Up
Program
Course
Resources

Final Report of the Committee on Assessment,
Department of English
Glendale Community College

Alex Joncas, Karen Schwalm, Carol Sunshine
Assessment Committee, Fall, 1989

Table of Contents
 Report on the Common Final Essay
Report on the Midterm Pilot Assessment
 Proposal Instituting the Exit Essay

The Committee on Assessment was formed in January, 1989 to research the possibilities for an ongoing assessment of students' writing abilities at the conclusion of English 101.  A proposal was circulated among faculty, and the Report from the Committee on Assessment proposing a plan for a pilot assessment of English 101, as proposed, was approved with no opposing votes at a departmental meeting on May 2, 1989.

The three-year pilot assessment contains several innovative features:  it allows for faculty choice, produces several different kinds of information about student writing performance, and integrates efforts to improve instruction with evaluation.

Instructors employ a variety of teaching methods and course plans in English 101 while they respect the competencies, and no assessment program should inhibit the development of these alternative styles of instruction.  Therefore, each fall, instructors teaching English 101 will be able to choose one of four assessment plans:  portfolios, a common final assignment, a common final examination, or an individual option.  We hope that instructors will choose different options over the three-year period as they see the opportunities presented by each.  Individuals choosing each option will have responsibility for identifying objectives, proposing research possibilities, and suggesting possible topics; an assessment committee (composed of representatives of each option) will coordinate department wide efforts, produce the actual assessment materials, guide research efforts, and draft the final reports.

Current composition research emphasizes the processes whereby writers compose as well as the final products writers produce, and this assessment program will produce information about both aspects of student writing.  Portfolio assessment makes long-range revision possible:  a student who understands paragraph development in the tenth week of the class can return to an earlier paper and improve it for inclusion in the end-of semester portfolio.  No piece of assigned writing is finished until the end of the course, even though it has already been graded.  Thus we will learn what students can do at the end of English 101, not at separate points throughout the semester.  A common assignment that draws on critical thinking skills and patterns of development taught throughout the semester will provide shorter range information about revision in addition to longer range information about the transfer of skills beyond the individual classroom.  In addition, evaluation by someone other than the students' own instructor is an appropriate way to introduce students to writing evaluation in other disciplines across the curriculum.  The common examination produces information about yet another facet of student writing ability -- writing under time pressure on an assigned topic.  This option attempts to model for students methods of acquiring new information, of learning new language required by that new content, and of writing in response to specific questions in a typical examination environment.  Finally, those instructors who wish to explore other ways of assessing student writing can design an individual option.

In addition to providing choices for instructors that reflect their individual course aims and gathering a variety of information about student writing ability at the end of English 101, this pilot assessment program also makes course innovation and instructional development both possible and attractive.  By scheduling the major collaborative evaluation activities at the beginning of each semester rather than at the end, we anticipate that instructors will be able to act on what they have learned immediately rather than waiting several weeks or months between semesters to make changes in instructional practices.  Putting assessment questions at the beginning of the course may help instructors to make their own course objectives more explicit.  (We have evidence that this is already occurring:  one colleague is already planning how to use the materials produced for assessment to help bridge the move from English 101 to English 102.  Others are discussing ways of using prior exams in the classroom and in the departmental handbook.)

While much of the assessment activity outlined here occurs within individual classes throughout the semester, the critical "event" is an assessment day at the beginning of each semester in which all English faculty (residential and visiting) participate.  During the morning session, faculty would establish anchor papers for the prior semester's final examination, develop evaluative guidelines, and then score a random sample of essays  In the afternoon session, faculty would meet with others selecting the same assessment option to discuss results from the prior semester and to establish the current semester's objectives.  The key feature of this pilot program is that individual faculty choose the assessment option most compatible with their own course objectives, determine the guidelines collaboratively before the semester begins, and then work toward their own assessment goals in small groups.

In order to make the assessment day work effectively, we need the following:

  • The second day of the week of accountability at the beginning of each semester will be set aside for assessment.  No other district, campus or department activity should impinge on this time
  • Residential faculty would have 8 hours of time subtracted from the current 18 hours devoted to advising allocated to this activity.  Special effort should be made to ensure that assessment time is not added to other responsibilities.
  • Visiting faculty would be paid for 8 hours of professional growth at the current rate ($13 per clock hour, $104 per individual).
  • Two days of support staff time would be required to help set up assessment activities (typing, copying, collating, mailing).
  • Coffee and juice should be provided for the morning session; lunch should be provided at noon.  It is important that the assessment program be self-contained to ensure continuity and to make the most of the time we have (60 people x $8 = $480).

The Committee on Assessment has worked effectively this semester to develop this pilot program, and members are already planning the activities for the fall assessment meeting.  One reason we feel we have been able to accomplish so much this semester is because we could meet every week.  We propose that this committee (with one additional member, all receiving one course release time each semester) continue to guide the assessment activities in the following ways:

  • Design and run all aspects of the assessment meeting at the beginning of each semester.
  • Act as liaisons and research resources for each of the options, i.e.., help faculty to design assignments, portfolios, exam questions.
  • Attend meetings on assessment (The National Testing Network on Writing, The Conference on College Composition and Communication, the joint meeting of the Western Region Conference on Learning Assistance and the Arizona Associated Departments of Education).
  • Develop ancillary instructional materials (sets of sample papers, overheads, classroom handouts) at instructors' requests.
  • Coordinate with the handbook committee.
  • Gather, summarize, quantify and report results from the groups using portfolios, final assignments, and final essays, and coordinate the individual reports, producing a report on student writing ability each semester.
  • Establish open lines of communication with visiting faculty (including evening faculty) about assessment options.