Revitalizing
General Education: Completing the Process
A Brief History of the
General Education Writing Assessment Project:
In August of 2002, Provost Reichard appointed a faculty task force
whose purpose was to identify key student-learning outcomes for
the GE program and to develop an assessment plan that would help
the campus determine how well our students were achieving those
outcomes. Writing was selected as the first outcome to be assessed
for several reasons:
- writing is already being assessed through the Writing Proficiency
Exam (WPE)
- writing was the first outcome to be assessed in the FIPSE grant
the campus received
- CSULB already has a well established first-year composition
program where writing is assessed frequently
- many faculty across the campus regularly evaluate student writing
in their own classes
- academic departments regularly express concern over the quality
of student writing
- student writing is often perceived by faculty and the general
public as a key indicator of the overall quality of a student’s
education
- writing serves as a primary means of determining what students
know about a given subject matter
In teaching and assessing
student writing, faculty are also helping students think more carefully
and critically about the evidence they use in their arguments, and
helping them develop rhetorical skills that complement and elaborate
similar elements used in effective oral communication. Finally,
assessment efforts focused on writing also help faculty who teach
courses in the major and who likewise value the cultivation of effective
student writing.
Spring 2003 Assessment Activities:
Fifteen faculty representing all three levels of General Education—Foundations,
Explorations, and Capstones—engaged in a semester-long project
to develop a rubric, or rubrics (also known as scoring guides),
that would be useful to faculty teaching writing in a variety of
courses at different levels across disciplines. The criteria for
designing this rubric were that it must represent elements of student
writing that faculty collectively value and hope their students
will produce, that the rubric be relatively easy to use, and that
it communicate useful information to faculty and students. Faculty
in this assessment project tested out versions of this rubric with
their students throughout the semester.
Fall 2003 Assessment Activities:
A version of the rubric was tested again during this semester, but
this time with ten different GE Capstones instructors. Participating
faculty and students overwhelmingly reported satisfaction with the
rubric. Students, in particular, liked the rubric because it laid
out for them in clear language what was expected in terms of writing
competency.
Rubrics:
The two rubrics developed in this assessment project are available
by clicking on the links provided. These rubrics can be used by
any instructor who teaches (or who wants to teach) writing in any
course, whether that be a course in the General Education Program
or a course in the major. The current version of the analytic rubric
resembles a form used by faculty teaching in the Integrated Teacher
Education Program (ITEP), a form developed jointly by participating
ITEP faculty and the Director of the FCPD and funded by a fall 2002
Assessment Grant. The holistic rubric represents the same elements
listed on the analytic rubric, albeit in a different form. The holistic
rubric provides general descriptions of writing quality at four
levels and is designed like the six-point rubric used to score the
Writing Proficiency Exam (WPE). But please note that the contents
of this GE rubric differ markedly from the WPE rubric. Holistic
rubrics provide an overall impression of the quality of student
writing and are useful for quick generally reliable scoring of a
large number of essays.
The analytic rubric separately lists individual elements of student
writing and provides levels of achievement for each. The analytic
rubric, although more time-consuming to use, provides clearer feedback
to students about the particular areas of their writing where they
are doing well ands where they may need to improve. Please note
that the last general category, Assignment Specific, allows instructors
to add or delete any elements unique to a specific writing assignment.
Other elements in the analytic rubric can be ignored and/or given
variable weightings for a particular assignment.
These rubrics are not intended to make all faculty value the same
elements in their students’ writing. Rather, they were developed
to help encourage consistency among faculty when assessing student
writing and thereby send a consistent message to students concerning
what many of their instructors value about their writing, regardless
of the course or level. These rubrics were built from “the
ground up” by faculty who teach writing regularly. The elements
represented are what participating faculty say they value most.
However, these rubrics do not mean that all faculty must grade the
same way. On the contrary, as an institution engaged in continuous
self-improvement, these rubrics will always be subject to revision
based on how well they reflect what faculty value about their students’
writing.
For now, though, it is important to build consistency across our
courses in terms of what and how we assess our students’ writing.
It is recommended, therefore, that any changes an instructor thinks
useful to make to either of these rubrics should not obstruct reaching
this goal of consistency. Certainly the look of these rubrics, the
weightings given to each element, the actual elements used in any
given assignment, and those added that are assignment specific are
all aspects faculty can manipulate for their own desirable pedagogical
ends. In fact, variations on the design of these rubrics can be
shared with your colleagues and are welcomed. Please send an electronic
version to Mark Wiley, Director of the FCPD (mwiley@csulb).
You can also direct any questions or comments you might have regarding
these rubrics to Dr. Wiley.
Analytic Rubric
for Argumentative Writing:
Although this rubric has received less attention from faculty who
have participated in these assessment workshops, several instructors
in the first year composition program have found it useful for teaching
students how to write thesis-driven arguments. The design of this
rubric provides more specific feedback for students on each criterion
listed on the rubric and for each level of achievement.
Goals for Spring
2004
Several scoring sessions are being planned for next semester. Together,
faculty from across the disciplines will read samples of student
writing, use the new rubric to assess that writing, and then discuss
what changes need to be made in writing instruction. Participating
faculty will receive a small stipend for their help. If you would
like to participate in this ongoing assessment project, please contact
Mark Wiley.
|
