English Department
Departmental Assessment Report
M. A., Rhetoric and Composition
Number
of Majors:
|
Level:
|
Fall 2005
|
Fall 2006
|
Fall 2007
|
|
Graduate
Student
|
4
|
|
|
Student Learning Goals:
Students will be able to:
|
1.
|
Identify and define at least four key theories in rhetoric and
composition, and describe how these theories might inform practice in the
writing classroom.
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Design and conduct research using appropriate methodological
approaches in the discipline
|
|
|
|
|
3.
|
Identify a relevant scholarly question or problem in the
discipline and explore it effectively in a lengthy article or essay, or in a
thesis.
|
|
4.
|
Demonstrate understanding of some key questions or issues in at
least three of the following: writing centers, ESL, composition theory,
rhetorical theory, writing across the curriculum, writing program
administration, writing pedagogies.
|
Assessment Plan:
|
Assessment Measure:
|
Goals Addressed:
(list by number)
|
How is the information
used?
|
|
1. Review of theses and portfolios
|
1-3
|
Faculty who
teach graduate courses in Rhetoric and Composition will meet yearly in
September to assess portfolios and theses. The Discipline Director will organize this meeting. The group will
assess the first three learning goals each year. The results will be used to
improve instruction, initiate curriculum changes, and/or modify learning
goals, and will be discussed at a meeting of all Rhetoric and Composition
faculty in the fall term each year. In particular, faculty will determine
how well ENGL 561 and ENGL 554 prepare students to successfully complete
theses and portfolios.
|
|
2. Exit essay
|
4
|
Prior to defense of thesis
or portfolio, students will be asked to complete a timed essay with questions
in three areas that they choose. The results will be used to determine
whether students possess the breadth of knowledge in the discipline that we
expect, and course content and requirements will be changed if necessary.
|
|
|
|
Once it is determined what
changes need to made in the curriculum, the Discipline Director will convene
a formal meeting of faculty who teach Rhetoric and Composition courses. In
that meeting, curriculum change proposals will be discussed (if warranted)
before submitting to the English Department Curriculum Committee; course
syllabi will be re-examined and revised to reflect the assessment information
and needed changes. After five years, the entire emphasis will be reviewed:
it will be compared with competing programs across the region, assessed based
on what graduates need (based on alumni survey and research on graduate
school requirements and expectations for community college teachers), and
courses will be revised/added/deleted.
|
Responses to the below
questions will wrap around as you type then tab to next item:
|
What do the assessment
results tell you?
The results of the thesis/portfolio
assessment will tell us whether and how well students are achieving the
learning goals for the emphasis that can be demonstrated in texts. Every
year we will address all four goals, and we will discuss changes that need
to be made in individual courses and the overall curriculum of the emphasis.
|
|
What are some examples
of changes made over the last two years based on assessment findings?
The assessment measures
have not yet been implemented. We hope to do so in Fall, 2008.
|
|
What recommendations do
you have for improving the assessment process?
None at this time.
|
|
Other comments:
|
TEACHING
ASSISTANTS
|
Level:
|
Fall 2005
|
Fall 2006
|
Fall 2007
|
|
Graduate
Student
|
29
|
29
|
31
|
Student Learning Goals
|
1
|
Design syllabi for first-year writing courses that enact the
Writing Program’s mission, goals and competencies for the course
|
|
2
|
Design assignments and in-class activities for first-year
writing courses that are appropriate for students’ ability levels, help
students learn the competencies for the course, and are grounded in
composition theory
|
|
3
|
Respond to and evaluate student writing
|
|
4
|
Conduct one-one conferences with students that balance
facilitative and directive strategies
|
|
5.
|
Reflect on and explain their philosophy of teaching writing,
their strengths and weaknesses as a teacher of writing, and the theories that
inform their assignments
|
Assessment Measures
|
Assessment Measure:
|
Goals Addressed:
(list by number)
|
How is the information
used?
|
|
1. Student course evaluations
|
2, 3, 4
|
The Director
and Assistant Director will meet in the spring each year to assess which
learning goals are reflected in these student evaluations.
|
|
2. Coursework for Seminar for Teaching Assistants
|
1-5
|
The instructor of record
for the Seminar (either the Director or Assistant Director) will write an
overview of how well each assignment met the learning goals for TA’s.
|
|
3. Teaching portfolios that include a collection of assignments,
syllabi, teaching reflections, sample responses to papers
|
1-5
|
Teaching Assistants will turn in teaching portfolios at the end
of each year during their appointment. During an annual meeting in the
spring of each year, the Director and Assistant Director will review these
portfolios and score them based on how well they reflect the learning goals.
|
|
4. Teaching evaluation by the Director or Assistant Director of
the Writing Program (includes a self-evaluation by the TA)
|
1-5
|
During an annual meeting in the spring of each year, the
Director and Assistant Director will review these evaluations and score them
based on how well they reflect the learning goals. The results of all four
assessment measures will be used by the Director and Assistant Director to
revise any of the following: TA Orientation, ENGL 598: Seminar for Teaching
Assistants, TA evaluation process, needs for additional coursework and/or
additional training in the summer. These changes will be presented to the
First-Year Writing Committee and the department chair for approval.
|
Responses to the below
questions will wrap around as you type then tab to next item:
|
What do the assessment
results tell you?
The student course
evaluations will reflect ENGL 101 students’ perspectives on the quality,
content, and delivery of the course, offering one assessment of how
effectively the TA’s design assignments, respond to student writing, handle
class time, and conduct conferences. An informal review of these course
evaluations the past few years suggest TA’s are quite effective in all these
areas, but a more formal assessment will be more reliable.
The coursework for ENGL 598
is primarily text-based; that is, students are required to draft syllabi and
assignments, analyze a conference transcript, analyze their written comments
on papers, and assemble a teaching portfolio that includes a teaching
philosophy. The faculty member teaching this course can easily determine
which learning goals are being achieved by reviewing these assignments.
Similarly, the teaching
portfolio required for TA’s will include written material that should
demonstrate the TA’s success at all five learning goals. The formal
evaluation by the Director or Assistant Director will bring in information
not seen simply through written text: classroom observations and informal
conversations about pedagogy and specific classroom practices.
All of these measures will
be used to initiate changes in curriculum, the appointment of TA’s (i.e., the
application used to select TA’s), course content for ENGL 598, mentoring and
training. The Director of the Writing Program will be responsible for
proposing the changes agreed upon.
|
|
What are some examples
of changes made over the last two years based on assessment findings?
The assessment measures
have not yet been implemented. We hope to do so in Fall, 2006.
|
|
What recommendations do
you have for improving the assessment process?
None at this time.
|
|
Other comments:
|
Last reviewed on 15 May 2008
|