Rethinking English Rethinking English CompositionComposition

A Redesign Project in ProcessA Redesign Project in Process

Anne HomanEnglish Instructor

Math, English, and Developmental Studies, Division ChairState Fair Community College

STATE FAIR COMMUNITY

COLLEGE

• Serves 14 counties in West Central Missouri • 30 degree and certificate programs along with an

AA transfer degree and an AA in Teaching • Main campus in Sedalia with satellite campuses

in Osage Beach, Clinton, Warsaw, and Whiteman Air Force Base in Knob Noster

• 67 full-time and 280 part-time faculty• Average student age is 26 • 4918 students enrolled as of Spring 2012 • Dual credit courses delivered in 18 high schools

in the 14 county region

Addressing an Addressing an Institutional

ProblemProblem

o Improving our graduation rate by improving the rate of successful course completion

. . . and some departmental problems

o Improving instruction to meet the needs of underprepared students

o Improving delivery and quality of curriculum across all composition sections as SFCC continues to grow

o Improving grammar, mechanics, and documentation scores targeted through department assessment

o Improving the process for assessing Student Learning Outcomes

English Composition I and II: Course English Composition I and II: Course

Structure Structure

Traditional Redesigned• 16-week format• No common

assignments• Assessment data self-

reported by instructor

• Primarily 8-week bridged classes

• MyCompLab required in all Comp I classes

• Pre and post diagnostic tests through MCL

• Plagiarism tutorial through MCL

• More objective assessment

• Rotating tutorial sessions

English Composition: A Scoring GuideEnglish Composition: A Scoring Guide

  4 = Excellent

3 = Good 2 = Fair 1 = Poor Score

Total

Criterion 1:Subject,

Audience, and Purpose

 The essay’s subject is significant and manageable; the writer remains focused on the essay’s purpose, as expressed in a thesis statement, and directs the paper to the appropriate audience.

4 321

  

Criterion 2:Elements of Reasoning

  

 The essay considers the elements of good reasoning as it poses an appropriate question or problem, identifies any key concepts, uses evidence or examples, examines various points of view, questions assumptions, draws conclusions, and analyzes the possible consequences or implications of those conclusions.

4 32

1

 

Criterion 3:Organization and

Development 

 The essay is carefully and strategically structured. Body paragraphs effectively develop and support the thesis. Transitions and hooks meld the essay together. Smooth flow exists between ideas.

4 32

1

 

Criterion 4:Source Selection

  

 The essay includes sources that are relevant to the writer’s topic and purpose, and sources are reputable, credible, and timely.  

4 32 1

 

Criterion 5:Integration and Documentation

of Sources 

 Use of sources supports thesis and/or topic sentences.  Sources are effectively and smoothly integrated into the essay, with accurate signal phrases, accurate summary/ paraphrase/ quotations, and in-text citation consistent to the established style (e.g., MLA, APA, CMS).  End-text documentation (e.g., list of works cited, references, or bibliography) adheres to conventions. 

4 32

1

 

Criterion 6:Sentence Structure,

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics

 

 Not only is the essay relatively free of errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics, but it demonstrates an understanding of the language including appropriate and precise diction and syntax variety.

4 32

1

 

Communicating = C1, C3, C5 Higher Order Thinking = C1, C2, C3 Information Management= C4, C6

Total  

Progress toward English Composition Course Progress toward English Composition Course

OutcomesOutcomes

  4 = Excellent

3 = Good 2 = Fair 1 = Poor  

Fall 2009 Fall 2010  Comp I Comp II Comp I Comp II  

Criterion 1:Subject,

Audience, and Purpose

 

  3.15 3.14 3.33 3.11  

Criterion 2:Elements of Reasoning

  

  3.12 2.94 3.08 3.05  

Criterion 3:Organization and

Development 

  3.13 3.01 3.04 2.92  

Criterion 4:Source Selection

  

  3.16 3.12 3.03 3.05  

Criterion 5:Integration and Documentation

of Sources 

  2.8 2.82 2.57 2.67  

Criterion 6:Sentence Structure,

Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics

 

  2.81 2.92 2.55 2.70

 

Using MyCompLab Using MyCompLab

Advantages Disadvantages• Unified assignments• Common assessments• More objective and

accurate assessment• Reduced lesson

preparation• Reduced grading time

• Inadequate lab resources at some sites

Fall 2008 – Fall 2009Fall 2008 – Fall 2009

Course Retention RateEnrolle

e Success

Rate

Completer Success

Rate

Elementary Algebra

9% increase 10.7 % increase

.07% increase

Intermediate Algebra

4.6% increase 18.9 % increase

13.5 % increase

College Algebra 13.9% increase 14.5% increase

.04% increase

Introduction to Writing

7% increase 8% increase

.02% increase

English Comp I 8.5% increase 4.8% increase

3% decrease

English Comp II 13.1% increase 23% increase

8% increase

 

Possible reasons for improvement Possible reasons for improvement

noted on previous slidenoted on previous slide

• Math faculty changed textbooks; English faculty changed textbooks for Comp II

• 20 % increase in enrollment fall 2008• My WritingLab and MyMathLab were first

implemented in spring 2008 in Elementary Algebra and Introduction to Writing, creating a ripple effect in subsequent courses.

More recent data withheld while course redesign in math and English is established

Where We Hope to Go From HereWhere We Hope to Go From Here

• Implementation of MCL in English Composition II

• More Common Assignments• More objective data from MCL to include in our

program reviews• Reliance on MyCompLab to streamline the

assessment reporting process