Transcript A Multi-method Approach:

A Multi-method Approach:
Assessment of Basic
Communication
Cheryl E Drout, Ph.D.
SUNY-Fredonia
GCP V. CCC Writing &
Speaking Requirements




CCC
Basic Written
Communication
course
Speaking Intensive
Infused coverage
of critical literacy
in all areas




critical
critical
critical
critical
thinking
writing
reading
speaking



GCP
Freshman Comp
Second Writing
Course

Across the
curriculum
Basic Communication:
Written
SUNY LEARNING OUTCOMES
 Produce coherent texts within
common college-level written forms
 Demonstrate the ability to revise
and improve such texts
 Research a topic, develop an
argument, and organize supporting
details

Written Communication:
Local Learning Outcomes

Research a topic,
develop an
argument, and
organize
supporting details




create focus
organize content
develop support
generalize from
evidence & abstract
from observations
Written Communication:
Local Learning Outcomes

Demonstrate the
ability to revise
and improve such
texts


local
global
Planned Methodology &
Collaboration


Written
Communication:
Longitudinal

FIPSE Writing Test
• Frosh Orientation
• Upper Level
• Title III Committee

Frosh Comp
• Research Paper
• Ass’t SubCommittee
Implemented Methodology


Written
Communication:
Freshman
Composition




First Draft
Final Draft
F’02
FIPSE Writing Test

Cross-sectional
• Entering Frosh ‘00
• Upperclass ‘02
Future Methodology


Written
Communication:
Freshman
Composition





First & Final draft
First paper
&
First & final draft
Final paper


CCC Juniors
FIPSE Essay
Learning Outcomes &
Measures

Research Topic &
Develop Argument

Final Draft
•
•
•
•


create focus
organize content
develop support
generalize from
evidence & abstract
from observations
Ability to revise
First & Final Draft
• Local
• Global


FIPSE
ESSAY
•
•
•
•
create focus
organize content
develop support
generalize from
evidence & abstract
from observations
FIPSE Essay

Write an essay in which you describe
and analyze what you have found to
be a major problem or success with
your high school/college
education.
Training & Inter-rater
reliability
All English faculty
 Mostly writing faculty
 All had previous training and/or
experience
 Several hours of practice preceded
actual scoring of protocols

Results: Comparison of
Frosh and Juniors


Entry level Frosh
18% Not meeting
standards



Juniors
0% Not meeting
standards
All other
percentages
Juniors > Frosh



approaching
meeting
exceeding
Greatest Weakness Overall

Ability to



generalize from
evidence
abstract from
observations
synthesize global
revisions involving
the same issues
Ability to employ standard
usage college level writing

Fredonia was fairly comparable to
aggregate SUNY data
Fewer who didn’t meet standards and
fewer who exceeded standards
 Majority met or approached standards

Guideline for standards
 80+ exceeding 70-74 approaching
 75-79 meeting <70 not meeting

Summary Observations
Students are competent in their
ability to employ standard usage,
syntax, mechanics, and grammar.
 They are less proficient in their
ability to generalize from evidence
and abstract from observations.

Recommendations

Faculty teaching the basic
communication course will provide
more guidance in the abilities to
generalize from evidence and
abstract from observations
during class time
 more feedback about these skills on
paper drafts.

Other responses

English department


Request to consider reinstituting
second writing course rather than
infused writing
Survey planned
Basic Communication:
Oral
SUNY LEARNING OUTCOMES
 Develop proficiency in oral discourse
 Evaluate an oral presentation
according to established criteria

Oral Communication:
Local Learning Outcomes

Delivery




Articulate Speech
Suitable Voice
Quality
Adequate Eye
Contact
Other Appropriate
Nonverbal Behavior
Oral Communication:
Local Learning Outcomes

Content





Thesis clear
Ideas/issues
relevant
Organization easy
to follow
Arguments
supported by
evidence &
explanation
Visual aids
integrated
Planned Methodology &
Collaboration


Oral Communication:
One time measure of
attainment

Upper Level Speaking
Intensive courses
• standardized ratings
• final speaking
assignment
• faculty feedback
• Ass’t SubCommittee
Future Methodology



Oral
Communication:
Upper Level
Speaking Intensive
courses
Ability to judge
others’
presentations
Collaborating Parties

Campus Assessment Co-Directors
Monitored data collection
 Coordinated Report Writing


Assessment Subcommittees


Title III Committee


Collected most data & Scored Protocols
provided FIPSE essay data
Gen Ed Director/Committee

generated input re: recommendations
Unexpected benefits of
collaboration




Consistent pattern of findings from two
different approaches
English faculty & Gen Ed Faculty composing
joint survey regarding writing across the
curriculum to assist in resolving different
recommendations of English department & G
E Committee
Multi-unit involvement in survey will promote
participation in responding
All photos copyright Robert Siedentop 2003