Journal of Business Communication

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Order Full text via Infotrieve
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dulek, R.
Right arrow Articles by Shelby, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 18, No. 2, 41-50 (1981)
DOI: 10.1177/002194368101800206
© 1981 Association for Business Communication

Varying Evaluative Criteria: A Factor in Differential Grading

Ron Dulek

The University of Alabama

Annette Shelby

Georgetown University

The perennial debate about differential grading—is it good or bad?—is beginning to move in a new direction—what causes it? This study, based on responses provided by a random sampling of ABCA members, examines one of the causes: varying evaluative criteria. The study reports that busi ness communication instructors identify a variety of criteria for grading but tend to use a consistent terminology when analyzing student writing. This consistent terminology does not, however, guarantee a consistent evaluation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?