WASC ARC Conference April 8, 2011, San Francisco, CA Improving Student Writing and Strengthening Writing Programs – Technology and Techniques That Work Ellen Junn, Associate Provost Jennifer Ivie, Assistant Professor of Psychology Kim Morin, Professor of Theatre Arts William Covino, Provost California State University, Fresno
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
WASC ARC ConferenceApril 8, 2011, San Francisco, CA
Improving Student Writing and Strengthening Writing Programs – Technology and Techniques That Work
Ellen Junn, Associate Provost
Jennifer Ivie, Assistant Professor of PsychologyKim Morin, Professor of Theatre Arts
William Covino, ProvostCalifornia State University, Fresno
FACT # 1: Student improvements in writing increase with more
practice ¨ specific, constructive feedback from faculty ¨ opportunity for revisions. IMPLICATION: ü Students need to write or revise more frequentlyü Examine policy requiring “iterative” writing in GE or
FACT # 2: If students do not continue to practice, their writing performance may actually deteriorate. IMPLICATION: ü Examine all writing programs across campusü Identify key courses with writing requirementü Target specific faculty teaching those courses
FACT # 3: Teaching students to write effectively can be time-consuming and labor-intensive. IMPLICATION: ü Identify effective technology-related tools ü reduce faculty workloadü provide specific, timely feedback to students.
ü Target part-time faculty who teach writing intensive courses.
FACT # 4: Writing instruction involves faculty who are NOT
trained as writing teachers.
IMPLICATION: ü Implement Criterion training for faculty.ü Offer Writing Across the Curriculum workshops.ü Provide professional development funds for all
FACT # 5: Assessing & documenting student learning outcomes in
writing performance are key elements to success. IMPLICATION: ü Ongoing data collected for past 3 semestersü Share results with faculty learning community to
determine Best Practices.ü Modify training based on feedback and assessment.
ESL students were more likely to respond that Criterion® helped them improve their writingúPreferred Criterion® feedback to instructor feedback.úSubmitted their documents more frequently.
- I like the kind of feedback Criterion® gives. - I spent more time improving my writing with Criterion®. - I wish I could use Criterion® for other classes.
ISWI Broadly Endorsed & Supported By:¨ Writing Competency Subcommittee (subcommittee of Senate’s GE Committee)¨ Professional Development Subcommittee (subcommittee of Senate’s Personnel
Committee)¨ Chair of the GE Committee¨ Office of Undergraduate Studies¨ Division of Graduate Studies¨ Institutional Research & Assessment Planning Director leading faculty ISWI Assessment
Team¨ Provost’s Office as implemented by the Associate Provost through the Center for the
Scholarly Advancement of Learning and Teaching (CSALT) & Technology Innovations for Learning and Teaching (TILT)
¨ Kim Morin, Professor ¨ Department of Theatre Arts¨ Artistic Director, Theatre for
Young Audiences; English/Drama Credential Advisor
¨ ISWI Faculty Coordinator¨ [email protected] ¨ 559-278-4342¨ ¨ Jennifer Ivie, Assistant Professor ¨ Department of Psychology¨ Interim Director, Center for
the Scholarly Advancement of Learning and Teaching (CSALT)