Scholars of teaching and learning have endorsed self-assessment assignments as a way to encourage greater reflection by students. However, no studies to date have compared writing in self-assessment with traditional academic assignments. We performed a quantitative text analysis of students' language in self-assessment versus traditional assignments from 3 courses. Self-assessment assignments included more references to cognitive words (i.e., words related to insight) than traditional academic assignments. In addition, self-assessments included more emotion words and pronouns and were linguistically simpler than traditional academic assignments. We conclude that self-assessment assignments encourage students to become more reflective, a goal of the American Psychological Association (2007) curricular guidelines.
American Psychological Association. (2007). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved November 1, 2007, from http://www.apa.org/ed/resources.html.
3.
AngeloT. A. (1995). Classroom assessment for critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 6–7.
4.
BalchW. R. (1992). Effect of class standing on students' predictions of their final exam scores. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 136–141.
5.
BensonT. A.BurkeC.AmstadterA.SineyR.HevernV.BeinsB.BuskistB. (Eds.) (2005). Teaching psychology in autobiography: Perspectives from exemplary psychology teachers. Society for the Teaching of Psychology. Retrieved July 18, 2008, from http://teachpsych.org/resources/e-books/tia2005/tia2005.php.
6.
CarrollD. W. (2007). Patterns of student writing in a critical thinking course: A quantitative analysis. Assessing Writing: An International Journal, 12, 213–227.
7.
DanielR. S. (1992). Teaching of Psychology, the journal. In PuenteA. E.MatthewsJ. R.BrewerC. L. (Eds.), Teaching psychology in America: A history (pp. 433–452). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
8.
DunlapM. R. (1998). Methods of supporting students' critical reflection in courses incorporating service learning. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 208–210.
9.
DunnD. S.McEntarfferR.HalonenJ. S. (2004). Empowering psychology students through self-assessment. In DunnD. S.MehrotraC. M.HalonenJ. S. (Eds.), Measuring up: Educational assessment challenges and practices for psychology (pp. 171–186). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
10.
FinkL. D. (2003). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11.
HartleyJ.PennebakerJ. W.FoxC. (2003). Abstracts, introductions and discussions: How far do they differ in style. Scientometrics, 57, 389–398.
12.
HettichP. (1990). Journal writing: Old fare or nouvelle cuisine. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 36–39.
13.
HinkleS.HinkleA. (1990). An experimental comparison of the effects of focused freewriting and other study strategies on lecture comprehension. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 31–35.
MadiganR.JohnsonS.LintonP. (1995). The language of psychology: APA style as epistemology. American Psychologist, 50, 428–436.
16.
MehlM. R. (2006). Quantitative text analysis. In EidM.DienerE. (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 141–156). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
17.
NadelmanL. (1990). Learning to think and write as an empirical psychologist: The laboratory course in developmental psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 45–48.
18.
PennebakerJ. W.FrancisM. E. (1996). Cognitive, emotional, and language processes in disclosure. Cognition and Emotion, 10, 601–626.
19.
PennebakerJ. W.FrancisM. E.BoothR. J. (2001). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC2001. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
20.
PennebakerJ. W.KingL. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296–1312.
21.
PennebakerJ. W.MehlM. R.NiederhofferK. G. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.
22.
PoeR. E. (1990). A strategy for improving literature reviews in psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 17, 54–55.
23.
SungY.-T.LinC.-S.LeeC.-L.ChangK.-E. (2003). Evaluating proposals for experiments: An application of Web-based self-assessment and peer-assessment. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 331–334.
24.
WalvoordB. E.AndersonV. J. (1998). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
WeimerM. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
26.
WigginsG. P.McTigheJ. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
