1

WAC ANNUAL REPORT FY07

Department: Writing Across the Curriculum Program Director: Teresa M. Redd, Ph.D. A. Unit Overview During FY07, the Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) program continued to extend its reach beyond the College of Arts & Sciences (COAS) to the University’s other schools and colleges. At its headquarters at the Center for Excellence in Teaching, Learning, and Assessment (CETLA), it offered a variety of workshops to a variety of schools at a variety of times. Both faculty and student evaluations attest to the effectiveness of the expanded program. However, COAS remains the flagship college. B. Mission, Goals, and Objectives

1. Mission An interdisciplinary program, Writing Across the Curriculum promotes “writing to learn” and “learning to write” in every discipline. Because writing and learning are intrinsically linked, the WAC program aims to expand the role of writing in courses in every discipline. In addition, it seeks to reinforce writing skills learned in Freshman English while helping students master the text conventions of their chosen discipline. To achieve its aims, the WAC program strives to change the way teachers teach as well as the way students learn. Therefore, although the WAC program encourages faculty to offer “official WAC courses,” (i.e., writing-intensive courses that fulfill the third writing requirement in COAS), the program supports the incorporation of WAC methods in all courses. Indeed, in 2006, the WAC Committee agreed that courses in the professional schools could incorporate selected WAC strategies and thereby qualify for WAC approval and support—even when the classes were too large to fulfill a writing requirement.

2. Goals

a. To expand the role of writing in courses in every discipline.

b. To empower students to use writing to learn the subject matter of a discipline.

2

c. To improve students’ professional as well as general writing skills.

3. Objectives During FY07, the WAC program sought to fulfill the following broad objectives:

a. Writing across the Disciplines. Faculty across the curriculum will integrate WAC methods in their courses.

b. Writing to Learn. WAC students will use writing to read

carefully, to make sense of their lessons, to think critically about the subject matter, to organize their thoughts, and to present those thoughts in a comprehensible format.

c. Learning to Write. WAC students will master the text

conventions of a discipline as well as general writing skills learned in Freshman English.

To fulfill these objectives, the WAC program set the following benchmarks for FY07:

a. At least 75% of COAS departments beyond the English Department will offer an official WAC course, while at least three other schools or colleges will offer WAC-approved courses.

b. The majority of WAC students will report that writing

helped them learn the subject matter of a WAC course.

c. The majority of WAC students will report that they improved their writing skills as a result of taking a WAC course.

4. Staff

The WAC Program is directed by CETLA’s director with the assistance of an interdisciplinary WAC Committee and CETLA’s support staff.

Name Position Department Teresa M. Redd, Ph.D. Director CETLA/English Gloria Bethea Administrative Secretary CETLA Benny Schalin Webmaster CETLA Ann Kelly, Ph.D.

WAC Committee

English

Wade Harrell, M.A. WAC Committee English

3

Annette Davis, Ph.D. WAC Committee EAC Adeniran Adeboye, Ph.D. WAC Committee Math Lee Brown, Ph.D. WAC Committee Philosophy Marguerite Neita, Ph.D. WAC Committee Allied Health

C. Progress in Fulfillment of the University’s Mission As envisioned in Strategic Framework for Action I and II, the WAC program has not only strengthened academic programs but also promoted excellence in teaching. In fulfillment of the University’s mission, the WAC program has provided students with “an educational experience of exceptional quality” by “developing a cadre of faculty who . . . are committed to producing distinguished and compassionate graduates.” The narrative below will document how the WAC Program has been fulfilling the University’s mission. D. Key Performance Indicators The WAC Program met or approached its FY07 benchmarks:

1. Approximately 68% of COAS departments (beyond the English Department) offered at least one official WAC course. This total falls slightly below the 75% benchmark. However, COAS offered a total of 37 WAC courses (18 in Fall 2006 and 19 in Spring 2007). These courses enrolled 231 students in the fall and 293 in the spring. Moreover, there were WAC-trained faculty in every department except Music, and many of them incorporated WAC methods in non-WAC as well as official WAC courses in COAS. In addition to COAS, six schools and colleges offered 10 WAC-approved courses (6 in Fall 2006 and 4 in Spring 2007) serving more than 500 students.

2. The majority of WAC students reported that writing had

helped them learn the subject matter of a WAC course. Indeed, in Fall 2006, at least 83% of the students in COAS’s WAC courses claimed that the writing assignments had improved their reading, understanding, and critical thinking; in Spring 2007, at least 78%. This was also the consensus of the majority of the students in WAC-approved courses in other schools and colleges.

3. The majority of WAC students reported that they had

improved their writing skills as a result of taking a WAC course. In Fall 2006, at least 88% of the students in COAS’s WAC courses felt that the writing instruction had helped them organize their writing and follow the conventions of the discipline; in Spring 2007, at least 80%. Meanwhile, in the fall, 78% said they had practiced editing

4

skills taught in Freshman English; in the spring, 67%. A similar trend emerged in the WAC-approved courses in other schools and colleges. In those courses, the majority of the students also felt that the writing instruction had helped them organize their writing and follow the conventions of the discipline. However, since large class sizes limited the amount of writing their instructors could evaluate, most of the students in professional classes did not report the improvement in editing skills that COAS’s WAC students did.

E. Assessment and Evaluation Assessment of faculty development is a three-stage process beginning with Program Activities, followed by Classroom Implementation, and ending with the Impact on student learning and teacher productivity. Consequently, the following pages present this year’s assessment of the faculty’s participation in and satisfaction with WAC activities, an analysis of the faculty’s implementation of WAC strategies, and evidence of the impact.

1. Activities a. Participation. By June 30, 2007, 55 faculty had

participated in CETLA’s WAC activities. Although this headcount was not as high as last year’s, FY07 enrollment (i.e., the number of visits) remained “steady” at 82. In fact, if one counts the seven participants in the guest-led Labwrite workshop (GW12 “Helping Students Write Better Lab Reports”), FY07 enrollment exceeded last year’s all-time ”high” of 83. As Table 1 reveals, the FY07 participants came from 11 schools and colleges.

As a result of the high enrollment, 10 more faculty completed the WAC seminar or workshops leading to certification. So far 107 COAS faculty have completed WAC training; of these, 70 have submitted syllabi to the WAC Committee to complete the certification requirements (see Table 2). In addition, 57 faculty from other schools and colleges have completed the training, and 12 of them have submitted syllabi for WAC certification. (See http://www.cetla.howard.edu/check/cert/certified.aspx for a list of certified faculty.)

b. Satisfaction. Soon after each workshop or seminar, CETLA solicited anonymous faculty evaluations of the instruction; 44 of the 82 participants completed the

5

evaluations, expressing a high level of satisfaction. Indeed, Table 3 shows that 100% of the participants “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that the sessions were organized, the instructions were clear, the lessons encouraged sufficient participation, the pedagogical advice was useful, and the length and pace were appropriate.

2. Classroom Implementation At the request of former Provost A. Toy Caldwell-Colbert, CETLA has sought to expand WAC beyond the College of Arts & Sciences since opening CETLA. Via the WAC Program, CETLA has not only helped develop WAC courses but has also introduced software such as Turnitin (for plagiarism detection) and Labwrite (for lab reports) to improve students’ writing. As explained below, faculty throughout the campus have been implementing these WAC initiatives.

a. WAC Courses. As expected, in FY07 COAS faculty

offered the most WAC courses (see Tables 4 and 5). These “official” WAC courses fulfilled the third writing requirement in COAS, and they extended across the COAS curriculum. Approximately 68% of COAS departments (beyond the English Department) offered at least one official WAC course—a total of 37 WAC courses (18 in Fall 2006 and 19 in Spring 2007). These COAS courses enrolled 231 students in the fall and 293 in the spring. Moreover, there were WAC-trained faculty in every department except Music, and many of them incorporated WAC methods in non-WAC as well as official WAC courses in COAS.

In addition to COAS, six schools and colleges offered 10 “WAC-approved” courses (6 in Fall 2006 and 4 in Spring 2007) serving 325 students in the fall and 191 in the spring . Although WAC-approved courses are normally too large to fulfill a writing requirement (as the “official” WAC courses in COAS do) in 2006, the WAC Committee decided to approve such courses because of the integration of “writing-to-learn” and/or “learning-to-write” techniques by WAC-certified instructors.

b. LabWrite. In April 2006, CETLA introduced LabWrite, an

NSF-funded web-based tutorial designed to help

6

students understand their labs better and write better lab reports. These workshops were conducted at CETLA by one of LabWrite’s creators, Dr. Michael Carter of North Carolina State University. As a follow-up to the workshops, CETLA invited Dr. Carter back on September 1, 2006, to work with interested biology and chemistry professors and their TAs. As a result, the coordinator of all 15 sections of Biology 101, decided to integrate Labwrite into all of the Fall 2007 Biology 101 sessions. To assist him, CETLA reserved two Open Labs to work with him and his TAs, integrated Labwrite into Blackboard (as requested by the TAs), and provided follow-up support as needed. The pilot included 372 students.

c. Turnitin.com. In FY06, CETLA bought its first

Turnitin.com license to protect the academic integrity of the University’s writing requirements. Consequently, after taking CETLA’s WC12 “Discouraging Plagiarism” workshop, faculty teaching Freshman Composition, Writing Across the Curriculum, and other official writing courses could use Turnitin.com’s database to deter and detect student plagiarism. During FY07, a total of 22 faculty took advantage of Turnitin.com to check 2,673 papers from 1,079 students. Among those faculty were several School of Law professors who adopted Turnitin for all first-year legal writing courses.

d. Last Year’s Participants. To understand how faculty

were implementing what they had learned in WAC workshops, CETLA collected survey responses and syllabi from last year’s workshop participants. Of the 66 faculty enrolled in WAC workshops in FY06, only 5 responded to the survey, but their syllabi provided tangible evidence of implementation. A number of faculty used many of the WAC strategies, including helping students master citation styles such as APA, writing a proposal for a research paper, and composing an annotated bibliography. Another faculty member required students to write thought-provoking discussion questions based on the weekly reading and to submit these questions via Blackboard. Still another faculty member required students to write two critiques of an assigned text, while another professor required students to analyze a clinical case and write a group report. In addition, three of the FY06 workshop participants earned

7

WAC certification, and four taught a WAC-approved course during FY07.

As for the 43 FY06 participants in the WC12 (Turnitin) workshops, 16 actively used the Turnitin plagiarism detector in FY07 to check papers from 811 students. In fact, the coordinator of the Legal Writing Program in the Law School stated that Turnitin was “implemented all year in all first-year Legal Writing courses.”

3. Impact

In FY07, CETLA collected direct and indirect evidence of the impact of WAC on students’ learning and teachers’ productivity. Some of the evidence is summarized below. a. WAC Program Student Evaluations. Since COAS

launched the first WAC courses in 1993, the WAC Program has collected student evaluations every year to supplement periodic portfolio assessment and other classroom research (see http://www.cetla.howard.edu/wac/assessment.htm). This fiscal year, CETLA collected student evaluations of the Fall 2006 and Spring 2007 WAC courses. In Fall 2006, 322 of the 543 WAC students in COAS and other colleges completed the evaluation form, while in Spring 2007, 206 of the 337 WAC students responded. An analysis of the data revealed the following: o The majority of WAC students reported that

writing had helped them learn the subject matter of a WAC course. Indeed, in Fall 2006, at least 83% of the students in COAS’s WAC courses claimed that the writing assignments had improved their reading, understanding, and critical thinking; in Spring 2007, at least 78%. This was also the consensus of the majority of the students in WAC-approved courses in other schools and colleges (see Tables 6 and 7).

o The majority of WAC students reported that

they had improved their writing skills as a result of taking a WAC course. In Fall 2006, at least 88% of the students in COAS’s WAC courses felt that the writing instruction had helped

8

them organize their writing and follow the conventions of the discipline; in Spring 2007, at least 80%. Meanwhile, in the fall, 78% said they had practiced editing skills taught in Freshman English; in the spring, 67%. A similar trend emerged in the WAC-approved courses in other schools and colleges. In those courses, the majority of the students also felt that the writing instruction had helped them organize their writing and follow the conventions of the discipline. However, since large class sizes limited the amount of writing their instructors could evaluate, most of the students in professional classes did not report the improvement in editing skills that COAS’s WAC students did (see Tables 13 and 14).

This trend resembles previous results, which gave the highest marks to reading, understanding, thinking, and organizing (see http://www.cetla.howard.edu/assessment.htm ). Thus, the data for Spring 1993 – Spring 2007 suggest that most students feel that WAC courses are worthwhile, especially as a tool for learning the subject matter of the disciplines.

b. Writing-to-Learn Study. In Fall 2006, CETLA

helped an Allied Health professor investigate whether the 11 students in her WAC course learned more when they (1) wrote a summary of a text for a lay audience, (2) wrote a summary of a text for the teacher, or (3) only read the text. Although each student was supposed to rotate through all three conditions, some students assigned to the “Read Only” condition repeatedly wrote summaries. Thus, it was only possible to evaluate the impact of writing a summary (regardless of audience) vs. only reading the text.

Unfortunately, the sample was far too small to warrant statistical analysis. Moreover, only 7 of the 11 students responded to the anonymous survey, and a few did not complete all of the assignments. However, a few striking differences emerged. When summarizing the text, all of the respondents indicated that they had read the assigned text

9

more than once (regardless of the audience). In contrast, only two of the students read the text twice when a summary was not required. On the other hand, 40-50% of the students claimed that they remembered, comprehended, analyzed, synthesized, and evaluated ideas from the text best when they merely read the text, but no one could substantiate this claim because several students did not submit all of the summaries and quizzes. In any case, despite their claims, 85% of the students recommended that the professor continue to assign summaries.

c. Turnitin.com In FY07, out of 2,673 papers submitted to Turnitin.com, 56 were 75-100% plagiarized, 410 were 50-74% plagiarized, and 574 were 25-49% plagiarized. These statistics show that Turnitin has enabled faculty to hold students to high standards, as in the case of an Economics professor who wrote:

Yeah, I’ve used turnitin.com a bunch. I set it so the students could review before final submission and I think it helped a couple of them. Unfortunately, in another case, I ended up suspecting a student who sent me a bunch of late work to clear an incomplete. I submitted her stuff to turnitin.com myself and it was as I feared. I dropped her grade substantially. And then I found out that she cheated in another class and was not going to be able to graduate. Sad tale.

This comment reveals that Turnitin is not simply detecting plagiarism; it is deterring plagiarism. Not only are students learning that they cannot afford to plagiarize, but, after viewing Turnitin’s plagiarism reports, they are learning how to avoid plagiarism. An Allied Health faculty member’s experience illustrates this point clearly:

Students were permitted to submit the first draft of their term paper through Turnitin.com and receive a personal report indicating areas where they may have plagiarized. This was very instructive for the students and carried no penalty. They were then allowed to make the necessary corrections before submission of the final paper. Overall the incidence

10

of plagiarism in the class was reduced considerably as students understood more clearly the kinds of activities that constitute plagiarism. The detection of plagiarized material was made easier for the professor.

From this comment, one can also understand how Turnitin has increased the faculty’s productivity: No longer do they have to spend hours surfing the web or tracking down sources to confirm student plagiarism.

d. Labwrite At the end of the Fall 2006 semester, the coordinator of all 15 Biology 101 sections administered an anonymous survey to assess students’ attitudes toward lab reports, since they had been using Labwrite, the web-based tutorial for writing lab reports. Altogether, 172 of the 372 students responded to the survey. Although there was no control group or pre-post testing, students in some sections reported using LabWrite more than others. For instance, there were three sections (35 respondents) where 90% or more of the students used Labwrite for four or more labs. On the other hand, there were two sections (16 respondents) where only 40-45% of the students used Labwrite for four or more labs. Unfortunately, the response rates and group sizes were too small to conduct a meaningful statistical comparison. However, the Biology 101 coordinator also surveyed his 9 Teaching Assistants, 8 of whom responded to the anonymous survey. They were asked specifically to compare the students’ writing and their teaching productivity with and without LabWrite. Two thirds (67%) of the TAs agreed that their students were better prepared for the lab and understood the scientific concepts of the lab better when they had completed the LabWrite PreLab, while two disagreed. Moreover, three quarters (75%) agreed that the students composed better lab reports when they completed the LabWrite PostLab; this time only one disagreed. In addition, the TAs reported gains in their productivity. When they used the LabWrite PreLab, PostLab, or Rubric, at least two thirds of the TAs found that the

11

LabWrite PreLab helped them prepare students for the lab, the LabWrite Post Lab helped them teach students how to write a lab report, and the LabWrite Rubric helped them evaluate students’ lab reports. They only regretted that the LabWrite materials and links had been posted inside Blackboard: Because of login and performance problems with Blackboard, accessing and submitting LabWrite assignments often became time-consuming.

F. Challenges and Projected Solutions Like previous evaluations, the FY07 student evaluations of the WAC program have confirmed the value of the “writing-to-learn” strategies, but suggested that some WAC students need to practice “learning-to-write” strategies more, especially editing strategies. To strengthen editing skills, WAC faculty need to refer students to the English Department’s Writing Center (LKH 100). WAC professors can refer students to the Writing Center for individual help with composing, research, and grammar skills. While tutors work with some students, other students can work independently on computers loaded with software that helps them improve their grammar, spelling, diction, proofreading skills, and critical reading strategies. However, the Writing Center is routinely forced to close so that graduate seminars can use the facilities. As the English Department’s external program reviewers noted last year, this practice compromises the mission and efficiency of the Center. Moreover, the Center is chronically understaffed. Currently, the Office of the Dean of COAS funds the teaching assistantships for the graduate tutors, and the Office of the Provost funds the computer maintenance. CETLA urges the Office of the Dean to find an alternative space for the graduate seminars and to continue to fund the graduate tutors. CETLA, in turn, will hire at least two undergraduate tutors for the Center (as it did in FY06) to accommodate the influx of WAC students. G. Benchmarks for FY08 Next year CETLA will seek to expand the WAC Program further, reinforce learning, and conduct its periodic assessment of writing in COAS’s WAC courses:

1. At least 75% of COAS departments beyond the English Department will offer an official WAC course, while at least

12

six other schools or colleges will offer WAC-approved courses.

2. The majority of WAC students will report that writing helped them learn the subject matter of a WAC course.

3. The majority of WAC students will report that they improved

their writing skills as a result of taking a WAC course.

4. At least 75% of the students in a random WAC sample will demonstrate progress in one or more areas of writing, achieving at least a “C” for writing proficiency.

13

SYNOPSIS OF DATA

14

Table 1. Enrollment in WAC Workshops and Seminars (FY07)

WC01 WC03 WC06 WC12 WC14 WCSI Total COAS 3 6 4 8 0 4 25 COD 2 1 1 0 0 0 4 CEACS 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 CPNAHS 3 2 2 3 0 3 13 GS 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 COM 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 SOB 0 2 2 0 0 1 5 SOC 1 1 1 1 0 0 4 SOD 1 2 2 0 18 0 23 SOE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SOL 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 SOSW 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 Total Attendance 10 15 14 17 18 8 82 Number of Workshops 2 3 2 5 1 2

15

Table 2. WAC Faculty University-Wide (FY93 – FY07)

Status COAS Faculty Other H.U. Faculty* Completed WAC Training 107 57

Revised a Syllabus for Certification

70 12

*Prior to CETLA’s opening in October 2003, the WAC Program was primarily a COAS initiative. Since then, CETLA has begun promoting WAC throughout the University.

16

Table 3. Faculty Evaluations of WAC Workshops and Seminars (FY07)

WC01 Helping Students Write to Learn about a Discipline N=9

Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 67% 33% 0% 0% 0% 2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 67% 33% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 78% 22% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 89% 11% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 44% 56% 0% 0% 0%

WC03 Helping Students Learn to Write in a Discipline

N=8 Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 63% 37% 0% 0% 0% 2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 75% 25% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 88% 12% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 75% 25% 0% 0% 0%

17

WC06 Handling the Paper Load N=7

Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 43% 57% 0% 0% 0% 2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 86% 14% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 86% 14% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 86% 14% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 86% 14% 0% 0% 0%

WC12 Discouraging Plagiarism

N=7 Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 43% 57% 0% 0% 0% 2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 57% 43% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 86% 14% 0% 0% 0%

Faculty Evaluations

WC14 Creating Rubrics for Writing N=2

Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

18

2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

WCSI Writing Across the Curriculum Seminar

N=11 Item Strongly Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Unanswered 1. The length and pace of the workshop were appropriate for me. 73% 27% 0% 0% 0% 2. The workshop encouraged sufficient participation. 73% 27% 0% 0% 0% 3. The workshop leader provided clear instructions. 91% 9% 0% 0% 0% 4. The workshop leader provided useful pedagogical advice. 91% 9% 0% 0% 0% 5. The workshop was well-organized 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

19

Table 4. WAC Course Distribution and Enrollment (Fall 2006)

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty AFST 701-01 AFRICAN WORLD-WRTG 14 Cummings AFRO 775-01 PREP-PRACTICUM-WRTG 13 Ammons CLAS 706-01 PLATO-WRTG 6 Tulin CLAS 710-01 THE CLASSICAL HERITAGE-WRTG 7 Joseph CHEM 745-01 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 13 Shafagati CHEM 745-02 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 9 Shafagati CHEM 745-03 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-04 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 6 Shafagati CHEM 745-05 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 6 Shafagati CHEM 745-06 ORGANIC CHEMISTRY LAB-WRTG 19 Shafagati HHPL 706-01 HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION-WRTG 23 Corbett HHPL 717-01 ROLE OF SPORTS IN SOCIETY-WRTG 20 Corbett HHPL 723-01 INTRO TO RESEARCH & STAT-WRTG 20 Caprarola POLS 772-01 GOVT IN POLS OF THE FAR EAST-WRTG 4 Hatem ECON 701-01 HISTORY OR ECON THOUGHT-WRTG 2 Green HIST 705-02 US HISTORY TO 1877-WRTG 13 DeLeon HIST 747-01 AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN IN US HISTORY-WRTG (ONLINE) 21 Clark-Lewis PSYC 716-01 ABNORMAL PSYCHOLOGY-WRTG 15 So

COLLEGE OF PHARMACY, NURSING AND ALLIED HEALTH

Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty CLLS 709-01 CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-WRTG 11 Neita CLLS 709-02 CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-WRTG 1 Neita

20

COLLEGE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty

CIEG 465-01 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING I 18 Rhoulac

SCHOOL OF COMMUNICATIONS Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty

RTVF 211-01 SURVEY OF COMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH 7 McCormick

SCHOOL OF LAW Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty

LAW 617-01 TORTS I 49 Dark

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE Course Number Title Enrollment Faculty

MEDI 417-32 INTRO TO ETHICS AND JURISPRUDENCE 239 Brown

TOTAL 556

21

Table 5. WAC Course Distribution and Enrollment (Spring 2007)

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Courses Title Enrollment Faculty BIOL 702-01 PARASITOLOGY-LEC/LAB-WRTG 6 Lee

CHEM 745-01 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-02 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-03 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-04 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-05 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 20 Shafagati CHEM 745-06 ORGANIC CHEM LAB-WRTG 21 Shafagati COMP 702-01 PLANETARY SCI LEC-WRTG 3 Small-Warren ECON 701-01 HISTRY OF ECON THOUGHT-WRTG 7 Green HHPL 717-01 ROLE OF SPORT IN SOCIETY-WRTG 21 Corbett HHPL 723-02 INTRO TO RESEARCH & STAT-WRTG 16 Caprarola HHPL 746-01 ETHICS & SOC ISSUES IN SPORT-WRTG 20 Corbett HHPL 755-01 ADDICTIVE BEHAVIOR-WRTG 18 Calloway HIST 747-01 AF AM WMN-US HISTORY-WRTG (ONLINE) 21 Clark-Lewis POLS 773-01 GOVT & POLITICS OF MIDEAST-WRTG 12 Hatem POLS 791-01 MODERN POLITICAL THEORY-WRTG 24 Flax SOC 786-01 DEATH & DYING-WRTG 17 Reviere PHYS 702-01 EXPER PHYSICS I-WRTG 7 Lowe

COLLEGE OF DIVINITY

Courses Title Enrollment Faculty HISU 201-01 INTRO TO HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY II 32 Straker HISU 213-01 METHODIST HISTORY AND DOCTRINE 6 Straker

22

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE

Courses Title Enrollment Faculty MEDI 417-02 INTRO TO ETHICS AND JURISPRUDENCE 55 Brown MEDI 417-32 INTRO TO ETHICS AND JURISPRUDENCE 98 Brown

TOTAL 484

23

Table 6. Student Evaluations of WAC Courses (Fall 2006)

* Since most students in the professional school did not complete freshman composition at Howard, this item was not applicable.

Questions COAS Other n = 115 n = 207 1. The writing assignments in this course made me read carefully. 88% 62% helped me make sense of the lessons. 83% 63% encouraged me to think critically about the subject matter. 93% 77% 2. The writing instruction helped me organize my thoughts and present them in a comprehensible format. 92% 73% follow the text conventions of the discipline. 88% 64% practice the skills taught in Freshman English. 78% 11%*

24

Table 7. Student Evaluations of WAC Courses (Spring 2007)

COAS Other Schools

and Colleges Questionnaire Item n=203 n=3

1. The writing assignments in this course made me read carefully. 78% 100% helped me make sense of the lesson. 82% 67% encouraged me to think critically about the subject matter. 91% 100% 2. The writing instruction helped me organize my thoughts & present them in a comprehensible format. 90% 67% follow the text conventions of the discipline. 80% 33% practice the skills taught in Freshman English. 67% 33%*

* Since most students in the professional school did not complete freshman composition at Howard, this item was not applicable.