ASCRC Writing Committee Minutes, 10/7/13
TODD 203
Members Present: S. Brown, G. Burns, B. Chin, J. Glendening, M. Kmetz, J. Melcher, M. Stark, M.
Triana, G. Wiex
Ex-Officio Members Present: B. Hollzworth, D. Raiford, A. Ratto- Parks, K. Webster
Members Absent/Excused: I. Applebaum, C. Corr, J. Hickman, B. Sriraman
The meeting was called to order at 10:10 a.m.
Members introduced themselves and new members were welcomed.
The 9/9/13 minutes were approved.
Communication Items:

Members were reminded that the November meeting will be in a different room, FOR106.
The motion to end the UDWPA and implement a University-wide Program-level Assessment of
Student Writing Proficiency in Approved Writing Courses was presented during the last 5 minutes
of the September Faculty Senate meeting. There was concern regarding students graduating from
earlier catalogs and transfer students with over 26 credits exception from the approved writing
requirement. An email to senators from Senator Vanita suggested the assessment was a waste of
time and money. A follow-up email from Senator Horejsi included Professor Ratto-Parks
clarification on some of the issues. Chair Chin will also send a response to Senator Vanita. It is
important that members of the Writing Committee reach out to senators to answer any questions.
There is much misunderstanding about the UDWPA, the current writing requirements, and the
proposed Writing Assessment.
Business Items
 Writing Course review assignments were established. Most of the forms are renewals for
Humanities and Fine Arts Approved Writing / Upper-division Writing courses. Each group has
three approved writing course forms to review. These require members to enter information into
the electronic worksheet for assessment data collection, which is the first phase of the pilot project.
The lead member of each group was provided with the original signed forms. The spreadsheet
below and the links to forms and the electronic worksheet will be sent electronically to members.
(Two courses were withdrawn after the meeting and three courses were moved so that all groups
had the same number of forms to review.) Group leaders should work with course proposers to
revise syllabi so the courses will be approved. Revisions to forms /syllabi should be received by
October 31st. The groups should be prepared with consent agendas at the November 4th meeting.
Group 1
Kelly Webster
Sherrill Brown
Group 2
Amy Ratto-Parks
Irene Applebaum
Group 3
John Glendening
Cathy Corr
Group 4
Megan Stark
Marcia Kmetz
Group 5
Gene Burns
GG Weix
Bharath Sriraman
Approved Writing
AAS / HSTR 347
LSH 151/152
AAS / HSTA 415
Upper-division Writing
HSTA / WGSS 471
HSTR 400
MART 450
PHL 499
Mark Triana
Jill Melcher
AAS 372
CLAS 251L
MUSI 302
ANTY 310
CLAS 252L
NASX 235
ARTH 250
HSTR 300
PHL 210E
HSTR 315
HSTR 401
THTR 330H
AAS / HSTA 417
HSTA 418
HSTR 418
MUSI 415
ANTY 408
HSTA 419
HSTR 437
MUSI 416
ARTH 350
HSTA 461
JPNS 311
MUSI 417
DANC 494
JPNS 312
THTR 331Y
RUSS 494
 Director Webster summarized last year’s Writing Center Annual Report (appended below). She
noted that sophomore students had the fewest tutoring visits to the Writing Center. Seniors had the
highest, then freshmen. The Side Car project imbeds small group tutoring sessions into key
courses. The assessment of these sessions has been very positive. This academic year there is only
enough funding for two courses a semester. During the Autumn 2012 and Spring 2013Semesters
2,207 students attempted the UDWPA exam, with an overall passing rate of 72.5%.
 The Committee discussed strategies for the October Senate meeting. Chair Chin will create power
point slides that clearly indicate what the UDWPA does not do and what University-wide Programlevel Assessment of Student Writing Proficiency in Approved Writing Courses does (focus on
student needs). A slide will also list programs that were represented at the 2011 and 2012 Writing
Assessment Retreats.
 The Geography Department participated in phase three of the Writing Assessment Pilot and would
like the Writing Committee to provide feedback on the design of their upper-division assessment.
A Workgroup consisting of Professors Raiford, Kmetz, Weix, and Chin will review the document.
Professor Raiford will take the lead on the review with a goal of getting back to Geography in two
weeks.
 ASCRC drafted catalog language to be implemented if the motion is approved. The Committee
reviewed and approved the language. According to Assoc. Registrar Hollzworth there are 12-15
graduation applications that are inactive only because of not passing the UDWPA. If the motion
does not pass, these students are required to be re-admitted to the University in order to take and
pass the UDWPA. If the motion passes, the Registrar will put a disclaimer at the top of the page
that lists the old catalogs.
There is an UDWPA exam scheduled for October 12th and enrollment for the spring exam begins
October 21st. The Writing Center has discussed a strategy for a communication campaign for
students and will work with advisors.
The Committee will need to plan a spring Writing Assessment Retreat if the motion passes. The
Committee should reach out to every department to assure representation from across campus.
Good and Welfare
 Members were invited to the reception after the Faculty Senate meeting on October 10th.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
______________________________________________________________________
The University of Montana Writing Center Annual Report
AY 2012-2013
I. Summary
The Writing Center: An Environment Where Writers Thrive
As a University hub for campus conversations about writing, the Writing Center administers programs to help undergraduate
and graduate students in all disciplines become more versatile and effective writers, readers, and thinkers. In one-to-one and
small-group tutoring sessions and in whole-class workshops, tutors help students to recognize their strengths and
weaknesses as communicators and to practice strategies appropriate to various writing contexts.
In addition, the Writing Center collaborates with faculty to provide instruction that positively impacts student performance. In
an effort to support all writers at the University of Montana, the Writing Center also supports faculty and staff by providing
one-to-one consultations on their professional writing projects.
Student and faculty perceptions of Writing Center services indicate that the campus community is deeply engaged in critical
writing practices, that students and faculty see value in Writing Center programs, and that University resources are being
marshaled to support student success.
Highlighted AY 2012-2013 Results
The Writing Center’s on-going assessment activities indicate sustained undergraduate student, graduate student, and faculty
demand for Writing Center services. Results suggest that the Writing Center successfully is meeting this high demand and
doing so in a way that addresses diverse student and faculty needs. Section III further explains these highlighted results.







4,177 30- to 60-minute undergraduate and graduate student tutoring sessions facilitated (Figure 1)
55 different academic areas addressed during tutoring sessions
160 discipline-specific, in-class writing workshops facilitated for 3,851 student participants (Figure 2)
32 faculty and staff consultations and professional development opportunities facilitated for 149 participants
6 Sidecar Project collaborations embedded into writing-intensive courses
8,177 instructional contacts made to support students’ development as writers
5 Writing in the Disciplines Project resources created in collaboration with academic department faculty
Figure 1. Tutoring sessions facilitated, by
year.
Figure 2. Writing workshops presented, by year.
II. Writing Center Accomplishments in Support of UM’s Strategic Issues
Partnering for Student Success
The following Writing Center programs promote achievement of key Partnering for Student Success Strategic Issue
objectives. These programs support student retention by directly strengthening students’ ability to read, write, and think in an
academic context and by enhancing faculty members’ ability to support student writers.
Programming for students:

Face-to-face and Online Tutoring: Undergraduate and graduate student tutoring provides student support in the
areas of critical thinking, reading, and writing. Tutoring also helps first-year students transition to college writing
expectations and graduate students transition to graduate-level writing expectations.

Missoula College Tutoring: Missoula College tutoring meets unique student and program needs.



TRiO Writing Mentorship Program: The Writing Mentorship Program provides new TRiO students with timely
student support as they transition to college writing expectations.
Workshops: Writing workshops across the curriculum provide discipline-specific writing instruction.
Sidecar Project: The Sidecar Project engages undergraduate and graduate students in the context of their courses
by providing discipline-specific, small-group student writing support over the course of a semester. The Writing
Center has collaborated with faculty in the context of the following courses:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o



AAS/HSTA 415 – Black Radical Tradition (Dr. Miller Shearer)
COMM 413 – Communication and Conflict (Dr. Sillars)
COMM 561 – Qualitative Research Methods (Dr. Ivers)
DIS – Drug Information Service, Department of Pharmacy Practice (Dr. Brown)
EDU 221 – Educational Psychology and Measurements (Dr. Stolle)
GLI/PSCI 191 – Political Regimes and Societies (Dr. Saldin)
SOCI 441 – Inequality and Social Justice (Dr. Kuipers)
SOCI 455 – Classical Theory (Dr. Rooks)
SW 350 – Intervention Methods (Dr. Wozniak and Dr. Wellenstein)
WRIT 101 – College Composition (Prof. Brown)
International Students/WRIT 101 – College Composition
Writing in the Disciplines Project: The Writing in the Disciplines Project provides students with online disciplinespecific resources collaboratively designed by academic departments and Writing Center staff. Available resources
address writing in Economics, Environmental Studies, Literature, Social Work, and Sociology.
KPCN/Writing Center Video: The Writing Center video serves to engage students through a dynamic medium and
by emphasizing key features of college writing, thereby serving students’ transition to college writing expectations.
UM Writes Blog: For the benefit of student writers, the UM Writes Blog showcases short pieces by administrators,
faculty, and staff who use writing in their everyday lives.
Programming for faculty and staff:

One-to-one Teaching Consultations: Writing Center consultations with faculty emphasize faculty development by
providing individualized feedback and guidance on writing assignment design and response, and by providing ideas
for incorporating writing–both graded and non-graded–into courses across the curriculum.

Professional Development Workshops: Writing Center workshops emphasize faculty development by helping
faculty learn to use writing to enhance student learning in any course. For example, Writing Center staff recently
collaborated with the Mansfield Library and the Writing Committee to present faculty workshops focused on:
o Responding to student writing.
o Supporting student development as information literate writers.
o Preventing plagiarism through teaching.
Education for the Global Century
The following Writing Center programs promote achievement of key Education for the Global Century Strategic Issue
objectives. These programs increase graduate and international student use of one-to-one writing tutoring, and support
student retention by strengthening foundational academic programs.
Programming for students:

Graduate and International Student Instruction: One-to-one and small-group writing tutoring and workshops meet
international and graduate student needs and engage students in interdisciplinary problem-solving conversations.

Writing in Spanish Tutoring: One-to-one tutoring for students writing papers in Spanish supports students as they
communicate in a foreign language.
Programming for faculty:

Global Leadership Initiative Support: In-class workshops tailored to GLI seminar
writing assignments and interdisciplinary big questions support students’ development as critical thinkers in a global
context.

Working with International Students Support: One-to-one and small-group
consultations on how to support international students across the curriculum support faculty who serve a diverse
student body.
Discovery and Creativity to Serve Montana and the World
The following Writing Center programs promote achievement of key Discovery and Creativity to Serve Montana and the
World Strategic Issue objectives. These programs promote and support student and faculty research, scholarship, and
creative work by providing students and faculty with the tools necessary to communicate their work.
Programming for students:

Research Portfolio Honors College Seminar: The Writing Center’s for-credit course (HC 320E) offered through the
Davidson Honors College supports undergraduate students completing independent research projects in the natural

and physical sciences, social and behavioral sciences, arts, and humanities. The course also coaches students in
presentation techniques for the UMCUR and NCUR settings.
Poster Workshop: This workshop teaches best practices for poster presentations in the sciences and humanities.
Programming for faculty and staff:

Faculty and Staff Writing Consultations: Writing Center consultations with faculty and staff provide feedback and
guidance on how to communicate research projects through writing and for a variety of audiences.
III. Writing Center Assessment
Assessment Activities
The Writing Center is engaged in a number of assessment practices that inform the Writing Center’s efforts to marshal
resources to positively impact student retention. The following assessment practices currently are a regular part of the
Writing Center’s assessment cycle.







Upper-division Writing Proficiency Assessment and Writing Assessment Pilot: The Writing Center staff administer
and track all aspects of the Upper-division Writing Proficiency Assessment. Writing Center staff, in collaboration
with the University Writing Committee and Associate Provost Arlene Walker-Andrews, also assist in orchestrating
the University’s three-tiered Writing Assessment Project.
Student Tracking: The Writing Center uses an Access database, which is connected to Banner, to track student
use of writing tutoring and to store important information from each tutoring session. The Writing Center tracks the
following attributes for each tutoring session:
Areas of Focus
Key Cohorts
Referrals
Class
Location
Tutor
Course
Major
Info Griz Reporting: The Writing Center currently is working with Information Technology staff to create reports that
will enhance the Center’s assessment capabilities.
Student Surveys: Sidecar Project participants complete a comprehensive survey aimed at assessing students’
understanding of the role of revision. These surveys also assess students’ perception of their own development as
writers during the course of the Sidecar experience.
Faculty Surveys: Faculty who participate in the Sidecar Project and who collaborate with the Writing Center
through other in-class workshops may elect to complete a survey aimed at assessing the strengths and
weaknesses of the collaboration.
TRiO Student Survey: TRiO students who participate in the Writing Mentorship Program complete a survey that
both encourages the student to reflect on his or her own writing strengths and weaknesses and collects student
perceptions of the Writing Mentorship Program experience.
Tutor Observations and Evaluations: Professional and graduate student tutors in the Writing Center participate in
an on-going observation and evaluation cycle. Tutors observe their colleagues and complete observation forms.
These forms are used to facilitate discussions about best practices and to inform the tutor evaluation process.
Selected Assessment Results for AY 2012-2013
Student Use Results (Figure 3 and Table 1):

Student demand for one-to-one tutoring remains high.
o Facilitated over 4,177 60- to 30-mintue undergraduate and graduate student tutoring sessions.

International student demand for one-to-one tutoring continues to increase.
o Facilitated 888 tutoring sessions with international students.

Graduate student demand for one-to-one tutoring continues to increase.
o Facilitated 492 tutoring sessions with graduate students.

Student demand for writing tutoring in the context of courses across the disciplines continues to increase.
o Tutored students writing in 55 different academic areas.

Freshmen and seniors continue to make up the Writing Center’s largest populations of users while sophomores
continue to make up the Writing Center’s smallest population of users.
o Facilitated 848 tutoring sessions with freshmen, 1,132 with seniors, and only 528 with sophomores.

Overall instructional contacts continue to increase.
o Made over 8,177 instructional contacts with students to support their development as writers.
Figure 3. Tutoring sessions, by class.
Table 1. Autumn and Spring tutoring session data, by location, type, and class.
Spring Semester 2013
Tutoring Session Statistics
2,220
129
1,581
294
41
175
Missoula College (all locations)
ESL/International
TRiO*
UDWPA
WRIT
336
417
192
227
385
Location
Total Tutoring Sessions
Missoula College East
LA 144
Mansfield Library
Online
Sidecar (in-class tutoring)
Student
Type
Student
Type
Location
Autumn Semester 2012
Tutoring Session Statistics
542
274
428
586
220
170
Student Class
Student Class
1,957
106
1,502
235
28
86
Missoula College (all locations)
ESL/International
TRiO*
UDWPA
WRIT
300
471
193
312
225
*Self-identified as TRiO; actual number is greater.
*Self-identified as TRiO; actual number is greater.
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Grad
Other/Undesignated
Total Tutoring Sessions
Missoula College East
LA 144
Mansfield Library
Online
Sidecar (in-class tutoring)
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Grad
Other/Undesignated
306
254
375
546
272
204
Faculty Use Results:

Faculty demand for in-class writing workshops continues to increase (Table 2).

Faculty demand for one-to-one consultations on their teaching, and faculty and staff demand for one-to-one
consultations on their own writing continue to increase (Table 3).
Table 2. Faculty-requested writing workshops.
Number of In-Class
Workshops
Presented
Number of
Disciplines Served
Number of
Participating
Students
160
33
3,851
Table 3. Faculty-requested consultations.
Number of Faculty
Consultations
Facilitated
Number of
Participating
Faculty
32
149
Sidecar Project Results:

Embedded Sidecar Project tutoring into 6 writing-intensive courses at the 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 levels.

Students and faculty who participated in Sidecar Projects express satisfaction and a desire for additional
opportunities to embed small-group tutoring into courses.

Student participants saw value in the Sidecar experience and made significant revisions to their papers.
o 92% strongly agreed or agreed that Sidecar sessions were helpful as they wrote their papers.
o 100% strongly agreed or agreed that Sidecar sessions helped them better understand the expectations of
the instructor and assignment.
o 100% made changes in their papers as a result of the feedback they received during Sidecar sessions.
o 100% made major revisions (overhaul of ideas, started over, re-visioned the essay) and/or mid-level
revisions (organization, further development of existing points).
o 92% strongly agreed or agreed that giving feedback and receiving feedback from peers was helpful.
TRiO Writing Mentorship Program Results:

TRiO students who participated in the Writing Mentorship Program became more confident in their ability to write in
an academic context and were more likely to use the Writing Center as a resource throughout their time at the
University.
Upper-division Writing Proficiency Assessment Results:

2,207 students attempted the UDWPA exam during the Autumn and Spring Semesters, with an overall passing rate
of 72.5% (does not include June 2013 exam data).
IV. Anticipated Needs and Next Steps
The following list outlines those areas in which the Writing Center plans to invest its resources. This list reflects the Writing
Center’s objective to directly support students’ success at the University. While the Writing Center is committed to taking
these steps to meet anticipated needs, funding will determine the Center’s ability to meet these needs.
For Students:

Revise writing tutoring by-appointment and drop-in hours to ensure resources are marshaled to support highdemand hours.

Perform outreach to increase sophomore students’ use of the Writing Center.

Provide improved infrastructure to handle growing demand from graduate and international students.*

Expand Sidecar Project small-group tutoring collaborations to all Colleges.*

Develop instructional programming specifically designed to support international student writers and the faculty who
work with them.*

Continue partnering with TRiO Student Support Services to provide the Writing Mentorship Program.
For Faculty:

Continue to expand partnerships with academic departments to deliver discipline-specific writing workshops.

Continue to expand faculty professional development opportunities. Plan and deliver new workshops on how to
incorporate and assess writing in courses across the curriculum.

Build a more robust relationship with the Global Leadership Initiative by providing support to GLI seminar faculty
and to GLI students throughout their academic tenures at the University.*
For Graduate Student Teaching Assistants:

Develop graduate student teaching assistant workshops focused on assessing student writing.
Other:



Develop new tutor training opportunities to ensure on-going professional development, especially in the areas of
English language learners and graduate student writers.
Develop more robust reporting capabilities through Info Griz.
Enact the Writing Center’s Hobson’s Retain communication plan.
*Asterisked items may require new or reallocated monetary resources.
Motion:
A. To end the Upper Division Writing Proficiency Assessment, effective October
10, 2013, and
B. To implement a University-wide Program-level Assessment of Student
Writing Proficiency in Approved Writing Courses, effective October 10, 2013.
Rationale for Part A:
First implemented in 1999, the Upper Division Writing Proficiency Assessment (hereafter UDWPA)
was designed to assess student preparedness for writing in upper-division courses. In 2010,
the ASCRC Writing Committee carefully reviewed the UDWPA and determined that it does not
provide accurate information about student preparedness or useful feedback to inform curricular
revisions. The Writing Committee delivered a report to ASCRC on April 20, 2010. ASCRC asked
that the Writing Committee recommend a specific course of action. On May 3, 2011, the ASCRC
Writing Committee recommended ending the UDWPA and creating a university-wide program-level
assessment in its place. ASCRC endorsed the recommendation and asked that a pilot project determine
the feasibility of a university-wide program-level assessment. The pilot project has been in operation
for two years.
Rationale for Part B:
Program-level assessment is a proven method for studying student writing performance in the context
of university courses and for providing curricular and instructional feedback. Program-level
assessment does not involve a re-grading of student papers or an assessment of individual instructor
teaching. It is a mechanism to gather data and identify patterns of strengths and areas for
improvement.
To implement program-level assessment at the University of Montana, instructors in Approved
Writing Courses will ask students to submit papers to Moodle. All identifying student and instructor
information will be removed. Volunteer faculty, staff, and graduate students will score a random
selection of papers using a rubric. Data will be gathered, analyzed and reported.
In order to determine the feasibility of this program-level assessment of student writing, the ASCRC
Writing Committee, in collaboration with Academic Affairs, the Composition Program, and the
Writing Center, created and piloted an assessment of student writing sampled from lower-division
Approved Writing Courses. In Spring 2012 and Spring 2013, the ASCRC Writing Committee hosted a
Writing Retreat in which volunteer faculty, staff, and graduate students scored a random sampling of
student papers from these courses. Scorers from multiple disciplines read and evaluated papers using a
scoring rubric based on the learning outcomes of Approved Writing Courses. Scorers evaluated the
papers, discussed the strengths and weaknesses of the papers, and shared their instructional
experiences and techniques. The primary goals of the retreat were (1) to discover how the
training/scoring process supports scorers’ ability to assess student papers with validity, reliability, and
efficiency; and (2) to consider the feasibility and sustainability of an annual program-level assessment
of student writing proficiency in Approved Writing Courses.
The evaluations (2013) (2012) from these Writing Retreats and the feedback on the pilot project were
positive. Because the scoring rubric aligns with the learning outcomes of Approved Writing Courses*
and because students demonstrate their proficiency in the context of courses, the Writing Committee
strongly believes this program-level assessment of student writing will provide accurate, timely, and
useful information to instructors of Approved Writing Courses and to academic programs. In addition,
the program-level assessment pilot generated focused conversations about student writing and faculty
instruction, thereby establishing a rich context for further work. The Writing Retreat has the potential
to serve as an important professional development experience that encourages conversation about
writing instruction, assessment, and curriculum and that promotes shared responsibility across
disciplines.
For examples of successful university-wide program-level writing assessment models, visit the Council
of Writing Program Administrators Assessment Gallery (http://wpacouncil.org/assessment-models).
Data from similar types of program-level assessments have shown improvement in student
performance over time. A local example is the Montana University System Writing Assessment
(MUSWA), which began in 2000 to study college composition readiness issues among Montana high
school students. Student proficiency in 2001 was 38%. It increased to 75% by 2011.
(http://mus.edu/writingproficiency/newsletter37.pdf)
Other Details:
If the Faculty Senate approves this motion, the Provost’s Office will work with the Office for Student
Success (specifically the Writing Center Director) to provide the funds to implement the assessment.
The Writing Committee recognizes that for university-wide program-level assessment of student
writing proficiency to be successful, several steps are critical. These include:
1) cooperation from Approved Writing Course instructors to require students to submit papers for
the program-level assessment;
2) voluntary participation of Writing Committee members, Writing Center staff, and faculty and
staff interested in student writing proficiency and writing instruction; and
3) at least one annual Writing Retreat at which volunteer faculty, staff, and graduate students read
and score student writing from Approved Writing Courses.
The Writing Committee also recommends that a staff member be tasked with gathering student writing
submissions from Approved Writing Courses, coordinating logistics for the Writing Retreat, analyzing
data, and reporting on the findings of the assessment.
The ASCRC Writing Committee will continue to participate and advise in the promotion, organization,
and conduct of the university-wide program-level assessment of student writing proficiency. The
Writing Committee will report annually to ASCRC and other appropriate audiences the writing
assessment results.
* Throughout, the term Approved Writing Course refers to general educaiton writing courses that are
not specifically listed as part of the Upper-DIvision Writing Requirement of a major. Many Approved
Writing Courses are lower-division.