Abstract
To determine the reliability of evaluation decisions about student writing competency across modes of discourse, a large sample of students was randomly assigned a writing task in one of four modes of discourse. Analysis of the data revealed significant differences between the mean score of narrative writing and scores for descriptive, expository, and persuasive writing. The decision consistency analysis also found that on the average, 30% of the students were misclassified across the modes of discourse. It follows from these results that modes of discourse do not appear to be interchangeable for making decisions about the overall writing competency of either groups of, or individual, students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.