Progress Report on Assessment of the Upper

Division Writing Requirement

May 2005

Submitted by the UDWR Committee:

Michael Connaughton

Briget Eastep

Philip Keith

Judy Litterst

Donald Neu

Paula Tompkins

Neal Voelz

Gary Whitford

Background

The Upper Division Writing Requirement (UDWR) was approved as part of the semester conversion in 1996-97. The rationale for developing this requirement was part of the general education conversion, reducing the freshman writing requirement from two courses to one on the condition that an upper division requirement be established.

In fall 2000 and spring 2004 departments were asked to provide the course(s) or method, and the minimum requirements for satisfying the UDWR. Most departments responded to this request. In fall 2004, a letter was sent to each department chair from the General Education Committee (Judy Litterst, Chair) indicating that assessment of the UDWR should begin no later than fall 2005.

Recent Activities

To facilitate the UDWR assessment process, a committee was formed in February 2005 and met several times during spring semester 2005. Departments were requested by the UDWR Committee to:

· Update their course/method for satisfying the UDWR.

· Provide 3-5 criteria that clarify what constitutes upper division writing proficiency. These needed to be phrased as student learning outcomes and assessable by direct measures.

· Provide examples of writing rubrics, etc. (if applicable).

· Begin assessment of their UDWR in fall 2005 (if they had not done so already).

Materials sent to the department chairs in early spring 2005 are in Appendix 1. A reminder was sent to all department chairs one week before the due date (4 April 2005). In addition, on 11 April 2005 the same materials plus example criteria and rubrics (from several departments) were sent to departments that had not responded.

Responses to Date

Most departments have identified their UDWR course and/or method for examining upper division writing (Appendix 2). As of 12 May 2005, 67% (31 of 46) departments have submitted their UDWR criteria to the UDWR Committee (Appendix 2).

Future Plans

The UDWR Committee is currently developing a rubric for evaluating the UDWR criteria provided by the departments. The idea is to have a standard way to review the criteria, and then come together as a group to discuss the overall critique and provide meaningful feedback to the departments. We anticipate having the criteria review finished by September 2005.

Department UDWR assessment reports are due at the end of spring semester 2006. The UDWR Committee will then be determining how assessment results are being (or will be) used to evaluate/improve classes and programs.

Appendix 1 – Materials Sent to Department Chairs during Spring 2005

To: Department Chairs and Department Assessment Committees

From: Upper Division Writing Requirement (UDWR) Assessment Committee

Michael Connaughton (FAH), Briget Eastep (CoEd), Don Neu (CoS&E), Gary Whitford (CoSS), Judy Litterst (General Education Committee representative), Neal Voelz (University Assessment Director), Paula Tompkins (CMST), Phil Keith (ENGL)

Re: Departmental Assessment of Upper Division Writing

Last semester Judy Litterst, Chair of the General Education Committee, contacted you about tasks that all departments need to complete this academic year to aid university assessment of upper division writing.

To refresh your memory as to the status of the SCSU Upper Division Writing Requirement and requirements, please review the attached UDWR Summary.

To fulfill the additional requirement #1, please submit 3-5 criteria that clarify what constitutes upper division writing proficiency for students in your department. The criteria should meet the following specifications:

Criteria must be phrased in terms of student learning outcomes (measurable outcomes).
Criteria must be able to be assessed with direct rather than indirect measures. Indirect measures use surveys, feelings, focus groups, and opinions. While informative, these methods are not as strong for measuring student learning outcomes for upper division writing. Direct measures include content analyses of student papers, aggregate data from department rubrics, measurable writing achievements, etc.
Criteria must reflect expectations for discipline-specific upper division writing.

A template is attached for you to use in reporting back to our committee. Please send this information to assessment@stcloudstate.edu or to Neal Voelz, University Assessment Director at njvoelz@stcloudstate.edu. We prefer electronic submissions, but if you have rubrics or other forms you wish to share, hard copy is acceptable. This should be sent to Neal Voelz, MS 262.

Please make sure you include the name of your department on anything submitted. This information should be sent by Monday, April 4^th.

To fulfill the additional requirement #3, unless you are currently doing so, your department needs to begin collecting data about student work, such as portfolios or samples of student papers. This will enable you to assess whether students are meeting the criteria once they are established and accepted by our committee. Please note that we are not asking you to do the actual upper division writing assessment this spring, but you should be ready to implement assessment efforts during Fall Semester 2005. Assessment reports will be submitted by departments Spring Semester 2006.

To guide you in this task, we offer some additional suggestions:

1. We encourage you to develop evaluation rubrics, checklists, portfolio evaluations, or other evaluations and to share them with our committee. With your permission, we would like to share them with other departments seeking ideas for assessment.

2. If applicable, we urge you to consult your national association or national accrediting body for statements about writing proficiency. Some bodies may have very specific criteria to help you articulate discipline-specific criteria and to establish benchmarks.

3. We urge you to consider ways to track writing improvement, linking assessment of upper division writing to introductory levels of writing in your discipline.

4. We encourage you to develop strategies for using assessment findings to provide a necessary feedback loop to improve your UDWR.

5. If you have any questions or need guidance in this task, please feel free to contact the University Assessment Director, Neal Voelz. He can help you to locate resources for writing assessable learning outcomes.

Upper Division Writing Requirement Summary

The General Education Committee, as authorized by the Faculty Senate, and the Administration have reached an agreement regarding the Upper Division Writing Requirement. Administration has agreed to accept on an interim basis the list of courses submitted to meet the requirement as presented by the General Education Committee. Additional work on learning goals and assessment will need to be completed.

The relevant paragraph from the Upper Division Writing Requirement document dated April 9, 2003 is as follows:

SCSU is committed to the university goal of enhancing academic

achievement by strengthening standards in teaching and learning. In meeting that goal, university faculty support an upper division writing requirement for all students. Any course or element in a sequence of courses meeting the upper division writing requirement should minimally involve either (a) a research/documented paper or report of substantial length and function appropriate to the student’s major field, or (b) a portfolio representing different types of writing appropriate to the student’s major field. These written papers should be reviewed, revised and finished relative to professional expectations in the discipline and will demonstrate appropriate writing proficiency relative to the discipline.

We have agreed to move forward with these additional requirements:

Individual departments will need to write and establish criteria beyond the ones listed above (length, review and revision) as to what constitutes writing proficiency for their students. These might include issues of organization, format, thought, analysis or other issues as appropriate. Three to five additional criteria for each department should be sufficient. Departments should complete this task by the end of the 2004-2005 academic year.
The General Education Committee or some other body designated by the Faculty Association needs to establish a general set of criteria by which to review each department’s standards. This should also be completed by the end of the 2004-2005 academic year. Review should be ongoing as soon as standards are established and departments begin to submit their plans.
During this developmental year, departments must begin collecting data about student work, such as portfolios or samples of student papers, so that they could assess whether students are meeting the criteria once they are established.
Departmental assessment reports on Upper Division Writing will be submitted to the General Education committee or some other group designated by the Faculty Association which will collect and analyze the data for university wide assessment purposes.

Upper Division Writing Requirement Feedback Form

Directions: Please copy this into a Word document and send as an attachment to assessment@stcloudstate.edu or to njvoelz@stcloudstate.edu. Thank you.

Name of Department:

UDWR Course(s):

This course includes (check any that apply):

____a research/documented paper or report of substantial length and function

appropriate to a student’s major field

____a portfolio representing different types of writing appropriate to the student’s

major field

Criteria for Writing Proficiency in Your Department (list 3-5 additional criteria, please):

Are these phrased in terms of student learning outcomes (measurable outcomes)?
Are these direct rather than indirect measures?
Do these reflect expectations for discipline-specific upper division writing?

Appendix 2 – Summary of Department UDWR Information

Data for the following table were obtained from surveys conducted by the 2000 and 2004 General Education Committees (Phil Keith and Steve Klepetar, Chairs, respectively), and the 2005 UDWR Committee.

Department	Course(s)	Method	Criteria Submitted Spring 2005
Accounting	MGMT 497?	Paper	No. Follow HCOB standard?
Art	All 400-level, except 436	Paper	Yes
Aviation	AVIT 397 or 419	Paper and Portfolio	Yes
Biological Sciences	BIOL 447, 448, 492 or 494	Paper	Yes
BCIS	MGMT 497	Paper	Yes. Follow HCOB standard
Center for Info Media	IM 420	Paper	Yes
Chemistry	CHEM 391/491	Paper and Portfolio	Yes
Child and Family Studies	CFS 423	Portfolio	Yes
Communication Disorders	CDIS 350/452	Paper/Clinical Reports	Yes
Communication Studies	CMST 315	Paper and Portfolio	Yes
Community Psychology and Ed Leadership	CPSY 324/325	Paper	Yes
Community Studies	CMTY 350	Paper	Yes
Computer Networking and Applications			No
Computer Science	CSCI 332		In Progress
Criminal Justice	CJS 488		No
Earth and Atmospheric Sciences	EAS 450		No
Economics	ECON 481		No
Electrical and Computer Engineering	ECE 461/462	Paper	Yes
English	ENGL 490	Paper and Portfolio	Yes
Environmental and Technological Studies	ETS 456	Paper and Portfolio	Yes
Finance, Insurance and Real Estate	MGMT 497?	Paper	No. Follow HCOB standard?
Foreign Languages and Literature	Various	Paper	Yes
Geography	GEOG 432; Travel and Tourism – GEOG 434		No
Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Sports Science	HLTH 415 and 438; 430 PESS 405, 434, 449 REC 433	Paper	Yes
History	HIST 491		No
Intl Relations	MGMT 497?	Paper	No. Follow HCOB standard?
Management	MGMT 497?	Paper	No. Follow HCOB standard?
Marketing and Business Law	MGMT 497?	Paper	No. Follow HCOB standard?
Mass Communications	ENGL 331 or 333		No
Mathematics	MATH 461	Portfolio	Yes
Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering	MME 480/481	Paper	Yes
Music	MUSM 322		No
Nursing Science	Senior Nursing Course	Paper	Yes
Philosophy	PHIL 451	Paper	Yes
Physics, Astronomy and Engineering Science	PHYS 430	Portfolio	Yes
Political Science	POL 429		No
Psychology	PYS 401, 430, 432 or 435	Paper	Yes
Public Administration	POL 444		No
Sciences			No
Social Science and Studies	SCSI 421; SST 453		No
Social Work	SW 445	Portfolio	Yes
Sociology/Anthropology	Sociology – Portfolio; Anthropology - ANTH 472	Sociology – Portfolio	No
Special Education	Senior Portfolio		No
Statistics	STAT 480	Paper	Yes
Teacher Development			No
Theatre	TH 481 and 482	Paper	Yes