Abstract

Despite the profuse amount of research on academic writing, until now, its study has not been approached comprehensively, but has focused on particular aspects that have not been interrelated. Based on a quantitative, correlational, and cross-sectional research, our objective is to know the relationship level between three approaches to the assessment of disciplinary academic writing in Law and Medicine: self-efficacy perception in writing (SEP), linguistic-discursive quality (LDQ) and disciplinary assessment (DA). Among the main results, we highlight that, in general, no significant correlations are observed between SEP, DA, and LDQ. In addition, among these three types of assessment, the LDQ presented the lowest average with respect to the scores of the other evaluations. Also noteworthy among the results is the fact that, in general, higher scores are achieved in Medicine than in Law. In conclusion, the interrelation between the three approaches to the writing assessment considered is relevant knowledge because it allows identifying how is the relationship between the objective performance of students, both disciplinary and linguistic, and their own perception of their abilities for disciplinary academic writing. In this sense, the integral conception of disciplinary academic writing could be a report to establish more successful teaching-learning processes.