A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Revised 10/21/2013
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit: School of Liberal Arts
Submitted by: Molly Lingenfelter and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year: 2014-2015
Complete and electronically submit your assessment report to your Department Chair/Coordinator/Director. As needed, please attach supporting documents and/or
a narrative description of the assessment activities in your course.
Course Outcomes
In the boxes below, summarize
lhe outcomes assessed in your
course during the year.
Assessment Measures
In the boxes below, summarize
the melhods used to assess
course outcomes during the last
year.
Assessment Results
Use of Results
Effect on Course
In the boxes below, summarize
lhe results of your assessment
activities during the last year.
In the boxes below, summarize
how you are or how you plan to
use the results to improve
student learning.
Based on the results of this
assessment, will you revise your
outcomes? If so, please
summarize how and why in the
boxes below:
The Results: (Mean in all
categories)
I. Following a recommendation
from the 2011-2012 assessment,
skills were assessed on a smaller
scale. Fewer core indicators
were assessed, which did lead to
a streamlined assessment
process. There are still
challenges with the definition of
certain core indicators, however.
The rubric needs to reflect
measurable outcomes that can be
assessed given the varied nature
of the assignments used for the
assessment. Given that a single
type of assessment may not be
the most effective way to assess
all the learning outcomes of a
course, and that the course
objectives or ENG 98R are so
broad, the next assessment
should focus on measurable
outcomes that can be effectively
Learning Outcomes were not
revised along with the IO 1 and
102 objectives in 2012. They
should be revisited.
Outcome#!
Students will construct essays
that demonstrate textual
analysis, synthesis of ideas, and
critical thinking.
For this cycle, we requested a
Position Paper (synthesis, etc.)
of 34 pages using at least one
source, in-text citations and a
Works Cited page. This is
usually the culminating
assignment in 98R, but
instructors weren't required to
use their final assignments.
Seventeen sections of English
98R participated in the
assessment. Three numbers were
randomly selected, and those
numbers were used to indicate
what students on the course
rosters essays would be collected
from.
One of the 2011-2012
assessment recommendations
was to assess fewer~ more
0-5 Point Scale
Thesis: 2.63
Critical Reading: 2.34
Argument Development: 2.52
Mechanics: 2.96
Total Overall: 2.34
For this assessment, a passing
score was 3. Of the core
indicators, mechanics came
closest to an overall passing
score. In the 2011-2012
assessment a passing score was
agreed upon as a 19 and the
averaged total came to 17.015.
This data needs to be taken in
context of a significant change
made to ENG 98R since prior
Page 1
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT {CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Course Outcomes
Assessment Measures
specthc SklllS. ine LUl I-LUIZ
rubric used seven core
indicators. Four core indicators
were used for this assessment:
Thesis, Critical Reading and
Interpretation, Persuasive
Argument, and Mechanics and
Usage. A five point scale was
retained for this assessment:
O=incompetent and 5=superior.
For this assessment, the learning
outcomes are used for the course
outcomes; however, they are still
being assessed using discrete
elements.
Course Outcome #I: "Students
will construct essays that
demonstrate textual analysis,
synthesis of ideas. and critical
thinking," was assessed with the
core indicators Thesis, Critical
Reading, and Persuasive
Argument.
Course Outcome #2: "Students
will create and support a main
idea or thesis" was assessed with
the core indicators Thesis and
Persuasive Argument.
Course Outcome #3: "Students
will identify and correct errors in
using the conventions of
standard wrinen English,
Assessment Results
assessments. Until tall .i:u l l., the
placement score for ENG 98R
was a reading score of 85+ on
the ACCUPLACER with a score
of 2, 4. or 6 on the essay portion
of the test. Following fall 2012,
the placement score dropped to a
reading score of 76-85 on the
ACCUPLACER with a score of
2, 4, or 6 on the essay portion of
the test. As a result of these
changes, there were far fewer
sections of 98R offered than in
prior assessment years: only 18
compared to 37 in 2011-2012. In
the past three assessments, 105,
96, and 148 essays were
collected for the assessment,
compared to 51 this year. The
smaller sample size meant that
errors had a greater effect on
statistics. There were a few
assignments that were
problematic as they did not
require students to demonstrate
learning outcomes such as
critical thinking, and because of
the small sample size, these
problematic assignments had a
significant effect on the results.
This cohort of students also had
lower ACCUPLACER scores
than those in the past three
Page2
Use of Results
assessea given the nature ot our
assessment and spend more time
in norming coming to consensus
on how those outcomes are
defined.
2. Vast discrepancies in the
assignment used for the
assessment not only affected the
assessment but reflect potential
inconsistency in the way ENG
98R is taught. The department
needs to emphasize the course
outcomes, objectives, and
common requirements of the
course to aim for more
consistency. A Canvas site is
being developed to house
materials that will support
faculty's curriculum
development and support a more
consistent curriculum. The use
of a single default textbook for
part-time faculty may also help.
We will also be offering a
professional development event
for all English faculty during
professional development week.
so that consistent curriculum can
be addressed before syllabi are
finalized.
Effect on Course
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESS:MENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Course Outcomes
Assessment Measures
mcludmg me.charucs, grammar,
syntax, and word choice. was
assessed with the core indicator
Mechanics."
Eleven full-time faculty met in
January to conduct the
assessment. Five essays were
used for norming, then the
remaining forty-six essays were
read. Each essay was read twice.
If the overall score had a
variation of 2 points or more, or
if the variation showed a
discrepancy between passing or
failing, then the essay was given
a third read.
Assessment Results
ENG98R assessments,
indicating they began the
semester more skill-deficient.
Nonetheless, results were similar
to the 2011-2012 assessment.
None of the core indicators
reached a passing level of three
for that assessment, the overall
mean of the scores was not at a
passing level, and Critical
Reading was lowest of the core
indicators used in both
assessments, mechanics the
highest.
A dip in scores given the new
placement scores for ENG 98R
is not surprising, given that this
cohort of student came in
needing more remediation than
previous cohorts. Higher-level
skills such as textual analysis
and synthesis of ideas often
develop more slowly than
mastering mechanics and usage.
Prior assessments note the
challenge of assessing higherlevel learning outcomes such as
Critical Reading, and this
assessment had similar issues.
Critical Reading may be
especially problematic because
without reading the source
Page3
Use or Results
3. Involving and communicating
with part-time faculty needs to
continue. The department has
been supporting part-time
involvement by sending letters
of appreciation and nominating
more of them for awards. The
department needs to continue
such efforts and develop a
system for more ongoing,
regular communication with
part-time faculty. The
information covered during parttime orientation is insufficient to
keep our part-time faculty
abreast of important department
information as well as best
practices in the discipline.
4. English department faculty
should revisit and discuss the
expectations of what skills and
knowledge a student should have
upon completing ENG 98R. The
composition courses have
similar course outcomes because
of the development of sequential
skills in the courses. As the past
two assessments have indicated
that ENG 98R students are not
leaving the course with a passing
score in core indicators and
overall essav writinl!, nerhaos
Effect on Course
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESS1\1ENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Course Outcomes
Assessment Measures
Assessment Results
matena1, tt 1s am1cu1t to assess
whether a writer is analyzing or
summarizing a source and/or
doing so accurately and
effectively.
Use of Results
we neeo to reassess now we
define a passing level of
competency, especially as the
placement scores will be further
lowered in fall 2015.
5. The 2011-2012 assessment
indicated the need for a strong
department sub-committee
focusing on developmental
courses. This committee was
reformed and addressed the
Read 95/English 95 cohorts as
well as ENG 98R. The focus
was predominantly on the 95
courses, and a Composition
Committee was created to
support all of the composition
courses. The department should
re-examine allocation of
resources and committees,
especially with significant
placement changes happening in
fall 2015. ENG 98R and READ
95 will be the only
developmental courses offered.
To support instructors with this
transition and facilitate
communication between English
and Read instructors, a
coordinator and/or committee
should be dedicated to these
courses.
Page4
Effect on Course
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSI\1ENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prera.x, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Course Outcomes
A~ment
Measures
Assessment Results
Use of Results
6. Overall, the core indicators
remained fairly close to 20112012 levels, despite an influx of
Jess-prepared students into the
course. Student suppon such as
the Read 135 course that lower
ACCUPLACER scoring
students had as a co-requisite
likely contributed to this
outcome. The depanment needs
to ensure that English faculty
teaching developmental courses
are knowledgeable about corequisite courses students are
taking. ENG 98R and Read 95
course descriptions, outcomes,
and assignments should be
shared with all facuity teaching
those courses, so they are
familiar with them.
Collaboration with instructors
teaching those courses should be
encouraged. An initial meeting
during professional development
days would be an optimal way to
disseminate infonnation and
establish connections. The
department also needs to keep
part-time faculty infonned of
imponant student support
services such as the Tutoring
and Leaming Center.
Page5
Effect on Course
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Course Outcomes
~ment Measures
~ment Results
Use of Results
Effect on Course
Outcome#2
See above.
Students will create and support
a main idea or thesis.
See above.
See above.
See above.
See above.
See above.
Outcome#3
See above.
Students will identify and
correct errors in using the
conventions of standard written
English, including mechanics,
grammar, syntax, and word
choice.
See above.
Please enter your name and date below to confinn you have reviewed this report:
Page6
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESS1\1ENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
The last English 98R assessment was conducted fall 2011 and completed in the spring 2012 semester. The department switched from a common assignment to
using each section's final argument paper for the assessment model. While there were some issues with these assignments that caused challenges for the assessment
activity, the consensus was that using each section's final assignment was preferable to asking instructors to use a common assignment for each section for the
purposes of the assessment. In early October, an email was sent to 98R instructors asking them to assign a final paper following guidelines that are typical of
culminating 98R courses: a 3-4 page position paper using at least one source, preferably textbook readings, with in-text citations and a Works Cited page.
Instructors were also asked to submit a copy of the assignment before the next Composition Committee meeting, so that the committee could review the
assignments and identify those that might negatively impact the assessment. Instructors were also notified how to submit their randomly chosen assignments.
The Composition Committee met in late October to review the assignment sheets. Nine of the eleven 98R instructors submitted assignment sheets in time for the
review. One thing the committee noted was the significant variation among assignments. The committee identified several potential problems inherent in some of
the assignments that might affect assessment. For example, one assignment required summaries of two articles before introducing a thesis (a thesis is generally
stated in the introduction, and the assessment rubric notes it should be near the beginning of the paper). These instructors were contacted with a request to make
minor revisions to these assignments in order to conform to the assessment guidelines. While several instructors did revise their assignments, one did not respond,
and several had already handed out the assignment to students.
Of the eighteen sections of 98R taught in the fall, seventeen of them participated in the assessment. One instructor never responded to emails. While most
instructors used the final essay for the assessment, a few indicated that their final assignment did not fit the assessment (for example, one instructor's final
assignment was an annotated bibliography), so they used the next-to-last assignment. Students could use whatever writing and revision strategies they had
throughout the semester, as well as resources such as the TLC, Smarthinking, and peer revision.
One of the 2011-2012 assessment recommendations was to assess skills on a smaller, more specific scale. The 2011-2012 rubric used seven core indicators: Essay
Structure and Organization, Thesis, Paragraph Development and Coherence, Critical Reading and Interpretation, Mechanics and Usage, Audience, and MLA
Formatting. Four core indicators were used for this assessment: Thesis, Critical Reading and Interpretation, Persuasive Argument, and Mechanics and Usage. For
the prior assessment, the first five indicators were scored on a 5 point scale: O=incompetent and 5=superior. The five point scale was retained for this assessment.
Audience and MLA Formatting had been scored on a three point scale in the previous assessment, and these indicators were omitted from this assessment. While
the 2011-2012 assessment noted that more time should be dedicated to MLA style, it does not strongly correlate to one of the learning outcomes of the course, so
in the attempt to focus on learning outcomes and streamline assessment, it was omitted. The core indicators of Essay Structure and Organization and Paragraph
Development and Coherence were modified and synthesized into Persuasive Argument. Descriptions of the core indicators were also modified. For example,
Thesis had been described as "Explicit position stated clearly in the introduction or early in the paper." The new description added that this position_should be
Page 7
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
"Specific and significant." The learning outcomes for 98R are broad goals that have been broken into measurable learning objectives for the course, and those
learning objectives were used as the course outcomes for the 2011-2012 assessment. For this assessment, the learning outcomes are used for the course outcomes;
however, they are still being assessed using specific elements that, when achieved, demonstrate a working knowledge of the broader learning outcomes.
Course Outcome # 1: "Students will construct essays that demonstrate textual analysis, synthesis of ideas, and critical thinking," was assessed with the core
indicators Thesis, Critical Reading, and Persuasive Argument.
Course Outcome #2: "Students will create and support a main idea or thesis" was assessed with the core indicators Thesis and Persuasive Argument.
Course Outcome #3: "Students will identify and correct errors in using the conventions of standard written English, including mechanics, grammar, syntax, and
word choice" was assessed with the core indicator Mechanics.
One challenge for the assessment is that components of an essay such as critical thinking, synthesis of ideas, and supporting a main idea are frequently
interdependent, and an essay is more than a sum of its parts.
Eleven full-time faculty met in January to conduct the assessment. Part-time faculty usually participate, but none made it to this assessment because the
Department Chair did not encourage them to attend. She did not want to promise them additional pay that would not be delivered, as had happened with the
English 102 assessment the previous semester. And because our sample size was manageable, we knew that full-time faculty could complete the assessment in an
efficient manner. Five essays were used for norming; then the remaining forty-six essays were read. Each essay was read twice. ff the overall score had a variation
of 2 points or more, or if one assessor gave it a passing score, another failing, then the essay was given a third read.
The Results: (Mean in all categories) 0-5 Point Scale
Thesis: 2.63
Critical Reading: 2.34
Argument Development: 2.52
Mechanics: 2.96
Total Overall: 2.34
Page 8
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Di vision/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
ENG 98R Assessment Results
5
4
3
2
1
-
-
-
-
-
,.
I
,_
0
Thesis
Critical
Reading
.
:r-
Argument
1...:.
Mechanics
.c -
-. -
.
Total
For this assessment, a passing score was 3. Of the core indicators, mechanics came closest to an overall passing score. In 2011-2012 Thesis had an overall score of
2.94 compared to 2.63; Critical Reading was 2.39 compared to 2.34; Essay Structure and Paragraph Development averaged 2.81 compared to 2.52 for Argument
Development; and Mechanics was 2.80 compared to 2.96 for this assessment. In the 2011-2012 assessment a passing score was agreed upon as a 19 and the
averaged total came to 17.015. This data needs to be taken in context of a significant change made to ENG 98R since prior assessments. Until fall 2012, the
placement score for ENG 98R was a reading score of 85+ on the ACCUPLACER with a score of 2, 4, or 6 on the essay portion of the test. Following fall 2012, the
placement score dropped to a reading score of 76-85 on the ACCUPLACER with a score of 2, 4, or 6 on the essay portion of the test. At the same time, an English
95/Read 95 cohort class was developed for students with scores above 55 but below 76. As a result of these changes, there were far fewer sections of 98R offered
than in prior assessment years: only 18 compared to 37 in 2011-2012. In the past three assessments, 105, 96, and 148 essays were collected for the assessment,
compared to 51 this year. The smaller sample size meant that errors had a greater effect on statistics. There were a few assignments that were problematic as they
did not require students to demonstrate learning outcomes such as critical thinking, and because of the small sample size, these problematic assignments had a
significant effect on the results. This cohort of students also had lower ACCUPLACER scores than those in the past three ENG98R assessments, indicating they
began the semester more skill·deficient. Nonetheless. results were similar to the 2011-2012 assessment. None of the core indicators reached a passing level of three
Page9
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSl\fENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
for that assessment, the overall mean of the scores was not at a passing level, and Critical Reading was lowest of the core indicators used in both assessments,
mechanics the highest.
•2011-2012
2014-2015
Thesis
Critical
Reading
Argument
(Org./Dev.)
Mechanics
A dip in scores given the new placement scores for ENG 98R is not surprising, given that this cohort of students came in needing more remediation than previous
cohorts. Higher-level skills such as textual analysis and synthesis of ideas often develop more slowly than mastering mechanics and usage. Prior assessments note
the challenge of assessing higher-level learning outcomes such as Critical Reading, and this assessment had similar issues. Critical Reading may be especially
problematic because without giving the assessment team access to the reading source material, it is difficult to assess whether a writer is analyzing or summarizing
a source and/or doing so accurately and effectively.
Page 10
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSl\fENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Recommendations:
I. Following a recommendation from the 2011-2012 assessment, more tangible micro skills were assessed to help determine whether the macro learning
outcomes were being met. Fewer core indicators were assessed, which did lead to a streamlined assessment process. There are still challenges with the
definition of certain core indicators, however, Critical Reading in particular. The rubric needs to reflect measurable outcomes that can be assessed given
the varied nature of the assignments used. Given that a single type of assessment may not be the most effective way to assess all the learning outcomes of a
course, and that the course objectives or ENG 98R are so broad, the next assessment should focus on measurable outcomes that can be effectively
measured and the assessment team should spend more time norming in order to reach a consensus on how measureable outcomes are defined.
2. Vast discrepancies in the assignment used for the assessment not only affected the assessment, but reflected potential inconsistencies in the way ENG 98R
is taught. The department needs to emphasize consistent course outcomes, objectives, and conunon requirements of the course. The Composition
Committee reviewed assignment sheets but realized that this happened too late in the semester for many instructors to modify their assignments. A Canvas
site is being developed to house materials that will support faculty's curriculum development and material such as sample assignments. In addition, syllabi
templates should support a more consistent curriculum. The use of a single default textbook for part-time faculty may also help. We will also be offering a
professional development event for all English faculty during professional development week, so that consistent curriculum can be addressed before
syllabi are finalized.
3.
Involving part-time faculty in all phases of assessment needs to continue. While we have had positive tum-outs during assessment efforts in the past, no
part-time faculty attended this one. As noted above, part-time faculty were offered a small stipend for the prior assessment, which they never received. The
department has been supporting part-time involvement by sending letters of appreciation for participation in assessments, and nominating more of them for
awards. The department needs to continue such efforts and develop a system for more ongoing, regular communication with part-time faculty and it should
be communicated that participation in assessment is a critical aspect of professional development and practices. The information covered during part-time
orientation is insufficient to keep our part-time faculty abreast of important department information as well as best practices in the discipline.
4. English department faculty should revisit and discuss the expectations of what skiIIs and knowledge a student should have upon completing ENG 98R.
The composition courses have similar course outcomes because of the development of sequential skills in the courses. As the past two assessments have
indicated that ENG 98R students are not leaving the course with a passing score in core indicators and overall essay writing, perhaps we need to reassess
Page 11
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSl\fENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R~Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
how we define a passing level of competency without sacrificing learning outcomes or rigor, especially as the placement scores will be further lowered in
fall 2015.
5. The 2011-2012 assessment indicated the need for a strong department sub-committee focusing on developmental courses. This committee was refonned
and addressed the Read 95/English 95 cohorts as well as ENG 98R. The focus was predominantly on the 95 courses, and a Composition Committee was
created to support all of the composition courses. The committee focused on ENG 98R this year as it was being assessed and will focus on ENG 10 l next
year, and ENG 102 the following year. The department should re-examine the allocation of resources and committees, especially with significant
placement changes happening in fall 2015. ENG 98R and READ 95 will be the only developmental courses offered. To support instructors with this
transition and facilitate communication between English and Read instructors, a coordinator and/or committee should be dedicated to these courses.
6. Overall, the core indicators remained fairly close to 2011-2012 levels, despite an influx of less-prepared students into the course. Student support such as
the Read 135 course that students with lower ACCUPLACER had as a co-requisite likely contributed positively to this outcome. Research on accelerated
developmental education stresses the need for strong student support. The department needs to ensure that English faculty teaching developmental courses
are knowledgeable about co-requisite courses students are taking. ENG 98R and Read 95 course descriptions, outcomes, and assignments should be shared
with all faculty teaching those courses so they are famiJiar with them. Collaboration with instructors teaching those courses should be encouraged. An
initial meeting during professional development days would be an optimal way to disseminate information and establish connections. The department also
needs to keep part-time faculty informed of important student support services such as the Tutoring and Leaming Center.
Page 12
A.
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part-Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Appendix
Dear ENG 098 lnstructors:
The follo\\ ing are instructions for collecting essay assignments from your students chis semester \Vhich will assist us in assessing student skill de\'elopment in
English 098.
l.
Please be sure to assign a culminating paper that is claim or thesis, based. Although the essay will probably focus on coursdtextbook readings, it
may also ask for additional textual support and ideally, should represent your students' abilities at the close of the semester. This is the essay from which
we will be collecting samples. (Assignment guidelines follow at the end of this email.)
2.
Email a copy of your essay assignment to me at mlingenfelter@tmcc.edu by Monday, October 2orh. (This is being asked to assure that the
students are adhering to the requirements of the assignment and for the English Department's Composition Committee to discuss assignments across 098
courses. You are not being evaluated during this assessment process.)
3.
You will be sent a copy of your current semester roster(s) with random students' names highlighted in the next few weeks. These student papers
arc those chat we will collect. Please pull these essays and make copies of them before you begin grading. Place the copies in the envelope that you will
receive along with rhc highlighted roster. (If a highlighted student is no longer in your course, or does not submit a paper, then pull the student paper
immediately beneath the highlighted name.) Student and instructor names will be manually removed before the assessment takes place. A copy of these
instructions will also be included in the envelope.
4.
Please return the envelope to the English department ('Molly Ungenfelter's mailbox) in Vista B300 \Vith necessary items by this date:
~ON OR
BEFORETHE FINAL \VE.EK OF CLASSES-DECEMBER 12t-
Thank you very much for your cooperation. If you have any questions or concerns. orifyou are ill[eresud inparticiparing in ourasscssmwtproms, please do not hesitate
to contact me!
~folly
Lingenfelter, English Department Coordinator
Page 13
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R·Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part·Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
Assignment Requirements
Position Paper (synthesis, etc.) {3-4 pages)
•
•
Srudencs should use ar least one source
Textbook readings are suggested (oucside sources optional)
•
•
In-text citations (required)
\Vorks Cited page (required)
Page 14
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prerix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part·Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
English 098 Assessment Rubric
Core Indicators
Thesis
€ Explicit, debatable position stated in
the introduction or early in the paper
€ Thesis statement is specific and
sij!;nificant
Critical Reading and Interpretation
€ Interpretation/analysis &/or refutation
of sources
€ Demonstrates understanding of
contexllbroader issues through
references/use of sources
Persuasive Argument
€ Organization of essay supports
argument; appropriate arrangement of
material
€ Argument developed using appropriate
voice, reasoning, and
counterargument.
€ Evidence is sufficient, relevant, and
comes from appropriate sources
Score (0-S)
Comments (Optional)
Mechanics and Usage
€ Sentence completeness, variety,
economy, and clarity
€ Effective word choice
€ Observes conventions of SWE
Page 15
Total
A
TMCC
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: ENG 98R-Preparatory Composition
Division/Unit:
Submitted by: and Natalie Russell
Contributing Faculty: Full and Part·Time English Faculty
Academic Year:
0·5 Scoring Guide
0 Incompetent Demonstrates fundamental deficiencies in the core indicator. Many major and minor problems.
1 Very Weak Demonstrates serious flaws in the core indicator. Strong evidence of incompetence.
Errors often obscure meaning.
2 Marginal
Demonstrates a developing competence in the core indicator but is flawed in some significant
way(s). Errors sometimes obscure meaning.
3 Adequate
Demonstrates acceptable competence in the core indicator. Some distracting errors, but they do not significantly obscure meaning.
4 Strong
Demonstrates clear competence in the core indicator. Minor errors are not serious enough to distract or confuse the reader.
S Superior
Demonstrates excellence in the core indicator. Problems are minor or nonexistent.
Note: If there is not enough evidence to draw a conclusion, please assign a zero (0) for that core indicator.
Page 16