LINGUISTIC SECURITY IN ONLINE LEARNING: IMPROVING ASSESSMENT DESIGN FOR THE WRITING PROCESS

Abstract

This study examines how revising assessment language can foster linguistic security in a first-year online Spanish Basic Writing course. Student perceptions of two short-answer items that had repeatedly underperformed were analyzed, asking whether the prompts’ wording –rather than their linguistic content– was provoking confusion or discomfort. A post-test questionnaire captured immediate reactions to each item’s clarity and perceived relevance, along with self-reported reasons for dissatisfaction. Findings show unanimous dissatisfaction with both prompts and distinct patterns across reasons, pointing to clarity issues in a syntax item and discomfort related to stigmatizing terminology in a speech-levels task. Guided by these patterns, revisions were introduced that neutralize affective content, align prompts with the taught scope, and make the requested operation explicit, such as naming the syntactic category or identifying the register mismatch. The scoring guide was also recalibrated to separate mastery of linguistic content from success at interpreting the prompt, and a brief communication was prepared for students explaining the changes to promote transparency and trust. The approach illustrates how a concise, course- embedded perception check can reveal construct-irrelevant barriers and guide targeted wording changes that protect validity. The process is practical for instructors who manage online basic-writing assessments and can be replicated in similar courses seeking to strengthen linguistic security while maintaining cognitive demand.