Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorElander, James
dc.contributor.authorHarrington, Katherine
dc.contributor.authorNorton, Lin
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Hannah
dc.contributor.authorReddy, Peter
dc.date.accessioned2011-12-01T09:31:01Z
dc.date.available2011-12-01T09:31:01Z
dc.date.issued2006
dc.identifier.citationComplex skills and academic writing: a review of evidence about the types of learning required to meet core assessment criteria 2006, 31 (1):71 Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Educationen
dc.identifier.issn0260-2938
dc.identifier.issn1469-297X
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/02602930500262379
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10545/192731
dc.descriptionAnalysis and review of the literature on requirements for academic writingen
dc.description.abstractAssessment criteria are increasingly incorporated into teaching, making it important to clarify the pedagogic status of the qualities to which they refer. We reviewed theory and evidence about the extent to which four core criteria for student writing—critical thinking, use of language, structuring, and argument—refer to the outcomes of three types of learning: generic skills learning, a deep approach to learning, and complex learning. The analysis showed that all four of the core criteria describe to some extent properties of text resulting from using skills, but none qualify fully as descriptions of the outcomes of applying generic skills. Most also describe certain aspects of the outcomes of taking a deep approach to learning. Critical thinking and argument correspond most closely to the outcomes of complex learning. At lower levels of performance, use of language and structuring describe the outcomes of applying transferable skills. At higher levels of performance, they describe the outcomes of taking a deep approach to learning. We propose that the type of learning required to meet the core criteria is most usefully and accurately conceptualized as the learning of complex skills, and that this provides a conceptual framework for maximizing the benefits of using assessment criteria as part of teaching.
dc.relation.urlhttp://tandfprod.literatumonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02602930500262379en
dc.subjectComplex skillsen
dc.subjectAcademic literacyen
dc.titleComplex skills and academic writing: a review of evidence about the types of learning required to meet core assessment criteria
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniversity of Derbyen
dc.identifier.journalAssessment & Evaluation in Higher Educationen
html.description.abstractAssessment criteria are increasingly incorporated into teaching, making it important to clarify the pedagogic status of the qualities to which they refer. We reviewed theory and evidence about the extent to which four core criteria for student writing—critical thinking, use of language, structuring, and argument—refer to the outcomes of three types of learning: generic skills learning, a deep approach to learning, and complex learning. The analysis showed that all four of the core criteria describe to some extent properties of text resulting from using skills, but none qualify fully as descriptions of the outcomes of applying generic skills. Most also describe certain aspects of the outcomes of taking a deep approach to learning. Critical thinking and argument correspond most closely to the outcomes of complex learning. At lower levels of performance, use of language and structuring describe the outcomes of applying transferable skills. At higher levels of performance, they describe the outcomes of taking a deep approach to learning. We propose that the type of learning required to meet the core criteria is most usefully and accurately conceptualized as the learning of complex skills, and that this provides a conceptual framework for maximizing the benefits of using assessment criteria as part of teaching.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record