ASCRC Writing Committee Minutes, 10/12/11
Members Present: G. Burns, B. Chin, C. Corr, L. Franklin, R. Sattler, M. Semanoff, D. Simpson, M.
Stark
Ex-Officio Members Present: A. Ratto-Parks, K. Webster
Guest: S. Edwards
The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m.
The minutes from 9/21/11 were approved
Communication Item:

Professor Semanoff and Steve Edwards, First-Fear-Interest Group Program, Director, were
welcomed to the meeting. Professor Semanoff chaired the committee last year and agreed to
serve for one more year. Director Edwards was asked by Associate Provost walker Andrews to
facilitate the second component of the Writing Assessment Pilot Program.

The Northwest Regional Conference on Languages, Literacies, and the Teaching of Writing
was a positive experience for the committee members that attended. They made a presentation
on Integrating Sustainability into the Writing Program. UM graduate students also made a
presentation. Montana State University Professor Doug Downs gave the keynote speech titled
“Composition’s Futures as Contact Zone for Screen and University Literacies”. There were
various presentations on the different ways students’ learn and incorporating technology into
learning.

Associate Provost Walker-Andrews responded to the follow-up question on students
transferring with a common course that is equivalent to a writing course at UM. Her email
communication was appended to the agenda. According to the BOR policy the courses are
equivalent so the student will have fulfilled the writing course requirement at UM. The
concern is that the course taken at the other campus may not have included the same amount of
writing. Academic Advisors should be made aware of the issue and a system should be put in
place to track these students. Camie will follow-up.

Several members attended the meeting focused on how Moodle could be used as a repository
for writing assignments for the second component of the writing assessment pilot. A summary
was appended to the agenda. It was clear from the meeting that time and effort will be
involved.
Director Edwards met will Associate Provost Walker-Andrews on Monday. His role will be to
facilitate the second component and to act as a conduit for communication. He will focus on the
following:
1. Identify faculty that teach lower division writing courses willing to share appropriate
student assignments (demonstrate writing course learning outcomes).
2. Work with Robert Squire, Director of Instruction Design & Technical Support,
UMOnline to devise a Moodle platform and process to upload students’ papers.
3. Collect assignments.
4. Create a rubric for assessing the assignments.
It is likely the rubric creation will carry over into spring semester. The assignments should
be assessed and discussed in the spring as well. There are 70 sections of courses lower
division writing courses offered this fall. The assignments should be a stratified random
sampling of approximately 200 papers. Students should submit their best writing (possibly
the final product from the class). There is concern that it will be difficult to assess
assignments without taking into account the context.
The Committee discussed the necessity of training for the reviewers to adequately and
consistently rate papers. In order for the pilot to be successful the scores must be reliable.
It is clear that faculty expectations of writing are not consistent. The graders must be trained
so that their biases do not skew the rating. The evidence from the project must be a
valuable form of assessment that will inform students and faculty of how they are doing and
how they can to better. Reader training and discussion to establish bench mark papers and
etc. is professional development and will help faculty teaching writing courses. One
possibility is for the discussion to be housed in Moodle. Faculty members that participate
will need to be recognized for their time and effort. The rubric can be applied to their
courses as well. This anchoring element will make the assessment more sustainable and is
one area that must not be compromised. Chair Chin will draft a letter for Associate
Walker-Andrews.
Business Item:

Professors Burns, Sattler, and Semanoff agreed to review the writing/upper-division writing
course forms submitted this fall. They will report at the next meeting. It was suggested that
they use the rubric to assess the lower-division courses as a test. The course syllabi must
include writing outcomes. Instructors also need to supply assessment tools.

The Committee reviewed and approved the Writing Skills Advocacy Letter. It will be revised
to include a statement regarding the supporting letters. Yolanda Reimer, Chair, Computer
Science and Jim Burchfied, Dean, College of Forestry and Conservation will be contacted to
give their permission to append their letters. The final letter will be signed by Chair Chin and
submitted to the administration and copied to the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate
and Academic Standards and Curriculum Review Committee.

The draft rubric was discussed by the committee. The information literacy section was taken
from broad national standards. However, the Library has parsed the outcomes according to
student class levels. It was noted that the rubric was developed from the learning outcomes
/criteria on the writing course form, but these seem slightly different from those listed in the
catalog. They should be the same. The workgroup will evaluate. The next step is for a
sampling of current writing courses to be evaluated using the rubric. The committee needs to
apply the rubric to a random sample of writing courses and create a matrix. The committee
may need to request actual enrollment data from the Registrar’s Office.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:12 a.m.