X hits on this document

150 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

16 / 40

Discussion and Action:

The faculty present agreed that the data are not very encouraging, but we might have more accurate results if we divide out the English majors from the non-majors when we report scores. Also, we agreed to leave out “originality” from the rubric and to reconfigure its design. (We’ll probably use a more holistic approach and evaluate the areas of thesis, audience awareness, support, coherence, analysis, comprehension, organization, mechanics, documentation, and diction as we do on the GE rubric.) Discussion concerning the validity of the results also arose: It was felt that the sample is too limited to make changes to the curriculum at this time. Some questioned whether faculty who are not current with a particular text should be evaluating a student’s interpretation of it. Furthermore, the Dept. considered assessing a paragraph of the student’s writing as opposed to a complete essay. Another suggestion was to assess our English majors based on their academic progress beyond AWC.

Action on 5/8/02:

The rubric used for assessment of GE communication skills was revised and adopted for assessment of the English major. Furthermore, it was decided that the next outcome measure to be assessed will be an analysis of a primary text in essay form with proper documentation. Discussion on a third outcome measure will continue.

Communication Skills Rubric

For English Major Assmt.

(approved 5/8/02)

Score Point

Description

5

Writing provides a clear, specific thesis and awareness of an audience; fully develops support  for thesis in logical, coherent manner; demonstrates excellent comprehension and depth of analysis of material used; shows high proficiency in standard English grammar, spelling, punctuation, and source documentation.

4

Writing provides a clear thesis and awareness of an audience; develops support for thesis in logical, coherent manner; demonstrates sufficient comprehension and depth of analysis of material used; shows adequate proficiency in standard English grammar, spelling, punctuation, and source documentation.

3

Writing provides thesis; develops support for thesis in somewhat coherent manner; demonstrates partial comprehension and depth of analysis of material used; shows inconsistent proficiency in standard English grammar, spelling, punctuation, and source documentation.

2

Writing provides flawed thesis; does not properly develop support thesis; demonstrates insufficient comprehension and depth of analysis or of material used; shows lack of proficiency in standard English grammar, spelling, punctuation, and source documentation.

1

Writing does not provide a thesis or support for thesis; demonstrates lack of comprehension and depth of analysis of material used; shows persistent, serious lack of proficiency in standard English grammar, spelling, punctuation, and source documentation.

As of fall 2002, Wednesday afternoon forums have been regularly scheduled.  These forums are gatherings of English faculty and students.  The forums provide an opportunity to discuss research and pedagogy in literature and language studies.  Several forums also target the particular interests of English majors.  The students will also be honored at an end-of-year celebration.  Furthermore, research is on-going to begin offering English major scholarships.

A.A.S. in Broadcasting

A.A.S. in Television Production

15

Document info
Document views150
Page views149
Page last viewedFri Jan 20 16:12:13 UTC 2017
Pages40
Paragraphs1345
Words12242

Comments