Printer Friendly Version

ASSESSMENT REPORT

FOR

Writing Center
Administrative or Educational Support Unit

September 1, 2002 to August 31, 2003
Assessment Period Covered      

October 3, 2003
Date Submitted

Expanded Statement of Institutional Purpose Linkage:
Institutional Mission/Goal(s) Reference:
Texas A&M International University, a Member of the Texas A&M University System, is committed to the preparation of students for leadership roles in their chosen profession and in an increasingly complex, culturally diverse state, national, and global society…Through instruction, faculty and student research, and public service, Texas A&M International University is a strategic point of delivery for well-defined programs and services that improve the quality of life for citizens of the border region, the State of Texas, and national and international communities.

Administrative or Educational Support Unit Mission Statement:
The primary mission of the Writing Center at Texas A&M International University is to support the instructional goals of the faculty by providing free individual and small-group tutoring sessions, peer review sessions, and writing workshops to students…In order to develop more confident and competent writers, tutors guide students in the development, revision, and editing of their papers…The goal of tutoring is to develop increasingly independent writers.

Intended Administrative Objectives:

1. The success rate for 75-hour contract students will improve as a result of their use of Writing Center services.

2. Student use of Writing Center services will increase.

3. Student satisfaction with Writing Center services will increase.

ASSESSMENT REPORT

FOR

Writing Center
Administrative or Educational Support Unit

September 1, 2002 to August 31, 2003
Assessment Period Covered     

October 3, 2003
Date Submitted

Intended Administrative or Educational Support Objective:

1. The success rate for 75-hour contract students will improve as a result of their use of Writing Center services.

First Means of Assessment for Objective Identified Above:
1a. Means of Unit Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Use Rising Junior Exam (RJE, later called University Writing Assessment or UWA) results report to compare passing rates of 75-hour contract students who took the RJE from Aug. 2001 – Apr.2002 with those of 75-hour contract students who took the RJE from Aug. 2002 – August 2003.  Goal:  increase the passing rate of 75-hour contract students by 15%.

1a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
From Aug 2001-Apr. 2002, 4 out of 10 contract students (40%) who took the RJE passed (Aug. 2001: 0/4 or 0% passed; Dec, 2001: 4/6 or 67% passed; Apr. 2002: 0/0 or 0% passed.)

From Aug. 2002 – Aug 2003, 18 out of 60 contract students (30%) who took the RJE passed (Aug. 2002: 3/14 or 21.4% passed; Dec. 2002: 5/16 or 31.2% passed; Apr. 2003: 5/16 or 31.2% passed; Aug 2003: 5/14 or 35.7% passed).

1a. Use of Results to Improve Unit Services:
Jan. 2003 – changed requirements used during Fall 2002 for the 75-hour contract from 70 journal pages to 60 journal pages, from no required meetings with tutors or Director to at least one 30-minute tutoring session per week with a tutor and at least on 15-minute conference with the Director every two weeks, and from reading on novel to choosing from a variety of reading assignments as recommended by the tutor or Director.  The intent was to find out if more instruction from tutors and the Director would improve contract students’ success on the test.

Jan. 2003 – Revised RJE Preparation Guide to clarify the nature of the exam and the evaluation criteria used to score the essays and to show the importance in the sample essays of effective content and minimal mechanical errors to success of the exam.
May 2003 – Added a new requirement to the journal:  students must “Prewrite, draft, and revise no less than six mock Rising Junior Exams…until each one earns a passing score (3 or 4) as determined by the Director.”

ASSESSMENT REPORT

FOR

Writing Center
Administrative or Educational Support Unit

September 1, 2002 to August 31, 2003
Assessment Period Covered      

October 3, 2003
Date Submitted

Intended Administrative or Educational Support Objective:

2. Student use of Writing Center services will increase.

First Means of Assessment for Objective Identified Above:
2a. Means of Unit Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Use sign-in logs from Spring 2002 and Summer 2002 to calculate total students visit and total requests for tutor assistance.  Continue to keep records of student visits and total requests for tutor assistance during Fall 2002, Spring 2003, and Summer 2003 and compare average number of students/week for each period.  Goal:  Increase student visits by 10% during the 2002-03 academic year.  Increase requests for tutor assistance by 5% during the 2002-03 academic year.

2a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
During Spring 2002 (1/14/02-5/19/02 –16 weeks), students made 1,333 visits to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service and 940 of those students received tutor assistance.  The ratio of visits to students enrolled at TAMIU was 1,333: 3,332 or 0.40.  On average, 83.31 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service during Spring 2002, and 58.75 of those students/week received tutor assistance.

During Summer 2002 (5/10/02 – 8/10/02 – 13 weeks) 1,801 visits were made by students to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service and 866 of those received tutor assistance.  The ratio of visits to students enrolled at TAMIU was 1,801: 3,861 or 0.46.  On average, 138.54 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service during Summer 2002, and 66.61 of those students/week received tutor assistance.  During the 2001-02 academic year, an average of 108 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service and 62.3 of those students/week requested tutor assistance.

During Fall 2002 (8/26/02 – 12/14/02 – 16 weeks) 4,269 visits were made by students to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service, and approximately 978of those students received tutor assistance.  The ratio of visits to students enrolled at TAMIU was 4,269: 3,724 or 1.145.  On average, 266.81 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service during the Fall 2002 semester, and 61.125 of those students/week received tutor assistance. 

During Spring 2003 (1.6/03 – 5/9/03 – 17 weeks) 3,225 visits were made by students to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service, and 930 of those students received tutor assistance.  The ratio of visits to students enrolled at TAMIU was 3,225: 3,545 or 0.909.  On average, 189.705 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service during the Spring 2003 semester, and 54.705 of those students/week received tutor assistance.

During Summer 2003 (5/12/03 – 8/9/03 – 13 weeks) 1,785 visits were made by students to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service, and 436 of those students received tutor assistance.  The ratio of visits to students enrolled at TAMIU was 1,785: 3,835 or 0.465.  On average, 137.31 visits/week were made to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service during the Summer 2003 semester, and 33.54 of those students/week received tutor assistance.

During the 2002-03 academic year an average of 201.72 students/week came to the Writing Center for some type of writing-related service and 50.96 of those students/week received tutor assistance.

2a. Use of Results to Improve Unit Services:
September 2002 – In order to encourage students to take advantage of Writing Center services, Ms. Cantu
and Mr. Koch visited 31 classes (primarily freshman comp and GENU classes) at the beginning of fall semester to inform students about Writing Center services available to them.

Jan 2003 – Ms. Cantu and Mr. Koch visited 9 classes (again, primarily freshman comp and GENU classes) at the beginning of spring semester to inform students about Writing Center services available to them.

Feb. 2003 – Because of the dramatic decrease in the number of students visiting the Writing Center this spring compared to Fall 2002, Writing Center services were promoted with an email to all students (2/28/03), an ad in the March issue of the campus newspaper (The Bridge), and flyers advertising Writing Center services posted around campus.

Second Means of Assessment for Objective Identified Above:
2b. Means of Unit Assessment & Criteria for Success
Keep records of student requests for tutor assistance through the website, by fax, and on the Helpline.  Goal:  Establish a pattern and record of use during Fall 2002.  Then, strive to increase total requests by 5% during Spring and Summer 2003.

2b. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
(Since the website, fax and Helpline were not operational during Spring 2002, we will rely on Fall 2002 for the benchmark.) 

During Fall 2002, we had 4 total requests for assistance: 1 through the website or by email, 2 by fax, and 1 on the Helpline. 

During Spring 2003, we had 3 requests for assistance through the website through the website or by email, 0 requests by fax, and 6 requests on the Helpline.

During Summer 2003, we had 0 requests for assistance through the website or by email, 1 request by fax, and 2 requests on the Helpline.

2b. Use of Results to Improve Unit Service:
Feb. 2003 – promoted fax and Helpline with an article in the Writing Center newsletter (The Writer’s Forum) and during classroom presentations.

Spring and Summer 2003 – updated the Writing Center website by adding PowerPoint presentations used for writing workshops and posted the revised version of the UWA Preparation Guide.

ASSESSMENT REPORT

FOR

Writing Center
Administrative or Educational Support Unit

September 1, 2002 to August 31, 2003
Assessment Period Covered      

October 3, 2003
Date Submitted

Intended Administrative or Educational Support Objective:

3. Student satisfaction with Writing Center services will increase.

First Means of Assessment for Objective Identified Above:
3a. Means of Unit Assessment & Criteria for Success:
Compare tutor evaluation forms completed by students during Spring and Summer 2002 semesters with those completed by students during Fall 2002 and Spring and Summer 2003.  Calculate and compare ratings for tutor quality (excellent, very good, good, fair, poor) over both time periods.  Goal: 90% of students who responded will continue to rate tutor quality as excellent or very good.

3a. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
During Spring and Summer 2002, 341 students evaluated the tutors.  On those evaluations 225 (65.98%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “excellent”, and 89 (26.01%) as “very good” for a total of 91.99%.  In addition, 20 (5.86%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “good” and 7 (2.05%) as “fair” for a total of 7.4%.

During Fall 2002, 663 students evaluated the tutors.  On those evaluations 413 (65.2%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “excellent”, and 161 (25.4%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “good”, “fair”, or “poor” for a total of 9.4%.

During Spring 2003, 661 students evaluated the tutors.  On those evaluations 503 (76.1%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “excellent”, and 133 (20.1%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “very good” for a total of 96.2%.  In addition, 21 (3.18%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “good” and 3 (0.45%) as “fair” for a total of 3.63%.

During Summer 2003, 156 students evaluated the tutors.  On those evaluations 120 (76.92%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “excellent”, and 32 (20.51%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “very good” for a total of 97.43%.  In addition, 4 (2.56%) ranked the “quality of tutor” as “good” and 0 (0.0%) as “fair” for a total of 2.56%.

3a. Use of Results to Improve Unit Services:
Spring 2003 – a tutor training checklist was developed to provide more consistency in the training and orientation of new tutors, and the Tutor Handbook was updated.  In addition, new tutors were required to undergo training given by Student Counseling Services regarding working with students with disabilities and/or special needs. 

Summer 2003 – other ongoing changes include holding more frequent tutor training sessions to focus on diagnosing UWA essays, scheduling monthly Writing Center staff meetings, and conducting special evaluations of tutors as needed to identify and address work behaviors that need improvement or that have been exceptionally good.

Second Means of Assessment for Objective Identified Above:
3b. Means of Unit Assessment & Criteria for Success
Use forms completed completed by students during Fall 2002 and Spring and Summer 2003 semesters to evaluate their satisfaction with writing workshops offered by Writing Center tutors.  Four areas will be evaluated by totaling the responses to one question regarding (1) information presented, three questions regarding (2) method of presentation (PowerPoint), two questions regarding (3) presenters, and one question regarding (4) time.  Goal:  reach satisfaction rate of 80%

3b. Summary of Assessment Data Collected:
During Fall 2002, 69 students attended and evaluated 42 workshops conducted by Writing Center tutors.

(1)            When asked if the information presented was “thorough and complete with enough examples,” 67/69 (97.1%) marked “yes, definitely” and 2 (2.9%) marked “most of the time”.

(2)            When asked if the PowerPoint presentation was well organized, interesting, and effective, 191/206 (92.7%) marked “yes, definitely” and 13/206 (6.3%) marked “most of the time”.

(3)            When asked if the tutors who presented the workshops were “knowledgeable” and created a “comfortable environment that motivated you to interact”, 131/138 (94.9%) marked “yes, definitely” while 6/138 (4.3%) marked “most of the time”.

(4)            When asked if they had enough time for the activity, 60/66 (90.9%) said, “yes, definitely”; 6/66 (9%) marked “most of the time”.

During Spring 2003, 162 students attended and evaluated 37 workshops conducted by Writing Center tutors.

(1)            When asked if the information presented was “thorough and complete with enough examples,” 138/162 (85.1%), “yes, definitely” and 11/162 (6.7%) marked “most of the time”.

(2)            When asked if the PowerPoint presentation was well organized, interesting, and effective, 403/444 (90.7%) marked “yes, definitely” and 31/444 (6.9%) marked “most of the time”.

(3)            When asked if the tutors who presented the workshops were “knowledgeable” and created a “comfortable environment that motivated you to interact” 268/288 (93.0%) marked “yes, definitely” while 14/288 (4.8%) marked “most of the time.”

(4)    When asked if they had enough time for the activity, 135/162 (83.3%) said, “yes, definitely”; 9/162 (5.5%) marked “most of the time”.

During Summer 2003, 129 students attended and evaluated 22 workshops conducted by Writing Center tutors.

(1)            When asked if the information presented was “thorough and complete with enough examples,” 115 (89.1%) marked, “yes, definitely” and 12 (9.3%) marked “most of the time”.

(2)            When asked if the PowerPoint presentation was well organized, interesting, and effective, 343/387 (88.6%) marked “yes, definitely” and 36/387 (9.3%) marked “most of the time.

(3)            When asked if the tutors who presented the workshops were “knowledgeable” and created a “comfortable environment that motivated you to interact” 234/258 (90.6%) marked “yes, definitely” while 23/258 (8.9%) marked “most of the time”.

(4)    When asked if they had enough time for the activity, 103/129 (79.8%) said, “yes, definitely”; 19/129 (14.7%) marked “most of the time.

3b. Use of Results to Improve Unit Service:
Spring 2003 – prior to presenting these workshops again during the four weeks leading up to the RJE, all PowerPoint presentations were revised and updated (examples changed, organization improved, language clarified, etc.) and the items on activities were changed so that each workshop would be new even for students who had seen them during Fall 2002.  In addition, five new workshops were developed and presented for the first time during Spring 2003:  “Verb Forms”, “Writing Body Paragraphs”, “Comma Usage”, “Trouble with Words”, and “Spanish Accents”.

SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION