ASCRC Writing Subcommittee Minutes, 9/20/10
Members Present: G. Burns, T. Russell, M. Semanoff, P. Silverman, K. Zoellner
Members Excused/Absent: N. Hinman, M. Medvetz
Ex-Officio Present: K. Ryan, K. Webster
The meeting was called to order at 11:10 p.m.
The minutes from 4/26/10 were approved.
Communication:

Members introduced themselves and new members were welcomed to the
committee.

Professor Semanoff attended the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate’s
summer retreat with former Chair Medvets. The goals for the year include:
o Continue discussion of the UDWPA and prioritize recommendations
o Discuss Writing Center resources
o Streamline process for Writing Course review
The Committee will need to consider a procedure for the rolling review of writing
courses as well. A possibility would be to distribute the review so that a third of
the writing courses are reviewed each year.
Business Items:

The Committee unanimously approved Professor Semanoff as chair.

Three members are needed to serve on the UDWPA Appeals Committee.
Professors Silverman and Ryan agreed to serve. Professor Medvetz was
nominated as well. It is likely that the Committee will not meet. Students may
appeal a non-passing score on the exam. However, they are encouraged first to
meet with a tutor and 9 out of 10 decide not to appeal. The appeal requires a
written explanation of why the scoring criteria were miss applied. If an appeal is
made the Appeals Committee will need to meet to agree on the interpretation of
the scoring criteria and the members will be required to read the appeal
documentation, the exam and samples.
The average passing rate of the six exams offered in 2009-2010 was 79%.
Approximately 2500 students take the exam each year. The June exam had a
lower passing rate. Many of the students taking this exam were seniors and were
rather upset about the results. The Provost requests that the 45 credit rule be
enforced. The enforcement would create an upsurge in exam takers and would
require additional resources. Data was collected by department that shows how
many credits students have when they attempt to pass the exam. This will be sent
to the Committee for review.

The Writing Course Review Form was revised to include space for removal:
III. Type of request
One-time Only
Change
Reason for new course, change or deletion
Remove

The Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate is revising its bylaws. Therefore,
this is a good time for the Writing Committee to propose standing committee
status and submit language to ASCRC and ECOS to include its charge in the
bylaws. A draft was submitted in February 2009 to ASCRC. However, it was
not approved - ASCRC had several questions. At the time, the Writing
Committee was busy with the review of all writing courses and decided to revisit
the charge at a later date. Professor Zoellner will send specifics to the Committee
for consideration.

Director Webster summarized and distributed a snap shot of the Writing Center’s
Annual report to committee members. The full report will be sent electronically.
Part of the committee’s current charge is to: Act in an advisory capacity to the
Writing Center. This information will be helpful in framing future discussions.

One issue that will require deliberation is whether or not there should be a special
arrangement policy. In the past students in certain circumstances (students not
passing after tutoring and taking the exam multiple times or seniors that will be
leaving the area) were able to take a five hour workshop that focused on rewriting
the exam. This arrangement was made so the exam did not prevent students from
graduating. Often the timed nature of the exam prevents students with test
anxiety from performing well. .

The Committee will meet on the first and third Monday each month.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.