ASCRC Writing Committee Minutes, 4/18/12
TODD 203
Members Present: G. Burns, B. Chin, C. Corr, S. Peterson, R. Sattler, M. Semanoff, M Stark
Ex-Officio Members Present: A. Kinch A. Ratto-Parks, K. Webster
Members Absent/Excused: L. Franklin, D. Simpson
Guests: Dean Burchfield, Scott Richter
The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
The minutes from 3/14/12 were approved.
Communication Item:

Students are not able to fulfill their general education writing requirement because there is a
higher demand for Technical Writing (WRIT 222) than there is supply. It is a matter of
resources. Students need to acquire technical writing skills prior to taking an upper-division
writing course in many of the sciences, forestry and Health and Human Performance majors.
Students need a certain level of proficiency in order to concentrate on content. Many students
are taking the WRIT 222 in order to pass the UDWPA. The intent of the writing program was
to have students writing across the disciplines, but certain departments are carrying the burden.
Dean Burchfield met with the Provost and negotiated four sections of Technical Writing.
There are also negotiations taking place to allow HHP students to take the Technical Writing
Course at the College of Technology. Forestry is now considering abandoning the WRIT 222
course for a more specialized course. WRIT 201 teaches students to write and allows them to
choose the topics for their papers. They are encouraged to draw from their major.
There needs to be a mechanism to assure students are placed in the appropriate course for their
skill level. Dean Burchfield requests that the Writing Committee consider a diagnostic for
lower-division students. The UDWPA is not working. There is a general sense of frustration
with students’ writing in the Council of Deans, as well as a tendency to assign blame. Students
need more opportunities to write. Fundraising is required of deans. Many donors want to see
more graduates that write well. It was noted that often students’ skills fade when they try to
learn new material. Faculty need to have a strategy to help students when this occurs. Students
really need two courses that teach writing. It is not possible with one course because students
get overwhelmed.
It is unclear what immediate actions the committee should take to improve the situation. One
suggestion was to take a resolution to the Faculty Senate endorsed both by ASUM and the
Academic Deans. This would make the problem more public. Such a resolution would need to
include data that provides evidence of the problem in terms of how many students are not being
served by the current course structure. Student member Peterson has been interviewing
students for her PhD research – students are desperate for support to become better writers.
WRIT 201 has had waiting lists and many students have not been able to get into WRIT 222.
The Writing Center also has requests from students and faculty for intensive writing courses or
workshops. The Library also has students desperate for writing assistance at its tutoring
sessions. Advisors may have additional input. Unfortunately this information is all anecdotal.
According to Dean Burchfield, the Provost likes concrete proposals and suggests a
problem/solution paper may have better results. A possibility would be to accompany the
resolution with the paper outline and suggestions for temporary remediation such as opening
another section of WRIT 201. WRIT 201 teaches students to write and allows them to choose
the topics for their papers. They are encouraged to draw from their major. A long term
solution needs to be identified considering writing is fundamental to students’ success.
ASCRC has proposed two composition courses in the past and received pushback from
campus. The proposed solution should tie into assessment. Another consideration is that the
University is in deep financial trouble due to the continued publicity over the sexual assault
cases. Enrollment projections are very low. Student member Peterson and Professors Stark
and Sattler agreed to work on the document. The committee will be sent an early draft of
possible resolution language. Dean Burchfield offered to take the information to the Council of
Deans for consideration as well.
Concerns were expressed regarding timing of the resolution. It is believed that the issue in
HHP has been temporarily resolved with students having access to COT courses. It was agreed
that a better approach maybe to include the information in the annual report and work on the
problem / solution (white paper) document over the summer / fall.
One idea was to have a symposium in the fall to discuss the various components and
misunderstandings of writing on campus. Clarification regarding the difference between
writing to learn and learning to write would be helpful.
Business Items

The draft rubric, scoring sheet and evaluation were distributed to committee members. Chair Chin
made some revisions for balance. Additional revisions will be forthcoming for Integration of Resources
from a Professor Zoellner who specializes in assessment. Some formatting changes were made. The
rubric will be further refined at the retreat. Several changes were suggested for the scoring sheet as
well. It was suggested that the consensus scoring sheet be in a different color and attendees be given
folders for the materials.
The retreat agenda was summarized briefly. The goal is not to score every paper, but rather identify
training papers and annotate them, and to discover how the process will work for documentation to
include in the report on the pilot project.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a.m.