reading: Disjunctions between preference and practice in civil engineering faculty responses. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 36, 253-271.
20. Torvi, D. (1994). Engineering graduate teaching assistant instructional programs: Training tomorrow's faculty members. Journal of Engineering Education, 83, 1-6.
21. Tryggvason, G., Thouless, M., Dutta, D., Ceccio, S., & Tilbury, D. (2001). The new mechanical engineering curriculum at the University of Michigan. Journal of Engineering Education, 90, 437-444.
22. Wankat, P. (1999). Educating engineering professors in education. Journal of Engineering Education, 88, 471-475.
23. Wankat, P., & Oreovicz, F. (1991). Engineering grad students: Careers in academia. In Proceedings: 1991 Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. 767-768). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE/ASEE.
24. Watkins, S., & Green, R. (2003). Speaking and writing proficiency of international graduate students in elective, mentoring environments. Journal of Engineering Education, 92, 147-154.