Re: In Defense of North

[<snewmann@sfasu.edu>]

Bear with me one more time on North's point please.

I meant to say in my last note that when we hear from a prof. that his
student's essay was not any better after she'd visited the W.C. that does
not mean that we did not help that student.  I think that often a writer
begins to "improve" as a writer--begins to comprehend the process
better--while the effects of that clearer vision might not show up for
another essay or two.  If we try to make each essay better rather than
focusing on the writer in our tutorials I believe we do our clients a
dis-service.  but when we focus on helping the client to become a better
writer her writing will ultimately become better, too, if we've been
successful at that.  Probably still clear as mud, huh?

stephen


On Fri, 1 Oct 1999 snewmann@sfasu.edu wrote:

> Katie, What Beth has said below in response to your questions is true for
> us, too.
> 
> RE: item "c" about the emphasis on grades.  That goes back to what I'd
> tried to say earlier in defense of North.  When we help students become
> better writers we also help them to produce better writing which
> ultimately affects their grades (not just in their Comp courses).  There
> are times for us, too, when the grades are not consistently better for the
> W.C. clients and, like Beth, we then focus on what does look good in our
> assessments.  Very few of our clients are "required" to come to us.  Just
> the fact that our clients are motivated to seek our help makes me think
> they are more likely to be successful students than might those who do not
> seek our help.  One last thing about grades.  In the courses we track
> often a higher percentage of non-clients earn "A's" than do clients.  We
> attribute this to our suspicion that "A" students are less likely to seek
> writing help from the W.C.  
> 
> As is the case with Beth, having access to this information has been a
> tremendous help to us in securing funding for our tutoring programs here.
> 
> stephen
> 
> 
> On Fri, 1 Oct 1999, Dr. Beth Rapp Young wrote:
> 
> > I'm not Stephen, but since we have also compared grades of uwc clients vs
> > nonclients (in w-i courses where students come to the uwc in large numbers, such
> > as fyc), I can offer my answers to these questions.
> > 
> > a) obliterating confidentiality?  As a university support service, we have access
> > to the student records database, and can obtain SAT scores, grades, and other
> > info for purposes of program assessment--a fairly standard procedure which other
> > support services also follow.  The person who obtains this data signs a
> > confidentiality agreement in advance (actually, we ask all staff to sign
> > confidentiality agreements) and works on a secure computer.
> > 
> > We follow the usual procedures for analyzing confidential records; we collect all
> > the data, then remove identifying info (such as student id numbers) from the file
> > before we begin to work with the data.  When we report results, we do so for the
> > entire group of students, not for one student at a time.  When working with
> > records for hundreds of students, it is pretty difficult to notice individual
> > grades anyway.
> > 
> > b) trusting the grades? Since we get the grades from the student records
> > database, we don't have to ask students to self-report.
> > 
> > c) sending the message that a wctr is supposed to raise grades?  This one is
> > trickier.  Of course, I put disclaimers in every report that mentions
> > grades--it's pretty easy to explain that grades usually depend on more than
> > writing (tests, attendance, etc.), so good writing alone does not an "A" make.
> > My annual report always highlights other measures too (e.g., student satisfaction
> > measures, client comments, increases in #s of clients, etc.)  And, frankly, we've
> > found that grades are not always higher for wctr clients . . . in which case, I
> > find something else to brag about.  (There's always something!)
> > 
> > But it's clear that administrators like to see concrete evidence that the uwc has
> > some effect on student writing, or, at the very least, that we're looking for
> > that concrete evidence.  This year, our writing center was awarded a 56% budget
> > increase to expand services--currently one-time money, but I've been given reason
> > to hope that the increase will be continued in future years.  I credit the fact
> > that we are carrying out these sorts of assessments with helping us obtain that
> > increase.
> > 
> > As we are a relatively new writing center, it may be more necessary for us than
> > for established centers to demonstrate that we're helping students.
> > 
> > kfischer wrote:
> > 
> > > Stephen, offlist here, how in heaven's name do you track their grades and SAT
> > > scores without a) obliterating confidentialitiy; b) trusting credibility (if
> > > the grades are reported by students, themselves); c) paying credence to the
> > > abhorrant notion that a w.c. is supposed to raise grades (as opposed to
> > > assisting with writing)?
> > 
> > Beth Young
> > 
> > ~~~~~~~~~~
> > Dr. Beth Rapp Young   Building: LS-616, +1347
> > Director, University Writing Center Office: 407-823-2853
> > Assistant Professor, English  Fax: 407-823-3007
> > University of Central Florida, Orlando Email: byoung@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu
> > http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~byoung
> > 
> > "Nulla dies sine linea."
> > -Pliny
> > 
> > "Writers are people who write."
> > -Donald Murray
> > 
> > 
> 
>