Writing in the Baccalaureate Core:
The 2012 Report and Responses from the
Baccalaureate Core Committee in 2013
OSU Faculty Senate, November 14, 2013
Kerry Kincanon, Marion Rossi
(former BCC Co-Chairs, 2012-13)
The Charge
• The final report of the Baccalaureate Core Ad Hoc Review Committee (Vitalization
of General Education at Oregon State University adopted by the Faculty Senate in
June 2010) calls for a “systematic review of our writing and math programs.”
• The Executive Committee (EC) of the Faculty Senate establishes a committee to
examine writing in OSU’s general education curriculum with Susan Meyers, Director
of Writing, as chair. Other committee members are: Dennis Bennett, Writing
Center Assistant Director; David Bernell, Assistant Professor of Political Science;
Tracy Ann Robinson, College of Engineering Communication Collaboratory Director;
Marion Rossi, Associate Professor of Theatre; Holly Swisher, Associate Professor of
Math.
• “The purpose of this report is to present and analyze findings on the status of
writing components within the current Baccalaureate Core structure.” (Final Report
from the Committee Reviewing Writing in the Baccalaureate Core, May 2012.) The
final document also includes recommendations based on the committee’s collective
interpretation of the data.
1
June 28, 2016
The Process
• Fall 2011: Committee constituted and initial discussions begin utilizing two
resources: 1) National Survey of Student Engagement Consortium for the Study of
Writing in College: 2010 Oregon State University Findings (compiled by Dr. Rebecca
A. Sanderson, Director of Student Affairs Research and Evaluation at OSU); 2)
Preliminary Findings for the Committee Reviewing Writing in the Baccalaureate Core
(compiled by a team of research assistants directed by Dr. Vicki Tolar Burton,
Transitional Director for the Implementation of the Baccalaureate Core at OSU).
Foci clarified and questions articulated.
• Winter 2012: New data gathered from: 1) a faculty survey; 2) faculty focus groups;
3) a review of writing programs/curricula at peer institutions. Analysis and
discussions continue; some report elements drafted, adjusted, aligned.
• Spring 2012: Further conversations with focus on recommendations. Full report
drafted, discussed and edited/amended. Final version submitted in May to the
Transitional Director for the Implementation of the Baccalaureate Core, the
Baccalaureate Core Committee, and the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate.
2
June 28, 2016
The Conclusion(s)
“The committee found that, although writing at OSU is not yet in a dire
situation, we are not where we want to be, neither in terms of internal
expectations, nor with respect to peer institutions. Moreover, recent
trends are moving us away from our goals, such that attention and
action are necessary. Based on the data gathered for this report, we
believe that action should be taken to improve the following key areas:
•
•
•
•
Faculty, Student, and University Involvement
Clarity of Expectations
Quality of Assignments
Effective Ongoing Evaluation of Students
Most importantly, we believe that a culture of writing must be
developed at OSU.”
(Final Report from the Committee Reviewing Writing in the Baccalaureate Core, p. 4)
3
June 28, 2016
Baccalaureate Core Committee (BCC) Response
• Upon initial review in spring 2012, the BCC responded
favorably to the report and its findings and drafted a memo of
support to the EC in June 2012.
• To quote from that memo, “The BCC, through its existing
responsibilities and processes and via any unique charges that
come its way from the Executive Committee, should be an
advocate for and a proponent of the “culture of writing” and a
well-intentioned, cumulative writing experience in the five
Bacc Core categories that specify a writing component.”
4
June 28, 2016
Baccalaureate Core Committee (BCC) Response
• The 2012-2013 BCC spent extensive time reviewing the
findings of the report and engaging in a “prioritization”
exercise in winter and spring terms.
• Through this process, we prioritized three resource neutral and
three resource dependent recommendations in the report for
further focus, consideration, and investment. We shared the
following with the EC in June 2013.
5
June 28, 2016
Baccalaureate Core Committee (BCC) Response
Resource Neutral (more or less)
Resource Dependent
Clarify expectations for writing in Bacc
Core Synthesis Category Courses*.
Develop a “Writing Advocate” model.
Align Writing II courses expectations
and experiences, and create a packet
for advisors that distinguishes
nuances between Writing II classes*.
Provide resources to help/force noncompliant units to meet enrollment
caps in Writing Intensive Courses
(WIC).
Further consideration of curricular
changes and linking of existing
courses (and possible new ones) to
writing, research, literacy expectations
(i.e., developing/building new models
with the resources we already have).
Direct resources into faculty
development and providing
information for faculty to help with
course design, expectations,
methodologies, etc.
6
June 28, 2016