1 Effects Of A Job Shadowing Assignment On Writing

1
Effects of a Job Shadowing Assignment on Writing
Bethany Shifflett
bshifflett@geolog.com
San Jose State University
San Jose, CA 95192-0054
Mary F. Fortune
California State University East Bay
Kristina Denton
San Jose State University
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a job shadowing assignment on
students' writing skills. Findings support previous work noting the value of repetitive writing
with feedback, writing based on experience, and writing on topics meaningful to students.
Among students who did not shadow a business practitioner, group scores remained stable from
pre test to post test while the shadow group's overall median score increased.
Introduction
The observation that collegiate students have difficulty demonstrating the writing skills
needed for success in college is of concern to many educators (Schneider & Andre, 2005;
Stearns, Ronald & Greenlee, 2003). Strong writing skills, as well as reading, provide benefits in
and beyond the classroom since the ability to comprehend and communicate information, ideas,

2
research findings, and a host of other personal and professional content can be compromised
when communication skills are limited. In the business world, for example, effective
communication both verbal and in writing is important and expected (Moody, Brent, & Bolt-Lee,
2002; Schneider & Andre, 2005).
Literature Review
A variety of factors influence the ability to write. They include language proficiency, reading
comprehension, understanding the writing process, and strong vocabulary (Brynildssen, 2000;
Lavelle, 2001). The literature suggests that there is no one tactic to employ to strengthen writing
skills, but there are many useful pedogogical strategies ranging from basic principles like
specifying structure and due dates for assignments (Stull & Baird, 1993) to peer reviews of
writing (Shaw, 2002). In addition, Jones (2001) noted that approaches that encourage greater
participation and understanding of how to write well are valuable.
Tsui (2002) recommends a two-step process that allows students to utilize criticism to refine
their work and suggests it is more likely to facilitate skill development than having students
complete their work without input. In addition, when reinforced throughout the curriculum,
writing and rewriting may further enhance students’ critical thinking skills which are related to
writing skills. While this approach may seem to be simple common sense, and perhaps the norm
for some, others face a significant challenge when their classes are large. In this case, strategies
such as the one described in this paper that result in rewrites yet do not drastically impact faculty
workload may be particularly valuable.
Rubrics: A Tool for Learning. Rubrics are important measurement tools that can be used to
assess a product or behavior such as an essay, research report, portfolio, art work, recital, oral

3
presentation, performance, or group activity (Allen, 2004). Rubrics (both holistic and analytic)
provide guidelines for making distinctions among performance levels. In addition, by clearly
communicating expectations through rubrics, partnerships between the teacher and student can
be facilitated (Rockman, 2002). Additionally, rubrics focus both students and evaluators on
specified learning objectives (Allen, 2004) which can reinforce specific elements related to
strong writing and so lead to improved student skills.
Context in Writing Assignments. A study by Curtis and Herrington (2003) noted that
students’ ability to write well may be affected by the context of the writing assignment. The
authors observed that students could better their writing skills by doing assignments related to
personal interests. They observed that when students could connect to their topic, they became
more passionate and driven to produce a well-written paper. Moody, Brent and Bolt-Lee (2002)
advise instructors to prepare students for day-to-day professional responsibilities and to bring
“real-life” experiences and activities into each assignment.
Implications and Purpose
Writing is important because it influences how we think, contributes to how we learn, fosters
personal development, connects us to others, and promotes success in college and at work. In
addition, our ability to make substantive contributions in almost any setting is related to the
effectiveness of our written communications. These factors, among others, drive the search for
tools, techniques, and curricula that can strengthen students' writing skills. This study focused
on one particular assignment designed to provide a meaningful context for students’ writing.
That is, an assignment to write about one's dream job after spending time with (shadowing) a
professional in that area.

4
Methods
Participants and Demographics
Prior to initiating this study, approval was obtained from the University’s Human Subjects
Institutional Review Board. Participants were students (N = 58) enrolled in two upper-level
writing courses (business communications) taught by the same instructor. One class was used as
a control and one completed the job-shadowing assignment. Data from participants present on
both testing days were included in analyses (N=50).
The majority of participants were seniors (65%) and the largest ethnic group was Asian
(52%), followed by Caucasian (26%) and Hispanic (8%). With respect to major, participants
were primarily from Organization and Management (36%) and Marketing (24%).
There were more females (58%) than males (42%). Student grade point averages (GPA) were
primarily in the ranges 2.5 to 3.0 (35%) and 3.0 to 3.5 (33%). Students predominantly worked
part-time (67%). The reported median age was 22 years with most students between 20 and 25
years old. The median hours worked by students was 20 hours per week and ranged between 6
and 50 hours per week. Additional demographic information by group assignment can be found
in Table 1.
Instrument Development
To evaluate students’ writing, two rubrics were developed: one holistic and the other analytic.
The holistic rubric contained three major components: a) communication of job specific
information, b) use of the seven C’s of Communication; clear, concise, coherent, concrete,
correct, complete, and courteous (Stull & Baird, 1993), and c) synthesis of ideas and issues. For
each possible score (1 through 5), descriptions of writing characteristics meeting the criteria for

5
each score were specified. Subsequently, two student assistants were asked to review the holistic
rubric for its clarity, relevance to the writing assignment, and ease of use. Following review, no
changes were made.
The analytic rubric had two major categories; one with job specific components to be
evaluated and one with general writing components. The analytic rubric was reviewed for
clarity, relevance to the writing assignment (description provided to reviewers), and ease of use
by two professors regularly engaged in teaching writing at the collegiate level. Following
review, revisions were made based on the recommendations received. The revised instrument
had nine components specified under each major category, and each component was rated on a
five-point likert scale (excellent, good, average, fair, and poor). Inter-rater reliability for both
instruments was good (alpha = .72 and .82 respectively).
Procedures and Data Collection
Both classes employed in-class writing assignments throughout the semester. In week 11 the
in-class writing assignment (See Appendix A) for both classes was for students to describe their
dream job. One of the researchers (not teaching either class) supervised this activity. Prior to
beginning the assignment, the researcher gave instructions, distributed and collected informed
consent forms, and asked students to put their name and a code word on an index card. Only the
code was recorded on students’ essays. Students had forty minutes to complete their essay (class
periods were 75 minutes twice a week). Subsequently, students exchanged papers and used the
holistic rubric to evaluate their peers and provide feedback. Students, using the holistic rubric,
gave a score (on the 1 to 5 scale) and circled areas that were particularly weak. Papers were then
collected for evaluation and were graded by the instructor using the analytic rubric. Graded

6
papers along with both rubrics were returned to the students three class periods later. When the
instructor returned to the class that would be doing the job-shadowing assignment, instructions
specific to the assignment were given. The assignment was due at the start of the 14th week of
instruction. Neither group was made aware that a subsequent in-class writing assignment would
be on the same topic.
The job-shadowing assignment. The assignment asked students to research their dream job
by arranging to spend at least four hours shadowing someone who worked in a business as
closely related to their dream job as possible. Students were responsible for making the
arrangements. However, they were encouraged to consult with the teacher if they were having
difficulty identifying someone. The locations used by the students included, campus
departments, internship sites, places they were currently or previously employed, non-profit
groups, and nearby businesses. Written instructions to the students emphasized that their goal
was to obtain, through interviewing and observation, detailed insights into what such a job would
be like.
Instructions then called for the students to write up the information gathered. The format for
the report was kept simple. Instructions specified a title page, body (write up of observations/
interview), and summary. Minimal expectations with respect to content were also provided. The
paper needed to include information on roles and responsibilities, pre-requisite skills and
knowledge for the job, benefits, advancement opportunities, and a description of a typical day on
the job.
In week 14 (after assignments collected) the same researcher attended both classes to
supervise the students’ in-class writing assignment which was to again describe their dream job.

7
Following completion of the forty-minute assignment, students were asked to complete a brief
survey related to the attention they paid to feedback and to complete the questionnaire prepared
for this study related to demographic characteristics and student’s perceptions with respect to
their ideal job. Once again, only the students’ code was recorded on the essay and surveys. All
materials were collected prior to the instructor returning to class. The class instructor returned
the graded papers to students later in the semester.
The question under examination was whether or not there would be difference in overall
writing scores between those completing the job-shadowing assignment and those who did not.
In addition, component scores (general writing competency and job specific elements) for the
two groups were compared.
Results
Results from Analysis of Main Question
The total score obtained at week 14 using the analytic rubric was the dependent variable
tested for a difference between groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the
median scores. However, it is important to note that the pre to post test changes (see Table 2)
suggest the job-shadowing assignment had a positive effect on writing. The no-shadow group
medians were stable from the pre test to post test, while the shadow group’s performance
improved.
The scores from each of the two sections (general writing competency, job specific
components) of the analytic rubric were subsequently examined. For the shadow group, both the
general written competency and job specific categories improved. With regard to job specific
elements, the control group performance decreased, and the writing competency section

8
remained stable.
Related Questions
Regarding the extent to which students attended to feedback in general, there was more
attention paid to feedback from faculty (“a lot” 42% and “extensively” 38%) than from peers (“a
lot” 40% and “extensively” 8%). These findings suggest that while students attend more
frequently to faculty feedback, students do consider input from their peers. Thus, arranging
opportunities to incorporate peer feedback into the assessment process could be valuable to
students and of practical use with respect to faculty workload particularly when class size is
large.
Discussion and Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a job shadowing assignment overall
with respect to its effect on students’ writing skills. Results indicated that students who
shadowed a business practitioner increased their core written competencies and gained valuable
information while doing the assignment. The control group’s scores remained stable from pre
test to post test while the shadow group’s overall median score increased. In addition, since
writing scores were not strongly correlated with either gender or ethnicity, it is reasonable to
assume that the job shadowing assignment was the source of the observed changes.
This assignment capitalized on the notion that repetitive writing with feedback, writing in a
meaningful context, and writing based on experience can be valuable tools in developing writing
skills. Findings also support research suggesting that students who connect with their topic tend
to produce well-written papers (Curtis & Herrington, 2003).
Building on the work completed in this study, fruitful areas of research might be to simulate

9
the in-person job shadowing with internet research using a similar research design. This
assignment would be of particular value given the wide spread use of technology in the delivery
of instruction.
Another important topic to examine is the impact of the assignment on students for whom
English is a second language. The ability to write well in one’s non-native language is a
challenge many collegiate students and their faculty grapple with. According to the California
State University (CSU) Graduate Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR) review committee,
English as Second Language (ESL) students have less success in writing competency than native
English speakers (CSU GWAR Review Committee, 2003).
In summary, the results from this study suggest that integrating meaningful activities, such as
job shadowing, into writing assignments can help strengthen students’ written communication
skills, provide motivation that results in greater effort on assignments, and can be of help to
students in their pursuit of professional goals. In addition, the sequencing of in-class writing,
peer feedback, and outside-of-class assignments results in a multi-step writing process without
dramatically increasing workload.

10
References
Allen, M.J. (2004, April 19). The use of scoring rubrics for assessment and teaching.
Presentation #17, California State University Institute for Teaching and Learning. Retrieved
from the World Wide Web on March 21, 2005,
http://www.calstate.edu/AcadAff/Sloa/links/using_rubrics.shtml
Brynildssen, S. (2000). Vocabulary’s influence on successful writing. ERIC Digest, 157.
Retrieved from the World Wide Web on August 20, 2004,
http://reading.indiana.edu/ieo/digests/d157.html
Curtis, M, & Herrington, A. (2003). Wring development in the college years: By who’s
definition? College Composition and Communication, 55(1), 69-90.
CSU GWAR Review Committee (2003). GWAR and non-native speakers of English. Review of
the CSU Graduation Writing Assessment Requirement in 2002. Retrieved from the World
Wide Web July 28, 2004 from http://www.calstate.edu/AcadAff/GWAR_review_2002.shtml
Jones, C. (2001). The relationship between writing centers and improvement in writing ability:
An assessment of the literature. Education (Chula Vista, Calif.), 122(1), 2-20.
Lavelle, E. (2001) Brief report: writing styles of college students. Journal of College Reading
and Learning, 32(1), 60(8).
Moody, J., Brent, S., & Bolt-Lee, C. (2002). Showcasing the skilled business graduate:
Expanding the tool kit. Business Communication Quarterly, 65(1), 21-36.
Rockman, I. F. (2002). Rubrics for assessing information competence in the California state
university (CSU). Prepared by the CSU Information Competence Initiative with input
from CSU campus information competence librarians. Retrieved from the World Wide

11
Web on April 8, 2004,
http://imctwo.csuhayward.edu/faculty_dev/infocompweb/cominfo.htm
Schneider, B., & Andre, J. (2005). University preparation for workplace writing. Journal of
Business Communication; 42(2), 195, April 2005.
Shaw, V.N. (2002). Peer review as a motivating devise in the training of writing skills for
college students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 33(1), 68(9).
Stearns, J. M., Ronald, K., & Greenlee, T.B. (2003). Contexts for communication: Teaching
expertise through case-based in-basket exercises. Journal of Education for Business
78(4), 213-9.
Stull, J., & Baird, J. (1993). Business communication: A classroom simulation.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Regents/Prentice Hall.
Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four
institutional case studies. The Journal of Higher Education (Columbus, Ohio) 73(6), 740-63,
November/December 2002.

12
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to recognize and thank Alexis Jacobsen for her assistance with this
project.

13
Appendix A
Instructions for In-class Writing Assignment
Imagine your dream job. Think of the aspects (of this job) that attract you. Try to imagine what
it would be like - including any challenges - to work in such a role/environment. What types of
communication skills would you need? How would you conduct your business so that you were
effective? Your task is to now write an essay that describes your ideal job. Please make sure
you include the following details:
• Breadth and depth of responsibility (of the job)
• Communication responsibilities and style
• Chain of command (boss, subordinates, who reports to who, etc.)
• Advancement opportunities and benefits linked to the job (travel, professional
development, stipend, car, cell phone, health coverage)
• Aspects you expect to find challenging as well as rewarding
Describe your understanding of a "typical day" (at your dream job/career). Include any final
thoughts, feelings, and impressions regarding what it might/would be like to have your ideal job.

14
Table 1
Descriptive Information on Sample
_________________________________________________________________________
Control Group Job Shadow Group
Ethnicity
Asian 41% 74%
Caucasian 46% 13%
Hispanic 9% 9%
Gender
Female 63% 56%
Male 37% 44%
GPA
2 – 2.5 17% 16%
2.51 – 3 33% 36%
3.01 – 3.5 33% 32%
3.51 – 4 17% 16%
Work Status
Full Time 21% 8%
Part Time 63% 72%
__________________________________________________________________________

15
Table 2
Summary Statistics for Writing Scores
____________________________________________________________________________
Control Group Shadow Assignment Group
Pre test (n=24) Post test (n=24) Pre test (n=26) Post test (n=26)
Median 45.5 46 47 52
Mean 48.3 46.4 48.8 51.9
Standard Deviation 11.6 9.6 7.1 12.9
____________________________________________________________________________

1 Effects Of A Job Shadowing Assignment On Writing

More Related Content

Similar to 1 Effects Of A Job Shadowing Assignment On Writing (20)

More from Charlie Congdon (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

1 Effects Of A Job Shadowing Assignment On Writing