SIGNIFICANCE/INNOVATION: Writing assignments are a common assessment practice of student learning in higher education. Students learn to structure their time and to explore scholarly topics throughout their educational process. Yet, students come into occupational therapy programs with writing deficiencies, with an inability to clearly express their ideas or to synthesize and evaluate literature, and with insufficient habits and routines for self-directed learning (Nielsen, 2014). Many universities have initiated writing-intensive designations on content courses beyond English. Fostering an environment for self-directed learning provides the opportunity for maximizing mindful, conscious planning into the writing process (Nielsen, 2014). A need exists to investigate the use of formative assessment of writing and to outline relevant methodologies to help improve instructional practices (Dunn & Mulvenon, 2009). More efficient research is needed for evaluating the impact of formative assessment and evaluation. Little research has been conducted in the past 10 yr regarding the influence that formative writing assessment has on student learning outcomes. Therefore, the need for further experimental research supporting the impact of formative assessment on academic success exists. In this research project, we describe methods for examining the critical thinking processes used in a writing-intensive course to learn health care delivery material. The basis for this research emerges from the pedagogy of teaching critical thinking as described in Elder and Paul’s (2007) model—particularly the aspects of analysis, evaluation, and improvement in student thinking. Coinvestigators for this project teach sections of a writing-intensive course focusing on content in health care delivery.

METHOD: To explore the effectiveness of instructional strategies, we formally gathered the student perspective via survey design using an in-depth questionnaire. Quantitative and qualitative questions were designed to assess the research questions. The study has taken place over 2 yr, with 130 participants. We analyzed quantitative data using descriptive statistics. We coded qualitative data using a constant comparative method a priori. Descriptive codes were generated.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Results provide information about self-regulation in writing, promoting components of critical thinking, student commitment, and perceived learning strategies. Assessment must also evaluate the impact of the changes in the process and finally close the loop in the educational process (Herring & Wilson, 2010). By using data, as in this study, a model for authentic learning is proposed in the spirit of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Limitations include the selective population: occupational therapy students in generalizing findings.

Dunn, K. E., & Mulvenon, S. W. (2009). A critical review of research on formative assessment: The limited scientific evidence of the impact of formative assessment in education. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 14(7), 1–11. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=14&n=7

Elder, L., & Paul, R. (2007). The thinker’s guide to analytic thinking. Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Herring, M., & Wilson, B. (2010). Enhancing student learning through evidence, self-assessment, and accountability: Closing the loop. Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation, 1(1), 46–52. Retrieved from http://www.uni.edu/coe/jaaep/journals/newWilson-HerringFinalf7-29.pdf

Nielsen, L. B. (2014, June 16). The secret of self-regulated learning. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-and-learning/secret-self-regulated-learning/