QCC COURSE ASSESSMENT SHORT FORM
Fall 2004, Rev. 6/15/07
Date: February 1, 2014
Department: Academic Literacy
Course: BE201-Beginning Composition for Non-Native Speakers
Curriculum or Curricula: LA
PART I. STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES
For Part I, attach the summary report (Tables 1-4) from the QCC Course Objectives Form.
(See Table #5 for Student Learning Objectives for Actual Assessment Assignment)
TABLE 1. EDUCATIONAL CONTEXT
BE 201 is the first course of a writing skills sequence for students of English as a Second Language who
have little or no previous composition experience in English. The objective is to provide students with a
sound foundation in the basic structure of English through intensive instruction and drill in the
relationship between spoken and written English and in the fundamentals of grammar, usage,
sentence structure, and paragraph development. Students who complete BE-201 successfully will be
informed by their instructors whether to register for BE-203 or BE-205.
TABLE 2. Curricular Objectives
Note: Include in this table curriculum-specific objectives that meet Educational Goals 1 and 2:
Curricular objectives addressed by this course:
Upon completing the course, students should be able to demonstrate the ability to:
1. Recognize main idea of assigned reading selections.
2. Use the word order of the English language correctly.
3. Compose varied sentences: simple sentence, compound sentence, complex sentence, and
interrogative questions.
4. Identify and write topic sentences.
5. Support the topic sentence with sufficient details while avoiding digression and repetition.
6. Use heuristic devices such as brainstorming, clustering, free writing, outlining, and revising.
7. Summarize and paraphrase original written texts by identifying the thesis and some of its
support.
8. Write one or two pages, including an introduction, body, and conclusion, on an assigned topic
in response to a reading.
1(25)
TABLE 3. General Education Objectives, based on draft Distributed at the January 2010 Praxis
Workshops
To achieve these goals, students graduating with an Associate degree will:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Communicate effectively through reading, writing, listening and speaking.
Use analytical reasoning to identify issues or problems and evaluate evidence in order to make
informed decisions.
Reason quantitatively and mathematically as required in their field of interest and in everyday
life.
Use information management and technology skills effectively for academic research and
lifelong learning.
Integrate knowledge and skills in their program of study.
Differentiate and make informed decisions about issues based on multiple value systems.
Work collaboratively in diverse groups directed at accomplishing learning objectives.
Use historical or social sciences perspectives to examine formation of ideas, human behavior,
social institutions, or social processes.
Employ concepts and methods of the natural and physical sciences to make informed
judgments.
Apply aesthetic and intellectual criteria in the evaluation or creation of works in the humanities
or the arts.
Gen Ed
objective’s
ID number
from list
(1-10)
General educational objectives addressed by this course: Select from preceding list.
1
1. Students will write coherent and convincing paragraphs.
1
2. Students will use writing to create and clarify meaning.
1
3. Students will articulate and support their ideas in group work and in class discussion
or debate.
1
5. Students will write with increased control of grammar, diction, and punctuation,
editing as necessary.
2
6. Students will interpret texts critically.
2
7. Students will evaluate the quality of evidence in discussions, reading, and writing.
7
8. Students may write or make a presentation based on group work.
7
9. Students will work in groups to accomplish learning tasks and reach common goals.
2(25)
7
10. Students will demonstrate interpersonal skills and accountability working in diverse
groups.
TABLE 4: Course Objectives and student learning outcomes
Course Objectives and Desired Outcomes
1. Students will recognize main ideas in assigned reading selections.
4. Students will identify and write topic sentences.
7. Students will summarize and paraphrase original written texts by identifying the thesis and some
of its support.
PART ii. Assignment Design: Aligning outcomes, activities, and assessment tools
For the assessment project, you will be designing one course assignment, which will address at least
one general educational objective, one curricular objective (if applicable), and one or more of the course
objectives. Please identify these in the following table:
TABLE 5: OBJECTIVES ADDRESSED IN ASSESSMENT ASSIGNMENT
Course Objective(s) selected for assessment: (select from Table 4)
1. Recognize main idea of assigned reading selections.
4. Identify and write topic sentences.
7. Summarize and paraphrase original written texts by identifying the thesis and some of its
support.
Curricular Objective(s) selected for assessment: (select from Table 2)
1. Students will be able to recognize the main ideas by differentiating major and minor details in
various reading passages.
4. Students will identify and write topic sentences within various reading passages.
7. Students will summarize reading passages by identifying main ideas, organizing these ideas
effectively, using appropriate transitional devices, and producing their summary by using their
own words.
3(25)
General Education Objective(s) addressed in this assessment: (select from Table 3)
1. Communicate effectively through reading, writing, listening and speaking.
Reading: Students will read various passages and summarize them.
Writing: Students will write summaries.
Listening and speaking: Students will discuss key components of main ideas in passages
and summary writing in pairs and whole group.
2. Students will use analytical reasoning to identify issues or problems and evaluate
evidence in order to make informed decisions.
Students will make informed decisions about which ideas are most important to include in
their summaries.
7. Students will work collaboratively in diverse groups directed at accomplishing learning
objectives.
Students will work in pairs with diverse students to analyze key components of summary
writing.
Student Learning Outcomes:
1. Students will differentiate between major and minor details in reading passages.
2. Students will organize their ideas using appropriate transitional devices.
3. Students will write effective summaries on various reading passages.
In the first row of Table 6 that follows, describe the assignment that has been selected/designed for this
project. In writing the description, keep in mind the course objective(s), curricular objective(s) and the
general education objective(s) identified above,
The assignment should be conceived as an instructional unit to be completed in one class session (such
as a lab) or over several class sessions. Since any one assignment is actually a complex activity, it is likely
to require that students demonstrate several types of knowledge and/or thinking processes.
Also in Table 6, please
a) identify the three to four most important student learning outcomes (1-4) you expect from this
assignment
b) describe the types of activities (a – d) students will be involved with for the assignment, and
c) list the type(s) of assessment tool(s) (A-D) you plan to use to evaluate each of the student
outcomes. (Classroom assessment tools may include paper and pencil tests, performance
assessments, oral questions, portfolios, and other options.)
4(25)
Note: Copies of the actual assignments (written as they will be presented to the students) should be
gathered in an Assessment Portfolio for this course.
TABLE 6: Assignment, Outcomes, Activities, and Assessment Tools
Briefly describe the assignment that will be assessed:
Students will be taught to read various passages and summarize them effectively.
Desired student learning
outcomes for the assignment
Briefly describe the range of activities
student will engage in for this assignment.
What assessment tools will be used to
measure how well students have met
each learning outcome? (Note: a
single assessment tool may be used to
measure multiple learning outcomes;
some learning outcomes may be
measured using multiple assessment
tools.)
Day of the Lesson:
Multiple Assessment Tools were
employed to measure the Curricular
and Educational outcomes of this
assessment.
(Students will…)
List in parentheses the
Curricular Objective(s) and/or
General Education Objective(s)
(1-10) associated with these
desired learning outcomes for
the assignment.
Students will be able to
recognize the main idea by
differentiating major and
minor details in various
reading passages.(Curricular
Objective #1)
Students will identify and
write topic sentences using
various reading
passages.(Curricular Objective
#4)
Students will summarize
reading passages by
identifying main ideas,
organizing these ideas
effectively, using appropriate
transitional devices, and
producing their summaries by
using their own
words.(Curricular Objective
#7)
Communicate effectively
through reading, writing,
listening and speaking.
(General Education
After teachers taught their students how to
write a summary, which took approximately
forty minutes, they asked the students to read
the passage on American Teen Health. This
task took approximately twenty-minutes.
Once the students had finished reading it, they
worked in pairs to draft a summary of it. This
activity took approximately twenty to twentyfive minutes. Once the students finished
writing their summaries, teachers noted down
the keys ideas of the passage on the board
and asked students to check whether or not
they included these ideas. If they hadn’t, they
were instructed to jot down notes below their
summaries and then if needed, revise their
summaries at home. Finally, the teacher gave
students the second article, entitled
“Facebook Moms” and asked them to
summarize it at home for homework.
Day of Actual Assessment:
Teachers asked learners to turn in homework
summaries and in-class summaries if they had
needed to be revised. At the beginning of
class, teachers reviewed the key points of the
homework reading/summary. This took
5(25)
1. Instrument One: A Summary
Scoring Rubric derived from the (MTEL)
Communication and Literacy Skills Test
(01) –
The mid-term summary results were
examined using the MTEL rubric and
they were compared to the final
summary results to assess any
improvement in students’ ability to
write cohesive, accurate, and wellwritten summaries.
2. Instrument Two: The CUNY CATW
Assessment rubric
The second major measurement tool
used for this assessment was an
adapted version of CUNY CATW
Assessment rubric. However, for this
particular assessment, the evaluators
only used the first domain, which
focuses essentially on how well a
student understands an article and
summarizes its key components. In
Objective#1)
approximately fifteen to twenty minutes.
Use analytical reasoning to
identify issues or problems
and evaluate evidence in
order to make informed
decisions. (General Education
Objective #2)
Once teachers completed this activity, the
students read and summarized the reading on
bullying. This reading passage served as the
first part of the actual MTEL assessment. After
the students finished writing their summaries,
the teachers placed them in Dr. Carroll’s
mailbox labeled with the teacher’s name and
class sections.
Work collaboratively in
diverse groups directed at
accomplishing learning
objectives. (General
Education Objective #7)
The Assessment Committee then evaluated
the summaries, noted the scores and returned
the students’ work to the teachers.
Midterm Assessment:
Next, the Assessment Committee evaluated
how well students performed on the CATW
midterm assessment by examining the
summary part of their CATW essays. After the
students completed the midterm exam, the
teachers submitted the midterm essays to Dr.
Carroll. The Assessment Committee evaluated
them and recorded the scores in a file.
Follow-Up Lesson and Final MTEL and CATW
Assessment:
Teachers repeated the summary lesson with
different reading passages. After this lesson,
teachers administered the MTEL final
summary and placed them in Dr. Carroll’s inbox so that the Assessment Committee could
evaluate the summaries and record their
scores in a file.
addition, any discussion of the writer’s
ideas that was part of that domain on
the rubric was not considered as part
of the evaluation.
The Department administers
departmental midterms and finals.
Thus after the students took the CATWtype midterm, their performance on
the summary section was scored and
later compared to their summaries on
the departmental final exam to assess
any improvement in students’ ability to
write a summary that meets the
requirements of the CATW test.
The timeline during which the two
different assessment measurements
were administered was as follows: The
MTEL was administered in midOctober, which is approximately the
mid-point of the fall semester. Then,
the mid-term exam version of the
CATW was administered in late
October. The second administration of
the MTEL occurred in early December,
and final CATW exam was administered
in mid-December.
Thus this assessment examined
students’ performance according to
two different rubrics:
a) The MTEL Summary Scoring
rubric, and
b) The Adapted CATW
Next, after they administered the CATW Final
Exam, the teachers placed the exams in Dr.
Carroll’s mailbox so that the Assessment
Committee could evaluate the summaries and
record their scores in a file.
Part iii. Assessment Standards (Rubrics)
Before the assignment is given, prepare a description of the standards by which students’ performance
will be measured. This could be a checklist, a descriptive holistic scale, or another form. The rubric (or a
6(25)
version of it) may be given to the students with the assignment so they will know what the instructor’s
expectations are for this assignment.
Please note that while individual student performance is being measured, the assessment project is
collecting performance data ONLY for the student groups as a whole.
Table 7: Assessment Standards (Rubrics)
Describe the standards or rubrics for measuring student achievement of each outcome in the
assignment:
This assessment employed two different evaluation instruments over the course of the fall of 2013. The
use of these two instruments intended to provide distinctly different measures that evaluated how well
low-level ESL students had learned to compose academic summaries. It must be emphasized that these
are two separate instruments, which are not directly compared. Instead, they were utilized to provide
the evaluators with in-depth knowledge from two different evaluation angles regarding how these
students performed.
Instrument One: A Summary Scoring Rubric derived from the (MTEL) Communication and Literacy
Skills Test (01) –
Background:
The MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric was developed by Department of Education of Massachusetts and
Pearson Education. It is a combined reading and writing test that incorporates the comprehension and
analysis of readings as well as outlining and summarizing. It was first copyrighted in 2008 through
Pearson Education.
The Department of Academic Literacy at QCC utilizes this rubric to assess summary writing at midterms
and finals in all its reading courses. In addition, many writing instructors use it as a tool to assist their
students with summary writing when they prepare them for the demands of the CATW exam. Since this
rubric has been successfully used as the official rubric to assess summary writing throughout the
Department, the members of the Assessment Committee concluded that it was an appropriate
evaluation tool for the task of summary writing. Thus, the MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric was the first
tool that was utilized to assess the students’ performance on writing summaries at mid-terms and finals.
This rubric consists of a four-point scale. The score of one represents the lowest level of ability, and it is
not passing. Two is approaching a passing level. Three is passing, and a score of four exceeds passing.
Some of the most important criteria that these scores are based on include: the extent to which the
student understood the main idea of the article, how well the student organized his or her own ideas,
the degree to which the student used his or her own words, and how clearly the summary was written.
This rubric was provided to the BE201 instructors before they taught their lessons, and a simplified
version was provided to the students so that the students understood what to expect and how they
would be assessed. However, the simplified version was not used to score the students’ summaries. The
BE201 instructors used and discussed the simplified version, which contains easier vocabulary, with the
students to aid their overall comprehension of the criteria on which they would ultimately be assessed.
How the MTEL Rubric Measured Curricular and General Educational Objectives
for this Assessment:
This rubric measured both Curricular Outcomes and General Education Outcomes.
7(25)
Curricular Objectives:
1. Students will be able to recognize the main idea by differentiating major and minor details in various
reading passages.(Curricular Objective #1)- This curricular objective is included in the MTEL because it
examines how well students are able to locate an article’s most important ideas.
2. Students will identify and write topic sentences within various reading passages. (Curricular
Objective #4). In order for the students to have the ability to convey the main ideas of an article, the
students were required to write clear and focused topic sentences.
3. Students will summarize reading passages by identifying main ideas, organizing these ideas
effectively, using appropriate transitional devices, and producing their summary by using their own
words. (Curricular Objective #7). All of these components above are included in the MTEL rubric.
General Educational Objectives:
1. Communicate effectively through reading, writing, listening and speaking. (General Education
Objective#1). The rubric measured how well the students read and understood reading passages as
well as their ability to write an effective summary.
Instrument Two: The Adapted CUNY CATW Assessment rubric
The second major tool used for this assessment was the Adapted CUNY CATW Assessment rubric. (See
Adapted CATW Rubric at the end of this document.) However, for this particular assessment, the
evaluators only used the first domain, which focuses essentially on how well a student understands an
article and is able to summarize its key components. In addition, since this assessment emphasized the
skill of summarizing the main ideas, any discussion of the writer’s ideas that was part of that domain of
the rubric was not part of the evaluation. Thus, the CATW Assessment rubric was adapted for the
purpose of this assessment.
This Adapted CATW rubric was chosen because all of the students in our Department are eventually
required to take and pass the CATW before they advance into credit-bearing courses such as English
Composition (EN-101). Since BE201 students are placed in the lowest level of writing because they lack
academic language and basic writing skills, our Department contends that earlier exposure to academic
types of writing, especially summary writing, will better prepare them to pass the CUNY standardized
CATW writing exam. Therefore, the Academic Literacy Department requires all of their writing classes to
take a version of the CATW test as a mid-term and final exam. However, the reading passages in the
lower level courses are shorter and contain fewer vocabulary challenges than the mid-level and
advanced ESL writing courses. This approach assists our students in passing the official CATW
standardized exam when they complete BE205.
Description of the Adapted CATW Rubric:
This rubric contains a six-point scale that contains six domains. These domains evaluate a students’
ability to a) summarize and discuss the main ideas of a reading, b) take a stand on a major idea in the
article and c) relate that idea to their own experience, d) develop their ideas with specific details, e)
organize their ideas cohesively, and f) write grammatically. As stated above, for the purpose of this
assessment, the Committee adapted the rubric in order to focus on the first domain that emphasized
how well the student understood the main idea of an article and summarized that idea. (See Adapted
CATW Rubric.)
8(25)
How the first domain of the CATW Rubric Measured Curricular and General
Educational Objectives for this Assessment:
This rubric measured both Curricular Outcomes and General Education Outcomes.
Curricular Objectives:
1. Students will recognize the main idea by differentiating major and minor details in various reading
passages.(Curricular Objective #1)- This curricular objective is included in the first domain of the CATW
by requiring students to ascertain an article’s most important ideas.
2. Students will identify and write topic sentences within various reading passages. (Curricular
Objective #4). In order for the students to convey the main ideas in an article, they were required to
write clear and focused topic sentences. The first domain of the CATW addresses this particular
curricular objective.
3. Students will summarize reading passages by identifying main ideas, organizing these ideas
effectively, using appropriate transitional devices, and producing their summary by using their own
words. (Curricular Objective #7). All of these components are included in the first domain of the CATW
rubric.
General Educational Objectives:
1. Communicate effectively through reading, writing, listening and speaking. (General Education
Objective#1). The first domain of the rubric measures how well the students read and understand
reading passages and their ability to write an effective summary.
Part iv. Assessment Results
TABLE 8: Summary of Assessment Results
Use the following table to report the student results on the assessment. If you prefer, you may report
outcomes using the rubric(s), or other graphical representation. Include a comparison of the outcomes
you expected (from Table 7, Column 3) with the actual results. NOTE: A number of the pilot
assessments did not include expected success rates so there is no comparison of expected and actual
outcomes in some of the examples below. However, projecting outcomes is an important part of the
assessment process; comparison between expected and actual outcomes helps set benchmarks for
student performance.
TABLE 8: Summary of Assessment Results (Part of TABLE 9’s focus is subsumed in this section.)
The committee hypothesized that scores would increase as a result of a) the lesson, and b) multiple
exposures to the new skill in a variety of situations such as solo, group, and class-wide experiences.
However, no specific expectations about the degree of individual improvement were theorized. Thus,
the overall improvement in results suggest a successful unit.
Student achievement: Describe the group achievement of each desired outcome and the knowledge
and cognitive processes demonstrated:
9(25)
The lesson had one desired outcome: to improve students’ ability to write effective summaries.
The following analysis indicates a moderate level of success from the midterm to final on the MTEL
Summary Assessment (See Table 1) and a higher level of success for the Adapted CATW assessment (See
Table 2). It should be noted that it is not the Assessment team’s intention to compare the results of the
two instruments directly. They are completely separate measurements. However, by employing two
measurements, the Assessment Committee can collect richer more in-depth data that will demonstrate
how much the students have advanced their summary writing skills.
At the midterm, two separate reading passages were employed. The first passage was evaluated
according to the MTEL rubric, and the second was assessed by the Adapted CATW. These scores were
utilized to establish separate baseline data to compare and contrast the students’ summary writing skills
at the end of the semester.
At the end of the term, the lesson was repeated, and students’ summarizing skills were once
again measured with the MTEL and the Adapted CATW; however new reading passages were provided
for the lesson and exams. On the MTEL scoring rubric (See Table 1), the passing score was “3” for
summary writing. Data analyses indicate that the average score was below “2” on the midterm
summaries for all sections. The average score remained below “2” on the final summaries for all
sections. While a small increased percentage of change resulted between assessments in Sections B, C,
and D, a decreased percentage occurred in Section A. Section D had the highest rate of improvement at
47%, but the average score was still below the passing score of “3.”
Table 1: Assessment Results for First Evaluation Instrument- MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric
BE201
Mid-term
Summary n
Mid-term
Summary
Average Score
Final
Summary n
Final Summary
Average Score
A
B
C
D
Total
9
21
22
17
69
1.94
1.67
1.59
1.29
1.59
9
21
22
19
69
1.78
1.95
1.95
1.89
1.92
10(25)
Percentage of
change
between
assessments
- 8%
+17%
+23%
+47%
+21%
Table 2: Assessment Results for Second Evaluation Instrument for the Adapted CATW Rubric
BE201
Mid-term
CATW
Summary n
Mid-term
CATW Average
Final CATW n
Final CATW
Average
A
B
C
D
Total
9
21
23
17
71
1.89
1.67
2.14
1.76
1.87
8
22
18
18
66
2.25
2.23
3.22
2.50
2.58
Percentage of
change
between
assessments
+19%
+34%
+50%
+42%
+38%
Next, the Adapted CATW Rubric was utilized to evaluate students’ ability to summarize. (See Table
2). On the midterm assessment, the Adapted CATW average was below “2” for Sections A, B, and D.
However, it was above “2” for Section C. The percentage of change between the Adapted CATW midterm
assessment and Adapted CATW final assessment was higher than for the MTEL Rubric. It should also be
noted that although Section A decreased in the percentage of change between MTEL assessments (See
Table 1.), this section increased on the Adapted CATW final assessment. Furthermore, Sections B, C, and D
achieved even greater increased percentages of change between midterm and final assessments. Section
C had the highest increase with a +50% improvement in scores, and thus, became the only section to have
an average score above “3.” More analysis with regard to specific classroom methodology and instruction
might be necessary to determine why such variability occurred among scores.
Additional Statistical Analyses of the MTEL and CATW Rubrics
Table 3: Comparison of Means for the MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric
n
Mean
Standard. Deviation
Midterm Score
68
1.5956 *
.57470
Final Score
70
1.9143 *
.64814

p < .001
According to Table 3, a t-test of dependent means examined the difference between midterm and
final scores when the MTEL Summary Rubric was utilized, and it revealed a statistically significant
increase in scores. After the first lesson, the students’ scores evidenced a mean of 1.5956, whereas after
the final, their scores were 1.9143.
11(25)
Table 4 Comparison of Means for CATW Rubric
n
Mean
Standard Deviation
Midterm Score
68
1.8676 *
.62065
Final Score
65
2.5792 *
.82858

p < .001
In Table 4, a t-test of dependent means also revealed a significant increase in scores between the
midterm and final exams when the CATW rubric was used (p < .001). Thus, both of the instruments
used, the MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric and the Adapted CATW Rubric, both exhibited a statistical
improvement in the participants’ ability to summarize as a result of repeated lessons, practice and
exams.
Table 5 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) among Four Classes
df
f
Significance
Midterm Score
3
2.698
.053
Final Score
3
.188
.904
Midterm CATW Score
3
2.454
.071
Final CATW Score
3
6.980
.000*

p < .001
According to Table 5, an Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) indicated a statistically significant difference
among the four different classes that participated in this assessment. To determine where the
differences occurred, a Tukey Post Hoc test was completed, and it indicated that when the mean scores
were examined using the Adapted CATW Rubric on the final exam in one specific class, the scores were
significantly higher than in the other three classes (p < .001). That is in one class the Final CATW average
score was 3.22 whereas the other three classes had scores that ranged from 2.25 to 2.50. Although it
challenging to infer why one class performed so much better than the other three, some possible
12(25)
explanations could include the teacher effect or students’ self-selection when they register for a specific
course.
TABLE 9. Resulting Action Plan
In the table below, or in a separate attachment, interpret and evaluate the assessment results, and
describe the actions to be taken as a result of the assessment. In the evaluation of achievement, take
into account student success in demonstrating the types of knowledge and the cognitive processes
identified in the Course Objectives.
A. Analysis and interpretation of assessment results:
See section 8 above.
B. Evaluation of the assessment process:
What do the results suggest about how well the assignment and the assessment process worked both to help
students learn and to show what they have learned?
The results of this analysis suggest that the students entered this class with weak summarizing skills because
even after one lesson, on their first assessment that was measured by the MTEL Summary Rubric, students’ scores
only averaged 1.59. However, these students made a moderate improvement by the time of the final assessment,
which also utilized the MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric. On, their overall average was 1.92, which is a 21% increase
between the two MTEL assessments. These results suggest that the assignment, which was designed by a team of
experts who have taught ESL reading and writing for many years, worked well in that it used a repeated or spiral
approach to teaching the same concept. These results also infer that these students could have increased their
scores more between the two assessments if they had benefited from more time on task, exposure to the target
language, and additional repeated lessons focused on summary writing.
With regard to the second major assessment which utilized instrument two: the Adapted CATW assessment, the
students exhibited stronger summarizing skills. On the adapted CATW mid-term assessment, the students scored
an average of 1.87, which is well below passing. However, by the end of the semester, with the repeated customdesigned assessment lessons, this average score rose to 2.58, which is a significant increase.
These two measures, the MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric and the Adapted CATW Rubric, both evidenced a
statistical improvement in the participants’ ability to summarize as a result of repeated lessons, practice, and
exams (See Tables 3 and 4). However, the scores were higher when the students were assessed according to the
Adapted CATW rubric. These results suggest that if these students were taught with a traditional method, which
included a) one lesson of instruction, b) in class group practice, c) in class individual practice, d) homework
practice, and e) an exam, they would not have been able to improve their mastery of this skill. However, when the
teachers used a spiral pedagogy and revisited the instruction and practice of this topic, the students increased
their scores significantly.
Although the improvement on this assessment yielded significant results, it should be noted that the subjects’
average score for the Adapted CATW Rubric was only 2.58, which is well below the minimum score of 4 which is
needed to earn a passing score in this domain of the CATW. Therefore, these results suggest that most of these
BE201 students will continue to need exposure to summarizing lessons, practice and exams as they advance
through BE203 and BE205. In addition, since summarizing is only one of many skills required to pass the CATW, it
is suggested that each time instructors in the lower-level ESL classes introduce a new writing technique, they be
13(25)
prepared to revisit these new skills with supplemental lessons, exercises, homework and exams throughout the
semester to ensure that the students can utilize the new skill effectively since “one shot” lessons are not sufficient
because our ESL learners arrive with both linguistic and academic deficiencies.
C. Resulting action plan:
Based on A and B, what changes, if any, do you anticipate making?
Modest gains were achieved using the first instrument, the MTEL, to measure summary skills. A stronger
improvement was evidenced through the utilization of the second assessment instrument, the Adapted CATW
assessment. Although the two instruments used were entirely separate and in no way compared directly, they
both measured how well a student comprehended a passage and was able to summarize it in his or her own
words effectively. The results from both assessments revealed that the students’ ability to summarize improved
over time significantly. However, the improvement was not sufficient to pass the summarizing component of
CATW exam.
This assessment insinuates that explicit repeated teaching of a) differentiating the main idea of a passage from
extraneous minor details, b) paraphrasing, c) using transitions, and d) organizing a well-organized cohesive
summary, leads to enhanced ability to write effective summaries, and since summary writing is an essential skill
on the CATW, BE201 faculty will be encouraged to use this spiral teaching, writing, and testing method as they fine
tune their courses.
Since our low-level ESL writing students arrive with weak linguistic and academic skills, they require much more
exposure to the target language. Moreover, since our Department only provides four ESL writing instructional
hours per week, compared to similar departments throughout CUNY that average 6-8 hours for the same type of
course and level, they are at a disadvantage. Therefore, instructors need to compensate for the lost time by
including more intensive instruction. This can consist of additional repeated lessons, challenging academic
material, and consistent review of the skills necessary to write an effective summary.
To enhance this lesson further, instructors can be encouraged to develop model summaries that directly
correspond to the criteria of the rubric being utilized. For instance, students can be provided with sample
summaries that have received the score of a 1, 2, 3, or 4 on the rubric. The samples can be distributed to the
students without their corresponding scores and then the students can work in groups to assess each summary.
The classroom instructor can then lead the students through a discussion/analysis of the scores that each
summary should have received and the rationale behind each decision so that the students view summarizing
from the teacher’s perspective. After this review, the students should score each other’s summaries to enhance
their understanding of this skill by analyzing and discussing their summaries along with the rubric.
Likewise, all BE201 instructors should participate in norming sessions during which they utilize these model
summaries along with their corresponding rubrics to ensure consistency and accuracy in their grading. These
sessions will also permit teachers to glean ideas from one another to enhance their summary teaching even more.
This will be especially helpful in that it will increase the likelihood of fewer discrepancies among BE201 sections
because the instructors will be exposed to increased support from their peers.
If, by the end of the semester, students in BE201 remain at a low level, then it is important that instructors not
pass them into BE203 because they are unprepared to meet the demands of the criteria of that higher level. This
will prevent these students from becoming multiple repeaters, and thereby reduce the multiple-repeaters issue in
our Department.
14(25)
Addendum: Documents
(Instructor’s Packet: Lesson plan, assessment* and reading passages*) Used in the Fall 2013
Assessment of BE201 1
Session #1 Overview of the Lesson
The focus of this lesson is finding the key ideas in a reading passage and writing a summary using those
key ideas. The focus of the lesson will be the following:

Review a simplified 4-point rubric with particular focus on a score of “3” as a passing summary.

Read the passage

Identify the overall topic, main idea, and key ideas within the passage.

Draft a summary.

Include transition words that indicate an additional idea.

Edit for simple sentence structure and main idea/key ideas (time permitting)
The Summary Rubric
The attached MTEL Summary Scoring Rubric for teacher reference and the simplified version of that
rubric is for class review. To help students understand the important parts of a summary, you can focus
on “3” as the target for summary writing because it is considered to be a passing score.
The Reading Passage #1
The attached reading passage (The Teens Are Alright (Healthwise, at Least) will be used to demonstrate
how to find the topic, main idea, and key ideas. We suggest that you and the students work together on
the initial part of this task (finding the topic and main idea) and allow them to work in pairs for the
second part of the task (finding key ideas).
Determining the Topic and Main Idea of Reading Passage #1
1. The topic of a reading passage is usually a few words that express the most general point that is
discussed in the passage. Elicit student responses about the topic of the passage.
2. Next, the main idea of the entire passage usually contains the topic and the author’s opinion or
the point being made. Elicit student responses about the main idea of the passage.
Determining the Key Ideas in the Passage
After you and the students have reviewed the topic and main idea of the passage, you can ask pairs to find
the key ideas in the passage. It is often challenging for the BE201 population to understand the difference
between general and specific ideas. Therefore, we recommend that you work on this concept with the
1
The rubrics and reading passages referred to in the lesson are at the end of this section.
15(25)
students before they participate in pair work. For example, you can write down several examples of
general vs. specific ideas on the board to model this concept and/or elicit examples from the students
such as fruit (general) and kinds of fruit (specific). When you think students are ready to work on their
own, ask them to highlight or underline only the key ideas in this passage. When the pairs have finished,
review key ideas with the whole class.
Paraphrasing for the summary
After the topic, main idea, and key ideas have been identified, pairs can work on drafting the summary.
Drafting a passing summary (“3” score) requires paraphrasing, but we do not recommend using such a
complex term. You may want to say that writing a good summary means that students should change
some of verbs, adjectives, and nouns with synonyms (or words with similar meanings). Below are two
examples of changing verbs, adjectives and/or nouns:
Example #1:
Original sentence: U.S. teens are getting healthier, and, it seems, are doing what they’re told when it
comes to eating right and exercising more.
Revised sentence: U.S. adolescents have become more healthy, and are listening to advice about eating
well and engaging in more physical activity.
Example #2:
Original sentence: Boys were more physically active than girls, but girls spent less time in front of the TV
or computer.
Revised sentence: Teen boys exercised more than teen girls, but teen girls did not watch as much
television or use the computer.
Writing the Summary
Ask students to draft a summary by stating the following:

The title of the passage

The author of the passage

The topic of the passage

The main idea

The key ideas
Adding Transition Words
The next part of drafting a summary is writing with coherence. Again, coherence is a complex term, so
we recommend discussing this aspect as making connections with words that add ideas. Elicit transition
16(25)
words that help students to add ideas into their writing. Ask students to look at their summary closely to
see where they might be able to add transition words.
The Homework Assignment For homework, ask students to read the attached passage #2 (Facebook
Moms) and draft a summary on their own. Remind them that the summary should include the title,
author, topic, main idea, and key ideas.
Session #2
Review the homework summary as a whole class for content and coherence. After homework review,
assign the individual in-class assessment activity.
In-class Assessment Activity
Ask students to read and draft a summary for passage #3 (How Bullying’s Effects Reach Beyond
Childhood) on their own. You will not review this summary. Instead, you will collect the summary and
put it into Dr. Julia Carroll’s mailbox for assessment committee grading.
Lastly, thank you so much for participating in this assessment!
Reading Passage #1
The Teens Are Alright (Healthwise, at Least)
By Alexandra Sifferlin
U.S. teens are getting healthier, and, it seems, are doing what they’re told when it comes to eating right
and exercising more. Between 2001 and ’09, a new study published in the journal Pediatrics shows,
teens became model health citizens. According to a national survey involving 9,000 students in grades
six to 10, adolescents were more physically active, enjoyed more fruits and vegetables, ate breakfast,
limited dessert and watched less TV. And all those healthy habits paid off.
While body-mass-index (BMI) measures (an indication of body fat using weight and height) of U.S.
adolescents grew between 2001 and ’06, it remained stable from 2006 to ’09, suggesting that average
BMI readings among teens are leveling off.
Weight stabilized for both boys and girls although there were slight differences between gender. Boys
were more physically active than girls, but girls spent less time in front of the TV or computer.
The authors of the report say campaigns to promote exercise among adolescents and decrease screen
time may be responsible for some of the positive behavior changes; pediatricians who discussed the
benefits of lifestyle changes with their patients also helped. Improving interactions between doctors,
nurses and their teen patients can potentially accomplish even more in helping adolescents to
understand the importance of making lifestyle changes to their health — and sticking with them for a
lifetime.
Adapted from Time magazine, September 16, 2013
17(25)
Reading Passage #2
Facebook Moms
By Tracey Harrington McCoy
Kimberly Gervaise, a stay-at-home mother of three in Little Silver, N.J., joined Facebook five years ago
and only posts every couple of months, mostly sharing photos from special events, like birthdays. She
has 393 friends, and wishes some of them would tuck it in a bit. “I get a little upset about people who
feel the need to post a picture of a straight-A report card – and there are many,” she says. “I am sure
that most of the time, they are just proud, but I find it annoying.”
Gervaise says more and more mothers are using Facebook as a way to brag about their lives, their kids,
their parenting techniques. And that’s making it harder and harder for moms like her to log on without
feeling slapped in the face.
Bragging about your kids is nothing new, but before Facebook, the Compare & Contrast game was
mostly played at the playground or the preschool parking lot. Moms would stand around quietly
assessing kids to see who was hitting major moments in their lives faster or slower than their own
children.
Facebook moms are constantly informed of updates about their friends’ kids and their
accomplishments. Daily, hourly even. According to Edison Research’s Moms and Media 2013 report,
57% of moms on Facebook are over 35 – these women are the first generation to have raised their
children entirely in the Facebook era.
Mothers are heavy Facebook users. Edison’s 2013 research reveals that 7 out of 10 moms have a profile,
and there are more than 1,000 mommy groups, public and private. These groups range in size from
hundreds of members to tens of thousands, and they are discussing everything from potty training to
gaming that private-school admissions test.
Of all the different groups that use Facebook, moms check in the most (an average of 5.1 times a day,
according to Edison), and they keep coming back, even if they are being hit with difficult to notice – and
sometimes not so difficult – "My kid’s smarter/healthier/happier than yours” criticisms. For the mom
who barely gets her kids’ shoes on before rushing them off to school, posts that show the perfect family
can create guilt or even self-hatred. “Who has time to get the paint and glitter out? Who has time to
clean up the giant mess?” says Meredith DePersia, a working mother of two in San Francisco. “
This situation is turning many women off. For instance, an online media professional and mom of one
from Falls Church, Va., is so tired of playing the game that she’s taken her ball and gone home. “I kind of
avoid Facebook entirely,” she says, “because I'm sick of everyone's presentation of perfection.”
Adapted from Newsweek magazine, October 4, 2013
18(25)
Reading Passage #3
How Bullying’s Effects Reach Beyond Childhood
by Alexandra Sifferlin
More research is documenting the lasting effect of bullying on its victims in nearly every part of their
lives, from emotional wellbeing to career success. The latest analysis from researchers at the University
of Padua in Padua, Italy, sadly confirms the obvious — that children who were bullied suffered from
issues with low self confidence, poor grades, and physical health problems that had a direct influence on
the state of their health as adults.
The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, reviewed data from 30 studies that investigated the
connection between being bullied and so-called psychosomatic problems that include headaches,
backaches, abdominal pain, skin problems, sleeping problems, bed- wetting, or dizziness. The results
showed that kids who were bullied were twice as likely to have psychosomatic symptoms compared to
their non-bullied peers.
The severity and influence of bullying is certainly increased by the variety of online avenues by which
bullying can take place, which extends it beyond the school to students’ private lives, making it harder
for kids to ignore, overcome and move on. Studies document higher rates of anxiety and panic attacks
among victims of bullying, and these are causing mental health and behavior problems later in life. That
could translate into unstable professional and personal lives as well; a recent study reported that bully
victims are two times less likely to hold down a job and also have difficulty maintaining meaningful
social relationships.
The psychosomatic symptoms, however, may also represent an opportunity — sometimes the first and
only one — for doctors or parents to recognize bullying and intervene. The researchers say, for example,
that pediatricians can play a larger role in identifying bully victims during check-ups if such symptoms
are persistent and long-lived. Discussing these warning signs with parents, as well as counseling them on
how to handle bullying when it occurs can help to promote self-confidence and in some cases ease the
situation. “Pediatricians’ suggestions are likely to be particularly effective given the high confidence that
parents usually put in these professionals, the authors write.
Adapted from Time magazine, September 16, 2013
19(25)
Final Summary Follow-up Lesson:
Teachers were instructed to follow the same lesson plan as they did for the initial assessment. The
following reading passages were used for this part of the assessment lesson and tests.
Your Wired Kid
By Annie Murphy Paul
If you're like many mothers of pre-teens or teens, you probably often find yourself gazing at the faces of
your beloved children — as those faces are bathed in the flickering light of the television or the cool
glow of the computer. Observing their glassy-eyed stares, it's hard not to wonder (and worry), What is
this screen time doing to their development?
We've all heard the recommendation of the American Academy of Pediatrics: just one to two hours a
day of "quality" electronic entertainment for children over 2. However, in 2010, a study in the American
Journal of Epidemiology reported that most adolescents spend an average of 25 to 30 hours per week
watching TV and using computers. And while half of parents surveyed in a 2010 study said they always
or often set limits on screen time, 18 percent of their kids really disagreed. It is getting harder to
measure how much screen time kids are exposed to. It’s not just the TV, which parents can turn off.
Today many teens and pre-teens have smartphones, laptops, tablets, and iPods that they carry with
them. When you add up the total time kids spend on their electronic devices, you arrive at a truly
shocking number: The average American between the ages of 8 and 18 spends more than seven hours a
day looking at a screen of some kind, reports a Kaiser Family Foundation study.
Scientists are now beginning to carefully study the effects of all this electronic engagement. Too much
screen time may be linked to an increased incidence of risky behaviors, such as smoking, drinking, drug
use, and unprotected sex. More social network activity seems to correspond to mood problems among
teens. Additionally, too much time spent in front of a screen can make children fat due to lack of
activity. But there's good news, too. Moderate computer use may be associated with the development
of some cognitive and social skills. Children who immerse themselves in computer games can develop
sharper vision, faster reaction times, are better at multitasking and are less easily distracted. Young
people who use social media are also better at connecting with their peers and displaying emotions.
With the right guidance, parents can help their children turn screen time into a positive experience.
20(25)
Learn to Manage Your Time in College
By Kelci Lynn Lucier
With so much happening on a college campus, it's no wonder that students can feel overcommitted
when it comes to classes, work, and campus activities. How can you balance your time when there never
seems to be enough of it?
Here are a few things to consider:
First, learn to manage your academic time. Even though you may have a million other things going on,
it's important to remind yourself why you're in college in the first place: to graduate. Therefore, your
academic work should always come first.
When looking at your schedule for the week, figure out what your academic commitments look like.
What time do you have classes? How much homework do you have to do? What assignments are due?
When do you have exams or quizzes?
Next, manage your personal time. It's unrealistic to think that you can study, go to class, and work all
day, every day. Your brain needs a break, too! Make sure to allow yourself time to do something fun.
Doing things that make your personal time more enjoyable can actually improve your work on projects
later. Of course, if you're overcommitted socially, you'll need to adjust things. Learning to say "No" or "I
have to go start studying now" can be one of the best time management skills you learn in college.
You’ll also want to keep your health in mind. When people's schedules are tight, one of the first things
they sacrifice is sleep. While a lack of sleep may be common among college students, it is more harmful
than you might think. It can negatively affect everything: your mental health, your physical health, your
stress level, and, of course, your schedule.
Consider that you might need time-management help. Time management takes time to learn. Be patient
as your learn how to manage your college academic schedule, your campus social commitments, and
your need for rest and relaxation.
The most important thing is to have some kind of system for time management. Some students use the
calendars on their phones; others use things like Google Calendar; others still use paper-calendars or
date books. Try a few systems and see what works for you.
Additionally, many campuses offer help with time management because it can be a challenge for some
people. If you are having trouble planning your time, try talking with your academic adviser or a
counselor.
21(25)
Are You Fitter Than a Fifth Grader? Yes, You Probably Are
By Alexandra Sifferlin
Today’s kids are less fit than their parents were at the same age, according to new research presented at
the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions, and that could mean health problems later on.
The fact that younger kids get more out of breath than their parents did at their age doesn’t just mean
they aren’t in shape. It’s also a red flag that they may more vulnerable to certain chronic diseases as
adults.
Researchers from the University of South Australia’s School of Health Sciences analyzed and compared
50 studies on children’s running fitness between the years 1964 and 2010. The studies included about
25 million kids between the ages 9 and 17 in 28 different countries. The researchers recorded running
times over a specific time frame–typically about five to 15 minutes–or over a certain distance–a half
mile to two miles.
They found that over the 46 years, the cardiovascular endurance — measured by the times it took to run
the various distances — among kids declined significantly. From 1970 to 2000, U.S. children’s
cardiovascular endurance fell about 6% per decade, and among all countries, it fell about 5% each
decade. In other words, kids today are 15% less fit than their parents were, and in the mile run, kids are
about a minute and a half slower than children were 30 years ago.
The researchers say that cardiovascular fitness is one of the most important factors for good health, not
just in childhood but in adulthood as well. “If a young person is generally unfit now, then they are more
likely to develop conditions like heart disease later in life,” said lead study author Grant Tomkinson in a
statement.
Currently, the Centers for Disease Control recommends that children get at least an hour of daily activity
that involves the entire body, such as running, biking, or swimming. Not only does the exercise benefit
the body, but research shows that kids who are more physically active tend to do better in school too.
Adapted from Time Magazine, November 19, 2013
22(25)
(MTEL) Summary Scoring Rubric
4




3




2




1




U

B

The response accurately and clearly conveys all of the main ideas and significant details of the
original passage. It does not introduce information, opinion, or analysis not found in the
original. Relationships among ideas are preserved.
The response is concise while providing enough statements of appropriate depth and
specificity to convey the main ideas and significant details of the original passage.
The response is written in the candidate's own words, clearly and coherently conveying main
ideas and significant details.
The response shows excellent control of grammar and conventions. Sentence structure, word
choice, and usage are precise and effective. Mechanics (i.e., spelling, punctuation, and
capitalization) conform to the standard conventions of written English.
The response conveys most of the main ideas and significant details of the original passage,
and is generally accurate and clear. It introduces very little or no information, opinion, or
analysis not found in the original. Relationships among ideas are generally maintained.
The response may be too long or too short, but generally provides enough statements of
appropriate depth and specificity to convey most of the main ideas and significant details of
the original passage.
The response is generally written in the candidate's own words, conveying main ideas and
significant details in a generally clear and coherent manner.
The response shows general control of grammar and conventions. Some minor errors in
sentence structure, word choice, usage and mechanics (i.e., spelling, punctuation, and
capitalization) may be present.
The response conveys only some of the main ideas and significant details of the original
passage. Information, opinion, or analysis not found in the original passage may substitute for
some of the original ideas. Relationships among ideas may be unclear.
The response either includes or excludes too much of the content of the original passage. It is
too long or too short. It may take the form of a list or an outline.
The response may be written only partially in the candidate's own words while conveying main
ideas and significant details. Language not from the passage may be unclear and/or disjointed.
The response shows limited control of grammar and conventions. Errors in sentence structure,
word choice, usage, and/or mechanics (i.e., spelling, punctuation, and capitalization) are
distracting.
The response fails to convey the main ideas and details of the original passage. It may consist
mostly of information, opinion, or analysis not found in the original.
The response is not concise. It either includes or excludes almost all the content of the original
passage.
The response is written almost entirely of language from the original passage or is written in
the candidate's own words and is confused and/or incoherent.
The response fails to show control of grammar and conventions. Serious errors in sentence
structure, word choice, usage, and
The response is unrelated to the assigned topic, illegible, primarily in a language other than
English, not of sufficient length to score, or merely a repetition of the assignment.
There is no response to the assignment.
23(25)
Simplified MTEL Rubric (Used only as a Pedagogical Tool) 2
Score Point
4 (Excellent)
Score Point Description
 The student writes about the main idea/key ideas in his or her own words.
 Clear organization throughout the summary
 No sentence mistakes
 No wrong word choice
 No grammar mistakes
3 (Very Good)





The student writes the main idea/key ideas mostly in his or her own words.
Mostly clear organization
Few sentence fragments
Mostly correct word choice
Few grammar mistakes
2 (Almost
Passing)




Some main idea/key ideas
Some sentence fragments
Some incorrect word choice
Some grammar mistakes
1 (Not Passing)




No main idea/key ideas
Many sentence fragments
Wrong word choice
Many grammar mistakes
Adapted CAT-W Rubric 3
Points
6
The discussion demonstrates a thorough understanding of the main ideas and the
complexity of ideas in the text.
5
The discussion demonstrates a good understanding of the main ideas and the complexity of
ideas in the text.
4
The discussion consistently demonstrates an understanding of the main ideas and of some
of the complexity in the text.
2
This simplified MTEL Rubric was given to the students to help them understand how their summaries would be
scored.
3
Only Domain #1 was used for the Adapted CATW assessment to reflect students’ understanding of main ideas of
text.
24(25)
3
The response demonstrates some understanding of the main ideas in the text, but
understanding is superficial or incomplete.
2
The response demonstrates a weak understanding of the main ideas in the text.
1
The response demonstrates little, if any, understanding of the main ideas in the text.
For the full CATW rubric please see:
http://www.owl.cuny.edu:7778/portal/page/portal/oira/Assessment/Faculty%20Handbook%20CATW.pdf
25(25)