A Multi-method Approach:Assessment of Basic

CommunicationCheryl 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 thinking critical writing critical reading critical 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 ofFrosh 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 Collected most data & Scored Protocols

Title III Committee 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