The Wild Rumpus: Building Successful Writing Programs Through Professional Development

1. The Wild Rumpus: Building Successful Writing Programs Through Professional Development Our “double-whammy” Wild Rumpus consists of two sessions where ideas will come fast and discussion will be exciting and energizing. Please join us and . . .

3. Using Community to Promote Professional Development in WID Programs Joel Wingard Moravian College

4. “small” faculty ( 115, for  1580 students)

5.  “small” campus (although split in two)

6. veteran professor is WAC/WID director

7. interdisciplinary GenEd and FYS committees

8.  new “WIDOC” also interdisciplinary -- talking to departments

9. faculty development workshops every May

10. “resources for writing teachers” annotated bibliography http://www.joelwingard.com/

11. Blackboard site for FYS planning http://blackboard.moravian.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_4231_1%26url%3D

12. An Intensive Faculty Enrichment Program for Full-time Instructors in an Independent Writing Program Donna Nelson-Beene Bowling Green State University General Studies Writing Program

13. Bowling Green State University General Studies Writing Program • General Studies Writing (GSW) • University’s independent first-year writing program • Serves approximately 4000 students each semester • Teaching staff of 41 instructors and 50+ graduate assistants

14. Features of portfolio assessment which promote program coherence, standards, collaboration—and ongoing professional development General Studies Writing Program • Student writing • Standardized rubric and audience sheets • Standardized student process analysis • Narrative self-reflection

15. Program Requirements for Instructors General Studies Writing Program • Electronic teaching Portfolios • Teaching philosophy statements • Observation triads • Service expectations

16. Ownership of the program General Studies Writing Program • Instructors have a voice • Committee participation • Learning Outcomes and Assessment • Textbook Approval • Technology • Placement Prompts • Think Tanks • Merit Evaluation • Writing Awards • Search Committees

17. Professional development within the program General Studies Writing Program Faculty development workshops Regular meetings Workshop presenters Extensive Blackboard site GSW manuals Summer retreats

18. text Dr. Darby Lewes, Lycoming College: (English professor by day; dog trainer by night)

19. Professional development opportunities across campus General Studies Writing Program Faculty learning communities Workshops University committee work Teaching in residential learning communities Linked courses Campus events

21. When the mentoring of non-tenure track faculty is intentional, ongoing, and multifaceted, instructors not only become strong and empowered educators, but they become leaders on campus and within the discipline. • Involvement in university initiatives • Teaching for other units on campus • Leadership on university committees • Presence at professional conferences • Award winners General Studies Writing Program

22. Engaged Assessment:Involving PTF, GTAs, and Lecturers Gwen Gorzelsky Wayne State University CWPA Conference Baton Rouge, LA July 2011

23. Wayne State University (WSU) Program Context Basic Writing (40 sections), FYC (50), Intermediate Writing (30), 2 technical writing courses (10) WAC: Writing Intensive (WI) course in major Instructors: GTAs (30), PTF (50), F-T lecturers (5)

24. Assessment Context External assessment 10 years ago Limited internal assessment W 2006: 30 FYC portfolios—competency in limited range of genres (reflective, interpretive) New curriculum 2007 – 2009: FYC focus = argument; Intermediate Writing focus = preparation for WI courses Call for assessment fall 2010: discipline-specific

25. Assessment goals Learn whether and to what extent students are transferring writing-related skills and knowledge Involve instructors substantively at all stages Close the loop: use assessment findings to improve curriculum, pedagogy, professional development

26. Major Scholarly Influences Assessment: Broad (2003; 2009); O’Neill, Moore, and Huot (2009) Transfer: Bergmann and Zepernick (2007); Downs and Wardle (2007); Perkins and Salomon (1988; 1992); Wardle (2009) Reflections and portfolios: Anson (1997); White (2005); Yancey (1998); Robertson, Taczak, and Yancey (forthcoming)

27. Initial Assessment: Approach and Methods Beginning with the transition from Intermediate Writing to Writing Intensives One course per year (FYC 2012 -13; BW 2013-14; tech writing 2014-15) Student surveys Student and instructor focus groups Instructor Dynamic Criteria Mapping (DCM) sessions

28. Roles of PTF, GTAs, and Lecturers Designing and implementing Participating Interpreting and applying findings Creating a connected culture Using findings

29. Interpreting and Applying:Orientation, Workshops, Mentoring Resources Surveyed GTAs anonymously Asked Mentoring Committee to draw on informal interactions/own teaching experience Asked Assessment Committee to draw on assessment findings Held joint Mentoring and Assessment Committee meeting to develop final lists

30. Interpreting and Applying:Pilot Intermediate Writing Sections Testing Writing About Writing (WAW) curriculum and reflective curriculum: 2 WAW-only; 2 WAW + reflection; 2 control Meeting in July & Aug. to design syllabi and assignments Drawing on initial assessment findings: genre and audience in WI courses; sequenced assignments Drawing on O’Neill, Moore, and Huot: incorporating instructors’ interests and experience Using White’s Phase 2 approach – portfolio evaluation focused on reflective letters that document students’ achievement of learning outcomes

31. Creating a Connected Culture: Role of New FYC Lecturer Cohort Meeting regularly as a staff Piloting reflection assignments in FYC Acting as informal mentors for GTAs, PTF Consulting on strategies for engaging PTF Designing orientation and workshop sessions

32. Certifying the Process: Making It Worthwhile with Awards for Professionalization Patricia Freitag Ericsson Director of Composition Washington State University

33. The Context • About 200 sections of Composition courses serving 4500 students • Taught by a mix of TA’s, Instructors, and other faculty • TA’s have pedagogy, theory seminar • Instructors have little support

34. Professional Development in Composition (PDC) Series Goals • Support pedagogy • Create community • Foster awareness of program history • Assure knowledge of WSU policies and programs

35. Professional Development In Composition (PDC) Series • Guest speakers who have contributed to WSU Composition Program • Presentations by campus support units • Pedagogy workshops • Certificate provided to those who attended at least 10 sessions

36. Goals-based Evaluation: Support Pedagogy • General Support: 84% • Ideas for Classroom teaching: 84% • Teaching goals more ambitious: 52% • Made me a better teacher: 84% All results of this survey are available at http://www.cyberhestia.org/PDC_Survey_2011.pdf

37. Goals-based Evaluation: Create Community • Felt welcome at sessions: 100% • Found others who shared interests: 68% • Developed friendships: 60% • Got to know others better: 80% • Feel positive about PDC experience: 88% All results of this survey are available at http://www.cyberhestia.org/PDC_Survey_2011.pdf

38. Goals-based Evaluation: Foster Awareness of History 68% agree or strongly agree All results of this survey are available at http://www.cyberhestia.org/PDC_Survey_2011.pdf

39. Goals-based Evaluation: Assure knowledge of policies and programs 56% strongly agree or agree All results of this survey are available at http://www.cyberhestia.org/PDC_Survey_2011.pdf

40. The Certificate • Certificate was an incentive: 60% • Certificate validated experience: 52% All results of this survey are available at http://www.cyberhestia.org/PDC_Survey_2011.pdf

41. Conclusions The PDC Series provided a successful professional development foundation for Composition teachers. Questions for Fall 2011 • How should we balance types of sessions? • Should we continue with year-long themes for single-presenter sessions? • How do we handle policy sessions? • Are certificates worthwhile?

42. Teaching Portfolios for Stronger Program Assessment and Professionalization Edwina Helton Indiana University East Presented by Jeff Jones

43. Your questions and contributions