Allegations fly in defense of writing exam
In the interests of fair play, equal time,
and due process, I trust the editors of the Daily Forty-Niner will permit
me the opportunity to respond to the attacks made upon the Writing Proficiency
Exam and me on page 4 of the Sept. 9 edition.
Edward Borowiec
The Forty-Niner devoted
almost an entire page to the WPE issue in the form of a staff editorial
and commentaries by Chris Glover and Debbie Lensner.
Students in both of my upper-division
classes (English/Linguistics 327 and English 310) were as bemused as the
Forty-Niner writers were, but for different reasons.
They wondered how a journalist could write
a piece without checking facts, without resorting to resources and research
and without following the principles of fundamental fairness before publication.
Apparently itís a common practice, all
the more troubling and disconcerting because it occurs so frequently in
the Forty-Niner.
I fear to think and believe, in light
of recent journalistic developments in Boston and Phoenix, that the new
trend in journalism is if you donít have the facts, you make them up.
Each of the pieces contained a collection
of inaccuracies and innuendo.
And if I may take the liberty of representing
the WPE Test Development Committee whose chairman, incidentally, is Dr.
Keith Colman of the Psychology Department, I would like to respond to those
Forty-Niner writers who have initiated a conspiracy of ignorance on this
critical academic issue.
Yet, despite their smugness, their condescension,
and their general air of superiority, they managed to raise our collective
consciousness about an issue that deserves far more attention than it has
received in the past.
My first response in reading the editorials
and the commentary was to wish that the writers had contacted me, Dr. Colman,
any member of the TDC or any other faculty member, in order to gain another
perspective regarding developments affecting the WPE and the teaching of
grammatical theory.
Over the past few years, at least since
1995, the TDC has examined a considerable amount of data related to the
objective and essay portions of the WPE. In addition, the committee reviewed
statewide data on the Cal State University Graduation Writing Assessment
Requirement.
The TDC concluded that the objective portion
of the WPE could no longer be justified for two reasons:
(1) a significant percentage of CSULB students
who passed the objective part of the WPE could not achieve a minimum passing
score on the essay portion, and
(2) no linguistic research has ever validated
the hypothesis that learning grammar would automatically lead to improved
writing performance.
In fact, research has shown that the teaching
of grammar detracts from enhancing studentsí writing skills if that instruction
is in lieu of writing assignments and opportunities to write in class and
at home.
Essentially, one learns to write by writing
-- assuming, of course, that oneís reading skills are adequate.
There is a high correlation between the
acquisition of solid reading skills and writing ability.
On the other hand, there is no statistically
significant correlation between learning grammar and the improvement of
writing skills among secondary and college level students.
What, then, is the state of our current
knowledge on the matter? I would like to refer our 49er staffers to a text
I currently use in my English 310 course (Applied Composition), A Rhetoric
for Writing Teachers by Erika Lindemann, 3rd Ed., pp. 73-84.
These pages reveal the research of rhetoricians
and linguists such as Richard Braddock, Richard Lloyd-Jones, Lowell Schoer,
Ken Donelson, and especially the comprehensive work of George Hillocks
Jr. in his ìResearch on Written Composition: New Directions for Teaching."
Just a few random comments and conclusions
from the work of these language researchers should provide our student
journalists with the opportunity to re-visit their own words:
-- " . . . Students have trouble learning
formal grammar, dislike it, and seem not to retain for very long what theyíve
learned."
-- ". . . learning grammar is not useful
for attaining any other goal except learning grammar."
-- ". . . there is little or no relationship
between grammar and composition . . . ."
The data, the research, the reports are
readily availableóeven to journalists who would eschew such meddlesome
labor.
The nature and quality of the essay-only
WPE at Long Beach represents a major improvement in our version of the
GWAR, and I would challenge anyone to dispute that assertion.
First, we removed the simplistic narrative
basis for the WPE by adding a strong reading and analytical component to
its structure.
Students are now required to examine a
text, a third or a half page in length, from which the basis of the question
will be extracted, usually in two or three sub-questions or issues.
No longer will Cal State Long Beach students
be given essay questions that require them to use simple description or
comparison as the basis for their response.
Finally, the WPE has been lengthened to
75 minutes. At this juncture, the TDC will gladly measure the WPE against
the structure and the rigor of any other university-level essay instrument
in California.
Campuses are moving toward the essay-only
GWAR everywhere within the CSU system. Most recently, this
has occurred at Cal State cal Northridge and Cal State Sonoma.
Ultimately, it is incumbent upon us to
provide all of our students with the language resources they need long
before they graduate -- regardless of their major, native language, enrollment
status, GPA, or prior experience with the English language.
At the moment, we are not giving our students,
especially our non-native speakers, what they need.
We are admitting students to various university
programs with the expectation that somehow theyíll acquire the requisite
language skills in the process of completing their academic requirements.
Too few students take advantage of the
language and writing courses, the workshops and tutorials, and the learning
and writing centers available on this campus.
Left to their own devices, their primary
mission is to graduate and go about their lives, but this sharply conflicts
with the universityís mission to produce well educated, literate, and articulate
graduates.
Edward Borowiec, CSULB English professor
and member of Test Development Committee. |
![[opinion]](http://www.csulb.edu/~d49er/Icon/opinion.gif){kind=icon}
![[news]](http://www.csulb.edu/~d49er/Icon/news.gif){kind=icon}
![[sports]](http://www.csulb.edu/~d49er/Icon/sports.gif){kind=icon}