An Analysis of Assignment Using Evaluative and Interpretative Information Processing: A Case Study of Selected Electrical Engineering Students

Abstract

This case study scrutinizes the written assignment-handling proficiency of selected electrical engineering students by employing Reynders et al.'s rubrics, within the framework of Bereiter & Scardamalia's Knowledge Transforming and Knowledge Telling model. The research discerns distinctive cognitive approaches in good and weak writers, illuminating their performance in terms of evaluative and interpretative processing. Good writers exhibit a mastery of Knowledge Transforming, demonstrating creative thinking, critical analysis, and innovative problem-solving skills. Their assignments display originality and an adept integration of established knowledge with fresh insights. In contrast, weak writers lean towards Knowledge Telling, emphasizing the communication of existing information without substantial transformation. They may face difficulties in achieving analytical depth and adapting writing styles to different audiences. In addition, the use of writing assessment rubrics, such as the ones developed by Reynders et al., is also crucial. Students will benefit from having clear goals for their academic writing and receiving constructive criticism on their draughts.