Transcript Orientation Assessing Writing

22 May 2012
Session Overview
 Purposes:
 Provide an overview of the assessment plan for
Foundational Studies
 Discuss Phase I of the assessment plan – assessing
writing
 Introduce using rubrics to assess writing
The Compliance Thing
Higher Learning Commission (HLC) of the North Central
Association of Schools and Colleges (NCA)
 Required report on Assessment of Student Learning –
Expectations:
1. “Assessment activities which reflect at least one year of data
collection, analysis, and anticipated use of results for all
academic programs at both the undergraduate and graduate
level” – one completed assessment cycle
2. an update on assessment for the Foundational Studies
program with at least one year of data
 Activities must be completed by May 2013 for reporting in Fall
2013
HLC Academy for Assessment
of Student Learning
 Four-year Academy student learning project: Jan.
2012 – Dec. 2015
 Focused on assessment of Foundational Studies
learning outcomes 1, 2, 3, and 10
Learning Outcomes for Foundational Studies
Project Overview
 First phase (Jan 2012 – Dec 2013) focused on SLO 10 –
written communication
 Second phase (Fall 2012 – Fall 2014) focused on SLO 10
– oral communication; data collection Spring 2014
 Third phase (Fall 2013 – Fall 2015) focused on SLO 1 –
information literacy/problem solving; data collection
Spring 2015
Phase 1: Assessment of Writing:
First-Year and UDIEs
Assessment of writing in first-year program
 English 101 – diagnostic and end of semester – Fall 2012
 English 105 and 107 – Spring 2013
 rubrics under development by Susan Latta
 norming session in June 2012
Assessment of Writing in the UDIEs
 SLOs for the UDIEs
 Will develop a shared rubric for common criteria –
each faculty or program can add additional
outcomes/traits and performance criteria/scales
specific to course or program objectives and outcomes
 Common outcomes/traits will be consistent with those
for first-year writing
 Specific program or course outcomes added by
instructors
Timeline for Fall 2012:
Develop and Test Rubrics
 Aug. 2012 – roundtables for rubric development
 Sept. 2012 - share rubrics for discussion and




feedback/modify
- training on applying rubrics/norming
Sept - Oct. 2012 - roundtables for pilot test of
evaluating student artifacts
Oct. 2012 - evaluate inter-rater reliability
Oct- Nov. 2012 - modify rubrics and conduct second
pilot if necessary
Dec. 2012 - load rubrics into Blackboard (if available)
Timeline for Spring 2013:
Data Collection
 ETS Proficiency Profile:
 Fall 2012 – first-year students
 Feb. 2013 – seniors
 NSSE/FSSE (indirect) – Spring 2013
 April – May 2013 – course artifacts
Completing Phase I Cycle
 Summer 2013 - data aggregated and analyzed
 Fall 2013 - open fora to discuss evidence and consider
implications
 Spring 2014 - open fora to identify needed
improvements to enhance student writing
 Implement changes in 2014-2015
Descriptive Rubrics
 Questions:
1. Is written communication among your program’s
student learning outcomes?
2. Do you currently use descriptive rubrics to grade
student writing in one or more courses?
3. Do you consider the rubric(s) you use to be an
effective and efficient means of evaluating student
work?
4. Is the aggregated data from the rubric(s) used as
evidence in assessing student achievement of your
program’s learning outcomes?
What is a rubric, anyway?
 A scoring/grading guide
– aka “primary trait analysis scale” (Walvoord)
1. A matrix that explicitly states the criteria and standards
for student work
2. Identifies outcomes and describes levels of performance
within each of the traits
3. Makes clear the strengths and weaknesses in student
work
4. A grading time-saver
 The rubric to be used should be shared with the students
before they begin work so they will know the criteria on
which they will be evaluated.
Developing Rubrics
1. Describe the characteristics of
a. a superior paper
b. an unexceptional but acceptable paper
c. a borderline paper
d. an unacceptable paper
2. Make a list of the SLOs or traits that will count in the
evaluation.
3. For each trait, develop descriptive statements for each
of the four (or five or six) points on the scale
(performance criteria).
Examples of rubrics for evaluating
writing
 Internet resources:
Assessment @ ISU
Sources consulted
Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning: A common
sense guide (Second ed.). Bolton, MA: Anker
Publishing Company, Inc.
Walvoord, B. E. (2004). Assessment clear and simple. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (1998). Effective
grading: A tool for learning and assessment. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.