View
220
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A Multi-method Approach:Assessment of Basic
CommunicationCheryl E Drout, Ph.D.
SUNY-Fredonia
GCP V. CCC Writing & Speaking Requirements CCC Basic Written
Communication course Speaking Intensive Infused coverage of
critical literacy in all areas critical thinking critical writing critical reading critical speaking
GCP Freshman Comp Second Writing
Course Across the
curriculum
Basic Communication: Written SUNY LEARNING OUTCOMES Produce coherent texts within
common college-level written forms Demonstrate the ability to revise
and improve such texts Research a topic, develop an
argument, and organize supporting details
Written Communication: Local Learning Outcomes
Research a topic, develop an argument, and organize supporting details create focus organize content develop support generalize from
evidence & abstract from observations
Written Communication: Local Learning Outcomes Demonstrate the
ability to revise and improve such texts local global
Planned Methodology & Collaboration Written
Communication: Longitudinal
FIPSE Writing Test• Frosh Orientation• Upper Level• Title III Committee
Frosh Comp• Research Paper• Ass’t SubCommittee
Implemented Methodology Written
Communication: Freshman
Composition First Draft Final Draft F’02
FIPSE Writing Test Cross-sectional
• Entering Frosh ‘00• Upperclass ‘02
Future Methodology Written
Communication: Freshman
Composition First & Final draft First paper & First & final draft Final paper
CCC Juniors FIPSE Essay
Learning Outcomes & Measures Research Topic &
Develop Argument Final Draft
• create focus• organize content• develop support• generalize from evidence
& abstract from observations
Ability to revise First & Final Draft
• Local • Global
FIPSE ESSAY
• create focus• organize content• develop support• generalize from
evidence & abstract from observations
FIPSE Essay Write an essay in which you describe
and analyze what you have found to be a major problem or success with your high school/college education.
Training & Inter-rater reliability All English faculty Mostly writing faculty All had previous training and/or
experience Several hours of practice preceded
actual scoring of protocols
Results: Comparison ofFrosh and Juniors Entry level Frosh 18% Not meeting
standards
Juniors 0% Not meeting
standards All other
percentages Juniors > Frosh approaching meeting exceeding
Greatest Weakness Overall Ability to
generalize from evidence
abstract from observations
synthesize global revisions involving the same issues
Ability to employ standard usage college level writing Fredonia was fairly comparable to
aggregate SUNY data Fewer who didn’t meet standards and
fewer who exceeded standards Majority met or approached standards
Guideline for standards 80+ exceeding 70-74 approaching 75-79 meeting <70 not meeting
Summary Observations Students are competent in their
ability to employ standard usage, syntax, mechanics, and grammar.
They are less proficient in their ability to generalize from evidence and abstract from observations.
Recommendations
Faculty teaching the basic communication course will provide more guidance in the abilities to generalize from evidence and abstract from observations during class time more feedback about these skills on
paper drafts.
Other responses English department
Request to consider reinstituting second writing course rather than infused writing
Survey planned
Basic Communication: Oral SUNY LEARNING OUTCOMES Develop proficiency in oral discourse Evaluate an oral presentation
according to established criteria
Oral Communication: Local Learning Outcomes
Delivery Articulate Speech Suitable Voice
Quality Adequate Eye
Contact Other Appropriate
Nonverbal Behavior
Oral Communication: Local Learning Outcomes Content
Thesis clear Ideas/issues relevant Organization easy to
follow Arguments supported
by evidence & explanation
Visual aids integrated
Planned Methodology & Collaboration
Oral Communication: One time measure of
attainment Upper Level Speaking
Intensive courses• standardized ratings• final speaking
assignment• faculty feedback• Ass’t SubCommittee
Future Methodology Oral
Communication: Upper Level
Speaking Intensive courses
Ability to judge others’ presentations
Collaborating Parties Campus Assessment Co-Directors
Monitored data collection Coordinated Report Writing
Assessment Subcommittees Collected most data & Scored Protocols
Title III Committee provided FIPSE essay data
Gen Ed Director/Committee generated input re: recommendations
Unexpected benefits of collaboration
Consistent pattern of findings from two different approaches
English faculty & Gen Ed Faculty composing joint survey regarding writing across the curriculum to assist in resolving different recommendations of English department & G E Committee
Multi-unit involvement in survey will promote participation in responding
All photos copyright Robert Siedentop 2003