Report of Written Communication Assessment,

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 1 Report of Written Communication Assessment, 2014-2016 Submitted October 2016 Prepared by Dr. Rebecca Ertel, Office of Academic Planning and Assessment for with the Senate General Education and Writing-Across-the-Curriculum Committee General Education Written Communication Outcome Overview The written communication component of CSU s general education curriculum has the following learning outcome and sub-outcomes: Outcome: Students communicate effectively Students are able to communicate in standard English Students are able to write in expository, descriptive & argumentative styles Students are able to utilize current technology to communicate To achieve this outcome, students complete a required core of two sequential composition courses, English 1100 or 1101 and English 1102. English 1100 and 1101 focus on informative writing and have the same learning outcomes, but English 1100 is an intensive version of the course that carries an additional credit hour and includes instruction in reading. Students are placed in either English 1100 or 1101 based on their ACT composite scores. Students with ACT composite scores of less than 18 are placed in English 1100. English 1102, the second course in the sequence, focuses on argumentative writing and research. English 1100, 1101, and 1102 meet Ohio s transfer module and transfer and articulation guidelines. Beginning in the fall semester of 2014, in addition to these 1000-level courses, the University implemented its newly adopted writing-across-the-curriculum program. As part of this initiative, all general education courses must include at least 1200 words of written work and stress the conventions and expectations of writing in the academic, business, and professional settings. In addition, because the general education learning outcomes are also institutional learning outcomes, the WAC program assures that instruction and practice in achieving proficiency in written communication extends into the majors by requiring two upper-division writing intensive courses within each major, one at the 3000-level and one at the 4000- leve. In conjunction with the adoption of a new WAC program, the University also revised and enhanced its assessment of written communication to include two new direct assessments of student writing to be used in addition to the University s already required course assessment forms. The first, the signature assignment, consists of writing samples collected from English 1100, 1101, 1102, and, beginning in spring semester of 2015, the required upper division writing intensive courses. The second is based on faculty assessments of selected assignments within faculty course

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 2 portfolios. Along with these samples of student work, the faculty course portfolios include a course narrative with the instructor s analysis and reflections, the required course assessment form, and the course syllabus. The signature assignment assessment was piloted during the spring 2014 semester. The experience from the pilot administration guided this first official administration of the signature assessment during the 2014-2015 academic year. Because a limited number of writing intensive courses were offered in spring 2015, an insufficient number of samples was collected and the assessment of written communication in writing intensive courses was conducted again in spring 2016. The data from 2016 is provided in this report. Written Communication Assessment Description: Fall Semester, 2014 Signature Assignments Writing samples were collected from students enrolled in English 1100 and 1101 during fall semester 2014. The samples were scored by the instructor of the section from which they were taken and a member of the Written Communication Faculty Learning Community. The two scores were averaged to produce a final score for the sample. If cases where the scores differed by more than one level on the rubric, the sample was scored by a third reader and the two matching scores were averaged to produce the final score. Samples were not returned from three sections of English 1100; in two cases, these sections were taught by newly hired adjuncts who missed the assessment training, and in one case by a full-time faculty member who suffered a serious medical issue and was later replaced as the instructor of record. The essays were assessed using a modified version of the American Association of Colleges and University s VALUE rubric for written communication. Prior to conducting the assessment, a calibration session was held for the scorers using writing samples from the spring, 2014 pilot assessment. The percent of agreement on the category scores was.85, above the.7 thresh hold generally accepted to establish reliability (Jonsson and Svingby, 2007). Of the 277 samples collected, 239 were scored. Thirty-eight (38) were discarded either because they did not respond to the prompt, were illegible, or were too short to be scored. Faculty Course Portfolios Course portfolios were collected from five instructors during fall semester 2014, four teaching English 1100 and one teaching English 1102. The qualitative data

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 3 from the Course Portfolios is used along with the quantitative data from the Signature Assignments to provide recommendations for improving the curriculum and instruction for the Effective Written Communication learning outcome. Findings Discussion of Findings by Category Score As expected, the Fall 2014 assessment of Signature Assignments found that students in English 1100 and 1101 scored primarily 1 s and 2 s on the CSU modified version of the Written Communication VALUE rubric indicating that the majority begin their composition courses performing at the Benchmark or Milestone 1 levels. 101 samples, 42% of the 239 scored, received a composite score of one (1), the Benchmark category. This compares to 45% in the spring pilot study. 124 samples, 52%, received a composite score of two (2), the Milestone One category. This compares to 47% in the pilot study. Fifteen samples, 6%, received a composite score of three (3). Only one sample, less than 1%, received a score of 3 in the pilot study. Based on the spring pilot, the faculty established Category 1 as the benchmark for students entering English 1100 and 1101. These results, with some modest variability, are consistent with the results of the 2014 pilot, confirming that most students begin their first composition course at the Category 1 or Benchmark level. Category Scores for Eng. 1100 Of the 185 samples scored from sections of English 1100, seventy-nine (79) samples, 43%, received a composite score of one (1), the Benchmark category. This compares to 45% in the spring pilot study. Ninty-six (96) samples, 52%, received a composite score of two (2), the Milestone One category. This compares to 55% in the pilot study. Ten (10) samples, 5%, received a composite score of three (3). Only sample, less than 1%, received a score of 3 in the spring pilot. Category Scores for English 1101 Of the 54 samples scored from sections of English 1101, 22 samples, 41%, received a composite score of one (1), the Benchmark category. This compares to 57% in the spring pilot study and 43% in the fall sections of English 1100. Twenty-seven (27) samples, 50%, received a composite score of two (2), the Milestone One category. This compares to 55% in the pilot study and 52% in English 1100. Five (5) samples, 9%, received a composite score of three (3). Less than 1%, received a score of 3 in the spring pilot and 5% of the samples from English 1100 in fall received a 3 score.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 4 Scores by Rubric Category Distributed by Course 1100 N= 185 1101 N= 54 N Category Percent N Category Percent 79 1 43% 22 1 41% 96 2 52% 27 2 50% 10 3 5.0% 5 3 9.0% 0 4 0.0% 0 4 0.0% Table 1. English 1100 and 1101 Pre and Post Comparison Samples were also collected for comparison from 71 students enrolled in spring semester 2015 sections of English 1102. During the first two weeks of the semester, these students were asked to respond to the same prompt used to obtain the samples they wrote in their English 1100 or 1101 courses in the fall 2014 semester. The sample scores showed students achieved insignificant gains in Category score during their first writing course. Scores for 9 of the 49 students who completed English 1100 improved by one category, while scores for 10 of the 24 students who completed English 1101 improved by one category. Given the design of the rubric, this finding is not surprising; the four point scale is not designed to capture small, incremental gains. Discussion of English 1100, 1101 Sub-Scores The median for all sub-scores is 1.5. Mean scores suggest that students in both English 1100 and 1101 are modestly stronger in the areas of context and purpose and development. Students weakest average scores are in the area of using sources and evidence. These results are consistent with the spring pilot study. Students entering English 1102 had a median score of 1.5 for all categories except content and purpose. The composite score of students entering 1102 showed a very modest gain from 1.5 to 1.6. Entering English 1102, the students weakest sub-score mean is in the area of Using Sources and Evidence. These results are consistent with the spring pilot study.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 5 English 1100 Sub-Scores, Fall 2014 Table 2. English 1101 Sub-Scores, Fall 2014 Table 3. English 1102 Sub-Scores, Fall 2014 Table 4.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 6 In general, these findings reinforce the observations made by faculty in their course portfolios. Discussion of Findings By Placement Standard Beginning in 2010, entering students have been placed into either English 1100 or English 1101 based on their ACT English or SAT composite scores. Results of the 2013-2014 pilot assessment show that a student s ACT English score, the measure used to place most students, has a high degree of correlation with the student s performance on the signature assignment when sampled in English 1100 or 1101. The number of samples from students placed based on their SAT score was too small to yield useful information, so was not analyzed. 20 Written Communication Composite Assessment and ACT Eng Scores 10 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 ACT ENG Combined Avg Score Figure 5: Written Communication Composite and ACT English Scores One issue noted in the report of the spring pilot assessment was a high rate of misplacement. Data from the Signature Assignment suggest that correct placement correlated well with performance on the assessment. Students who were correctly placed in English 1101 and 1100 performed better than students who were incorrectly placed. Since the Signature Assignments were written during the first week of classes, this result cannot be explained by instruction. Written Communication Assessment Description: Spring Semesters 2015/2016 Signature Assignments Writing samples were collected from students enrolled in English 1102 in spring 2015 and 11 upper-division writing intensive courses during spring semester 2016. The samples were scored by the instructor of the course and a member of the Written Communication Faculty Learning Community. The two scores were averaged to produce a final score for the sample. To improve inter-rater reliability, if the two scores differed by more than one category on the rubric, the sample was

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 7 scored by a third reader and the two nearest composite scores were averaged to produce the final score. The samples were assessed using a modified version of the American Association of Colleges and University s VALUE rubric for written communication. Prior to conducting the assessment, a calibration session was held for the scorers using writing samples from the spring, 2014 pilot assessment. The percent of agreement on the composite score is.79, above the.7 thresh hold generally accepted to establish reliability (Jonsson and Svingby, 2007). Description of English 1102 Samples 174 samples were collected from 245 students enrolled in English 1102 during spring semester 2015. 9 samples were discarded because they were either too short to score or illegible. 165 samples were scored. English 1102 Scores, Spring 2015 Table5. Discussion of Samples from English 1102, Spring 2015 Median category scores ranged from 1.8 in Content and Purpose to 1.5 in Syntax and Mechanics. Entering English 1102, the students weakest sub-scores were Syntax and Mechanics and Sources and Evidence. These areas remain the students weakest in the 1102 sample. These results are consistent with the spring pilot study. The mean composite score for the sample is 2, reflecting no gain between English 1100/1101 and 1102, also consistent with the pilot results. Description of Samples from Writing Intensive Courses, Spring 2016 The number of samples collected from writing intensive courses during spring 2015 was small for several reasons. Most significantly, only 28 of the 34 major programs submitted samples. Of the six programs which submitted samples, a significant number of the students from which samples were collected were not graduating

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 8 seniors. Due to the small sample size, samples were collected and score in spring 2016. Description of Spring 2016 Writing Intensive Sample Samples were collected from 68 seniors enrolled in 11 upper-division writing intensive courses during spring semester 2016. 14 samples were discarded because they were either were not within the word count specified for scoring or were illegible. 54 samples were scored. Writing Intensive Courses Spring 2016 Table 6 Discussion of Samples from Writing Intensive Upper Division Courses Mean and median category scores show little variability, ranging from 2.5 in the Syntax and Mechanics and Sources and Evidence categories to 2.6 in the remaining categories. The Syntax and Mechanics and Sources and Evidence sub-scores are also the lowest sub-score areas in the samples from first-year students. The mean composite score for the sample is 3 compared to 2 for the sample from first-year students. Recommendations Improve instruction in the areas of using sources and evidence and grammar and mechanics. Increase emphasis on writing in major programs. Increase student awareness of the importance of writing.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 9 References Jonsson, A. & Gunilla, S. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2, 130 144 Stoddart, T., Abrams, R., Gasper, E., & Canaday, D. (2000). Concept maps as assessment in science inquiry learning A report of methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1221 1246

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 10 Catalog Descriptions: Appendix A Central State University English 1100: Introduction to Writing and Reading for College (5) Course Syllabus ENG. 1100 Introduction to Writing and Reading for College (5 credits, I, II): An intensive introduction to writing and reading for College. Students will read literary and non-literary texts and compose essays that demonstrate proficiency in college level writing and mechanics. At least one paper will be a readerresponse essay based on a literary text. Students will also be introduced to the basic principles of documentation and write one essay using documentation. Lecture/discussion periods will focus on discussions of assigned readings and introducing the conventions of academic prose, including elements of Standard English grammar and mechanics. Individualized and small-group work on the writing process included. Required of students whose performance on the English Placement Test indicates a need for intensive writing instruction. Equivalent to English 1101 for general education requirements. Textbooks: Maimon, Elaine P. and Janice H. Peritz. Writing Intensive: Essentials for College Writers. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2009, 2007. Print. Connect Writing 2.0. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2013. Online. Learning Outcomes 1. Recognize elements that contribute to rhetorical situations, including purpose, audience, stance, and appropriate conventions. 2. Critically examine personal views in comparison/contrast with those explored in texts. 3. Identify, analyze, and discuss themes and structures of texts. 4. Apply the process of writing through drafting, revising, and editing, at times in collaboration with others. 5. Apply writing process to produce effective and fully developed essays. 6. Use correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation. 7. Explore a diverse range of authors, cultures, and perspectives. 8. Use electronic environments to draft and publish work where possible. Policies/Requirements: 1. Write a combination of essays, annotated bibliographies, and/or shorter compositions of formal writing that is roughly equivalent to twenty pages. 2. Write one source-supported essay following the MLA format.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 11 3. Complete all assignments according to scheduled due dates, including all assignments from Connect Writing 2.0. The Connect Writing 2.0 assignments should total at least 10% of the final grade. 4. Participate in all class discussions, activities, and assignments. 5. Take the departmental final examination at the prescribed time. 6. Avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism, the submitting of another student s work or material from other printed sources as one s own work, may result in the grade of "F" for the paper or for the course itself. 7. Attend class on time regularly. Students are responsible for obtaining materials, assignments, and information given on missed class days. 8. Instructors may develop and enforce other policies consistent with the current CSU course catalog, departmental guidelines, and standard academic practices. Veteran instructors may pick an alternate supplemental textbook. Criteria for Grading: The grade for the class will be determined by the student s level of competence in class assignments and activities, homework, tests, quizzes, and essays. Instructors may develop and enforce attendance and other policies consistent with the current CSU course catalog and Departmental guidelines. Each instructor will develop a course section syllabus that discusses specific methods of delivery, topics, activities, and assignments. The final exam will count as at least 10% of the final grade. ENG1100 uses the university s A-F and I grading scale. Americans with Disabilities Compliance: Central State University is committed to including students with disabilities as full participants in its programs, services, and activities through compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. If you are a student with a documented disability please call Dr. Wanda Hadley at 937-376-6479 to discuss your course accommodations. Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions At the completion of the course the student will demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions as follows: Knowledge: 1. Explain the theme, structure, and meaning of literary and non-literary texts. 2. Know how to develop a thesis. 3. Explain the relationship between details and themes of texts. 4. Understand what constitutes evidence and how to determine the most effective form. 5. Develop the ability to produce edited writing according to the conventions of Standard American English. 6. Understand how to document primary and secondary sources in essays.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 12 Skills: 7. Identify, analyze and discuss themes and structures of literary and non-literary texts. 8. Defend themes by identifying valid supporting ideas and evidence. 9. Write effective thesis statements. 10. Write effective, fully developed, and organized essays. 11. Synthesize ideas from readings into other activities and writing. 12. Use and document secondary sources. 13. Use a more extensive, sophisticated vocabulary. 14. Write for clarity, organization, and development. 15. Use correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation. Dispositions: 16. Understand and appreciate a variety of literary and non-literary texts. 17. Examine personal views in comparison/contrast with those explored in texts. 18. Explore a diverse range of authors, cultures, and perspectives. 19. Learn the relationship between literature and life/universal truths. 20. Understand the importance of effective written communication. 21. Develop confidence in responding to oral /written prompts. 22. Understand the importance of documentation.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 13 Catalog Descriptions: Central State University English 1101: Introduction to Writing for College (4) Course Syllabus ENG. 1101 (4 credits, 1, II, III) Introduction to Writing for College: Informative writing based on literary and non-literary texts. Students will compose essays that demonstrate proficiency in college-level writing and mechanics. At least one paper will be a reader-response essay based on a literary text. Students will also be introduced to the basic principles of documentation and write one essay using documentation. Individualized and small-group work on the writing process included. Textbooks: Maimon, Elaine P. and Janice H. Peritz. Writing Intensive: Essentials for College Writers. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2009, 2007. Print. Kennedy, X. J., Bedford Guide for College Writers with Reader, Ninth Edition. New York: Bedford/St. Martin s, 2011. Print. Learning Outcomes 1. Recognize elements that contribute to rhetorical situations, including purpose, audience, stance, and appropriate conventions. 2. Critically examine personal views in comparison/contrast with those explored in texts. 3. Identify, analyze, and discuss themes and structures of texts. 4. Apply the process of writing through drafting, revising, and editing, at times in collaboration with others. 5. Apply writing process to produce effective and fully developed essays. 6. Use correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation. 7. Explore a diverse range of authors, cultures, and perspectives. 8. Use electronic environments to draft and publish work where possible. Policies/Requirements: 1. Write a combination of essays, annotated bibliographies, and/or shorter compositions of formal writing that is roughly equivalent to twenty pages. 2. Write one source-supported essay following the MLA format. 3. Complete all assignments according to scheduled due dates. 4. Participate in all class discussions, activities, and assignments. 5. Take the departmental final examination at the prescribed time. 6. Avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism, the submitting of another student s work or material from other printed sources as one s own work, may result in the grade of "F" for the paper or for the course itself.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 14 7. Attend class on time regularly. Students are responsible for obtaining materials, assignments, and information given on missed class days. 8. Instructors may develop and enforce other policies consistent with the current CSU course catalog, departmental guidelines, and standard academic practices. Veteran instructors may pick an alternate supplemental textbook. Criteria for Grading: The grade for the class will be determined by the student s level of competence in class assignments and activities, homework, tests, quizzes, and essays. Instructors may develop and enforce attendance and other policies consistent with the current CSU course catalog and Departmental guidelines. Each instructor will develop a course section syllabus that discusses specific methods of delivery, topics, activities, and assignments. The final exam will count as at least 10% of the final grade. ENG1100 uses the university s A-F and I grading scale. Americans with Disabilities Compliance: Central State University is committed to including students with disabilities as full participants in its programs, services, and activities through compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. If you are a student with a documented disability please call Dr. Wanda Hadley at 937-376-6479 to discuss your course accommodations. Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions At the completion of the course the student will demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions as follows: 1. Knowledge: 2. Explain the theme, structure, and meaning of literary and non-literary texts. 3. Know how to develop a thesis. 4. Explain the relationship between details and themes of texts. 5. Understand what constitutes evidence and how to determine the most effective form. 6. Develop the ability to produce edited writing according to the conventions of Standard American English. 7. Understand how to document primary and secondary sources in essays. 8. Identify, analyze and discuss themes and structures of literary and non-literary texts. Skills: 1. Defend themes by identifying valid supporting ideas and evidence. 2. Write effective thesis statements. 3. Write effective, fully developed, and organized essays. 4. Synthesize ideas from readings into other activities and writing. 5. Use and document secondary sources. 6. Use a more extensive, sophisticated vocabulary.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 15 7. Write for clarity, organization, and development. 8. Use correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation. Dispositions: 1. Understand and appreciate a variety of literary and non-literary texts. 2. Examine personal views in comparison/contrast with those explored in texts. 3. Explore a diverse range of authors, cultures, and perspectives. 4. Learn the relationship between literature and life/universal truths. 5. Understand the importance of effective written communication. 6. Develop confidence in responding to oral /written prompts. 7. Understand the importance of documentation.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 16 Central State University English 1102: Writing and Researching the Essay Course Syllabus Catalog Description ENG 1102 (4 credits, I, II, III) Writing and Researching the Essay: Research-based argumentative and analytical writing using library and Internet sources. Students will continue to develop proficiency in college-level writing and mechanics. They will write brief essays and at least one longer research paper, properly formatted, using both print and electronic sources. The research paper will be oriented toward the student s major field or area of interest. Course includes review for the English Proficiency exam. Prerequisite: Grade of C or above in ENG 1100 or 1101 or equivalent. Textbooks Maimon, Elaine P. and Janice H. Peritz. Writing Intensive: Essentials for College Writers. Boston: McGraw Hill, 2009, 2007. Print. Lunsford, Andrea A. And John J. Ruszkiewicz. Everything s an Argument. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin s, 2009. Print. Learning Outcomes 1. Analyze argumentative strategies and rhetorical appeals. 2. Develop appropriate argumentative strategies and rhetorical appeals in essays. 3. Find, evaluate, and use sources as recommended by academic major or area of interest. 4. Write unified and coherent analytical and persuasive essays. 5. Apply the process of writing through drafting, revising, and editing, at times in collaboration with others. 6. Employ textual conventions for incorporating ideas from sources. 7. Achieve proficiency in the tools of research, including print documents, scholarly databases, general databases, and informal Internet sources. 8. Use correct grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation. Policies/Requirements 1. To enroll in ENG 1102, students must have earned a grade of "C" or above in ENG 1101 or equivalent 2. Write a combination of essays, annotated bibliographies, and/or shorter compositions of formal writing that is roughly equivalent to twenty pages. 3. Write a fully developed, fully documented research paper, proceeding from rough drafts to final form. 4. Consult with faculty in the major departments for recommended sources. 5. Study sample essays for discussion of ideas and writing models. 6. Schedule at least two conferences with the instructor. Conferences can be individual or in small groups. 7. Attend class on time. Students are responsible for finding out, on their own, the material for classes missed.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 17 8. Avoid plagiarism. Plagiarism, the submitting of another's work or material from other printed sources as one's own work may result in the grade of "F" for the paper or for the course itself. 9. Take the required departmental final exam at the prescribed time. 10. Achieve skills and complete all work by the end of the semester. 11. Instructors may develop and enforce other policies consistent with the current CSU catalog, departmental guidelines and standard academic practices. Veteran instructors may pick an alternate supplemental textbook. Criteria for Grading: The final grade will be determined by the level of competence in the writing and discussion required in the course, mastery of proper documentation(s) as required by major area, and class attendance and participation. Each instructor will develop a course section syllabus that discusses specific methods of delivery, topics, activities, and assignments. The final exam will count as at least 10% of the final grade. ENG1102 uses the university s A-F and I grading scale. Americans with Disabilities Compliance: Central State University is committed to including students with disabilities as full participants in its programs, services, and activities through compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990. If you are a student with a documented disability please call Dr. Wanda Hadley at 937-376-6479 to discuss your course accommodations. Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions At the completion of this course the student will demonstrate knowledge, skills, and dispositions as follows: Knowledge (what you can explain and/or teach to others) 1. Understand the various modes of writing (exposition, description, and argumentation) used in research writing. 2. Explain the relationship between the thesis and the rest of the research paper. 3. Describe the techniques of argumentation. 4. Refute adversarial positions. 5. Describe proper documentation as required by major area. 6. Communicate awareness of issues. Skills (tasks you can perform): 1. Read and think critically. 2. Analyze argumentative issues. 3. Relate information in essays to one s own academic major or areas of interest. 4. Apply the techniques of argumentation to research-based writing. 5. Read and think critically. 6. Use approved documentation forms in research-based writing.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 18 7. Use primary and secondary sources properly. 8. Write unified and coherent analytical and persuasive essays. 9. Choose and limit a research topic. 10. Find information in the library and on the Internet. 11. Formulate a thesis for the research paper. 12. Use MLA or APA formatting and documentation conventions. Dispositions (attitudes and patterns of behavior) 1. Value careful reading and effective written communication. 2. Value critical awareness of differing arguments. 3. Maintain interest in current topics. 4. Confidence in discussing issues. 5. Evaluate and organize ideas. 6. Achieve proficiency in the tools of research. 7. Recognize rhetorical modes used in research writing.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 19 Appendix B Using ACT/SAT Scores ENGLISH PLACEMENT Effective Fall Semester 2010, the English faculty members have agreed to use ACT and SAT scores to place new first time students in first-year composition courses, provided that students have submitted at least one of these scores. ACT/SAT SCORES GPA REQUIRED COURSE ACT English score of 17 or NA English 1100 Combined SAT of 730-869 Introduction to Reading and ACT English > 18 or Combined SAT > 870) Writing for College NA English 1100 Intro to Writing for College Students in English 1101 will be required to write a verification essay. Depending on their performance, they might be advised to transfer to English 1100, Introduction to Reading and Writing for College. Students without scores must write a placement essay.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 20 Appendix C Signature Essay You write a well-developed essay in response to the following prompt. Be sure to plan your ideas carefully, include specific examples and details in your paragraphs, and leave sufficient time for editing. Prompt: Think of an occasion where you had to solve a problem. What was the problem? How did you attempt to solve it? What was the result? What would you do differently if faced with a similar problem in the future? You could write about a challenge at school, work, or home that needed a resolution. You may choose any situation you remember well to describe. Tell your audience the story of the problem with details about you, other people who were involved, and the situation that will bring the scene to life. Your finished essay should be at least four to six paragraphs. Your response will help me learn more about you and your writing.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 21 Appendix D Written Communication Capstone Milestone Milestone Benchmark Outcome 4 3 2 1 Context and Purpose for Writing (Includes considerations of audience, purpose, and the circumstances surrounding the writing task(s).) Demonstrates a thorough understanding of context, audience, and purpose that is responsive to the assigned task(s) and focuses all elements of the work. Demonstrates adequate consideration of context, audience, and purpose and a clear focus on the assigned task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with audience, purpose, and context.) Demonstrates awareness of context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned task(s) (e.g., begins to show awareness of audience's perceptions and assumptions). Demonstrates minimal attention to context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned task(s) (e.g., expectation of instructor or self as audience) Content Development Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject, conveying the writer's understanding and shaping the whole work. Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to explore ideas within the context of the discipline and shape the whole work. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas through most of the work. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop simple ideas in some parts of the work. Genre and Disciplinary Conventions (Formal and informal rules inherent in the expectations for writing in particular forms and/or academic fields.) Demonstrates detailed attention to and successful execution of a wide range of conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing tasks(s) including organization, content, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices. Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing tasks(s) including organization, content, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices. Follows expectations particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s) for basic organization, content, presentation. Attempts to use consistent system for basic organization and presentation. Sources and Evidence Demonstrates skillful use of high-quality, credible, relevant evidence appropriate to the discipline, genre, and context of the writing. If outside sources are used, the writer effectively uses a disciplinaryappropriate method of documentation. Demonstrates consistent use of high-quality, credible, relevant evidence mostly appropriate to the discipline, genre, and context of the writing. If outside sources are used, the writer attempts to employ a disciplinaryappropriate method of documentation. Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant evidence to support ideas that are appropriate to the discipline, genre, and context of the writing. If outside sources are used, the writer attempts to document their use. Demonstrates an attempt to use evidence to support ideas in the writing. If outside sources are used, the writer makes little or no attempt to document their use. Control of Syntax and Mechanics Uses graceful language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is virtually error free. Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the portfolio has few errors. Uses language that generally conveys means to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors. Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage.

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 22

Report on Assessment of Written Communication October 2016 23 Descriptive Statistics for All Samples Appendix E Context Content Genre Sources Syntax Mean 1.71 Mean 1.63 Mean 1.52 Mean 1.29 Mean 1.42 Standard Standard Error 0.04 Standard Error 0.04 Standard Error 0.04 Error 0.03 Standard Error 0.04 Median 1.75 Median 1.50 Median 1.50 Median 1.00 Median 1.00 Mode 2.00 Mode 2.00 Mode 1.00 Mode 1.00 Mode 1.00 Standard Deviation 0.53 Standard Deviation 0.51 Standard Deviation 0.48 Standard Deviation 0.41 Standard Deviation 0.48 Sample Variance 0.28 Sample Variance 0.26 Sample Variance 0.23 Sample Variance 0.17 Sample Variance 0.23 Kurtosis - 0.12 Kurtosis - 0.80 Kurtosis -1.43 Kurtosis -0.20 Kurtosis 0.47 Skewness 0.33 Skewness 0.21 Skewness 0.19 Skewness 1.07 Skewness 0.84 Range 2.50 Range 2.00 Range 1.50 Range 1.50 Range 2.50 Minimum 1 Minimum 1.00 Minimum 1 Minimum 1 Minimum 1 Maximum 4 Maximum 3.00 Maximum 3 Maximum 3 Maximum 4 Sum 270 Sum 258. 00 Sum 240 Sum 204 Sum 225 Count 158 Count 158. 00 Count 158 Count 158 Count 158 Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.08 Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.08 Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.08 Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.06 Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.08