Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Jennifer Good, WAC Director Jennifer Dyess, WAC Senior Program Associate.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Jennifer Good, WAC Director Jennifer Dyess, WAC Senior Program Associate."— Presentation transcript:

1 Jennifer Good, WAC Director Jennifer Dyess, WAC Senior Program Associate

2  The WAC Committee Met eight times in 2011-2012 Approved 42 content courses for writing-intensive instruction in 2011-12 (Total number of writing- intensive courses approved is 101.) Added a syllabus audit responsibility (as of August 2012) to help ensure ongoing compliance with WAC program.  Notes: The full 2011-12 WAC Annual Report and WAC Committee meeting minutes are available on AUMnetAUMnet


4 WFDI Part IWFDI Part II Part I Details PurposeIntroduce WAC before WI instruction ModeFour traditional 3- hour workshops FrequencyOffered 2x’s per semester; 72 total hrs. of facilitation # Participants51 faculty Incentive$400 transferred into dept. for each completer (Total=$20,400) Part II Details PurposeEmbed support and review into instruction ModeSix hybrid 3-hour workshops FrequencyOnline via Blackboard; traditional sessions 2x’s per semester # Participants33 faculty Incentive$600 transferred into dept. for each completer (Total: $19,800)

5 Table: Means per Construct for 2010-11 and 2011-12 Cohorts (Scale of 1, lowest, to 7, highest) Construct 10-11 Mean (N=14) 11-12 Mean (N=32) Student Learning: Skills5.605.41 Student Learning: Content5.765.44 Preparation for WI Course5.845.34 Instruction Quality6.836.12 Overall Program Worth6.575.74 Support of LC Staff6.455.79 Growth from Fellow Colleagues 6.364.68  All means dropped in 2011- 12, although still positive when considering 7-point scale.  The mean for “Instruction Quality” remains the highest.  The mean for “Preparation in Technology Management” item remains the lowest for the Preparation construct (See full report).  This cohort did not feel that other program faculty encouraged their development of writing- intensive teaching skills.

6  A total of 126 WI-labeled courses were offered for undergraduates in 2011-12.  The additional credit hour in WI content courses accounted for a total increase in Credit Hour Production of 1397, accounting for 1.3% of the overall undergraduate credit hour production from Summer 2011 to Spring 2012.  Approximately $322,707 in extra revenue was generated by WAC due to increased CHP (conservative estimate based on $231 instate tuition rates.)

7 Program DescriptionTask Analysis  Pilot year with five undergraduate peers assigned to specific WI content-area courses.  Students represented Nursing, Theatre, Exercise Science, History Education, and Biology Majors.  The nomination process was initiated again in Spring 2012, resulting in eight new and one returning WID intern for next 2012-13 academic year. TaskFrequency (Sessions, not Hours) Session Planning and Communication 60 (28%) Individual Tutoring 93 (44%) Student Group Sessions 13 (6%) Faculty Sessions 12 (6%) Administrative Work 36 (17%)

8 ItemMean Intern’s knowledge of course content 3.82 Quality and Frequency of Communication with WI Instructor 3.77 Quality and Frequency of Communication with Students 3.92 Quality of Feedback about Writing During Drafting and Revision Process 3.91 Perception of the Impact the WID Intern had on Students’ Writing Abilities 3.55

9  Three Issues of The WAC-ky Times were distributed to AUM Faculty and posted on the website.The WAC-ky Times  Research Conference Presentations ◦ Good, J. (April 2012: Vancouver, BC.) Allowing the data to tell the story: Studying writing assessment data to inform faculty development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. ◦ Good, J., & Barksdale, J. (December 2011: Orlando, FL). Getting creative: Connecting assessment of a writing QEP with assessment of general education outcomes. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC). ◦ Good, J., & Barganier, S. (November 2011: Oxford, MS). Blending the best of academic support in writing: The Writing in the Disciplines (WID) internship. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. ◦ Good, J., & Shumack, K. (November 2011: Oxford, MS). Incorporating Web-based applications into WAC faculty training to link professional development and writing- intensive instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association.  Publication: Good, J.M., Osborne, K., & Birchfield, K. (2012). Placing data in the hands of discipline-specific decision makers: Campus- wide writing program assessment. Assessing Writing, 17, 140-149.

10 CAAP Writing Skills: AUM and National Mean Scores  Writing skills are direct objectives of the composition series (ENGL 1010/1020).  Students (N=309) were tested in ENGL 1020 in Spring 2012.  AUM scored slightly below the national mean on all categories.  National mean dropped in all categories from 2010 to 2012.  AUM experienced a decrease in mean for rhetorical skills and composite scores, but a slight increase on usage and mechanics from 2010 to 2012.  2012 CAAP Writing Skills Report is posted on the OIE website.CAAP Writing Skills Report

11 ACT Writing Skills Linkage Report Results 2010 ENGL 1020 2012 ENGL 1020 Percent in the same quartile for ACT and CAAP 46%48% Percent in a lower quartile from ACT to CAAP 43%44% Percent in a higher quartile from ACT to CAAP 12%8%  The ACT Linkage Report compares ACT Writing Skills with CAAP Writing Skills to assess value added in core Composition courses (ENGL 1010 and 1020) and is posted on the OIE website.ACT Linkage Report  Results were discussed with the Director of Composition.  Director of Composition was encouraged to provide faculty training to emphasize course and WAC objectives in composition program.

12 CAAP Writing Essay: AUM and National Mean Scores  Skills measured on writing samples parallel objectives of WI content-area courses.  Students (N=374) were tested in WI content-area courses in Spring 2012 for the first time.  2012 data will be used to determine a baseline for achievement.  AUM scored at our above the national mean on all categories.  Due to small range of scores possible (1 to 6), ACT does not provide a linkage report for writing sample subtests.  The CAAP Writing Essay Report is posted on the OIE website.CAAP Writing Essay Report

13 FocusContentOrgStyleLang Conv First WAC Course 3.713.683.673.623.59 Second WAC Course (n=963) 3.723.653.693.613.60 Third WAC Course (n=201) 3.833.733.773.683.71 Fourth WAC Course (n=29) 4.073.864.003.933.83 Fifth WAC Course (n=3) 5.00 4.675.00

14 ObjectiveBaseline MeasureCurrent Progress MeasureStatus Check Students will demonstrate the ability to use discourse, analysis, and evaluation skills appropriate to their academic discipline in writing.  First Course Style M=3.62  First Course Org M=3.67  Fourth Course Style M=3.93  Fourth Course Org M=4.00 Achieving Objective Students will sustain a focused discussion in written assignments. First Course Focus M=3.71 Fourth Course Focus M=4.07 Achieving Objective Students will write using documented evidence to support their points. First Course Content M=3.68 Fourth Course Content M=3.86 Achieving Objective Students will demonstrate writing skills (including grammar, mechanics, and spelling) in order to correctly convey information. First Course Lang Conv M=3.59  Fourth Course Lang Conv M=3.83 Achieving Objective

15 The WAC staff would like to thank the following individuals for their continued support and effort: The WAC Committee The AUM Administration WI Content-Area Course Instructors in Every Department on Campus The Research Database Analyst and Senior IR Officer in the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Download ppt "Jennifer Good, WAC Director Jennifer Dyess, WAC Senior Program Associate."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google