Building Writing Center Assessments That Matter

by Ellen Schendel, Bill Macauley

No less than other divisions of the college or university, contemporary writing centers find themselves within a galaxy of competing questions and demands that relate to assessment—questions and demands that usually embed priorities from outside the purview of the writing center itself. Writing centers are used to certain kinds of assessment, both quantitative and qualitative, but are often unprepared to address larger institutional or societal issues. In Building Writing Center Assessments that Matter, Schendel and Macauley start from the kinds of assessment strengths already in place in writing centers, and they build a framework that can help writing centers satisfy local needs and put them in useful dialogue with the larger needs of their institutions, while staying rooted in writing assessment theory. The authors begin from the position that tutoring writers is already an assessment activity, and that good assessment practice (rooted in the work of Adler-Kassner, O'Neill, Moore, and Huot) already reflects the values of writing center theory and practice. They offer examples of assessments developed in local contexts, and of how assessment data built within those contexts can powerfully inform decisions and shape the futures of local writing centers. With additional contributions by Neal Lerner, Brian Huot and Nicole Caswell, and with a strong commitment to honoring on-site local needs, the volume does not advocate a one-size-fits-all answer. But, like the modeling often used in a writing consultation, examples here illustrate how important assessment principles have been applied in a range of local contexts. Ultimately, Building Writing Assessments that Matter describes a theory stance toward assessment for writing centers that honors the uniqueness of the writing center context, and examples of assessment in action that are concrete, manageable, portable, and adaptable.

220 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2012

Reviews

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

My expectation when picking up this book was that it would lay out exactly how to do writing center assessment. It did, but not in the way I was imagining: instead of a step-by-step assessment plan, it walks you through the process of developing a mission and vision for your writing center that leads to determining appropriate assessable outcomes. There's also an excellent annotated bibliography and enough information on where to look for developing those specific assessment plans once you've established your foundational ideas about mission/vision and what needs to be assessed.

[Marie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very valuable read for Writing Program Administrators. The best section was the Coda- don't skip it just because it's at the end.

[Stacy Charlesbois · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent advice on how to think about, strategize for, and even look forward to, implementing assessment.

[Mary · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very friendly, approachable assessment text. A lot of big-picture here: what's your mission statement? What's the department/college's mission statement? How can you combine them? What would the outcomes look like? I especially like the first chapter and the interchapter for the students/tutors to read.



Notes: “if we can use our own knowledge and expertise to conduct assessment that is meaningful to our work, tha we know will bring understnaidng and valuing of the work by those to whom we are responsible, we will have changed the context for our centers and, thus, the work itself”(xvii)
From hout “writing assessment must be site-based, locally controlled, context-sensitive, rhetorically based, and accessible” (35).
Invite staff to meet and develop a set of goals” (39).
“It is essential to select indicators that can be as overt, as obvious as possible and to acknowledge their limitations as well” (42)
“assessment is not about getting it right every time … but about making progress every time” (43).
“Take your time, make good choices, get the right people involved, and be realistic about what you can accomplish/handle” (54).
“Mining instituional statements for priorities is akin to organizing and developing ideas into a workable and meaningful whole” (61). “The common ground of the big idea provides a context for exchange as well as a wonderful opportunity to show what the writing center does and what it can do for the institution” (65)
“assessment must begin with your values but still resonate with people who are not ‘insiders’ to writing center scholarship” (83)
You aren’t the only players in students’ literacy developments (86)

Principles of assessment
Good assessment is research
Assessment is rhetorical in both design and in report
Good assessment is collaborative.
Good assessment drives positive change.
“Good assessment is an open invitation to greater relevance” (xx-xxi)

steps
chose a small number of goals
develop direct/indirect measure of your success in meeting those goals
Assess your progress
Integrate what you learned into the program (31-32)

“we need to be willing to find points of agreement with professional organization and other campus units that support our values and work” (104).

Quantitative research is about “the belief that the world works in predictable patterns” (109) while “the goal of qualitative research is to understand significance and meaning from the participants’ perspectives and their social actions” (111).

if assessment is another layer of work we’re adding to our already jam-packed workloads, then it isn’t good assessment--you won’t learn much from it” (177).

Collect data regularly, routinely (eg intake information, tutor graduation exit surveys) as well as in focused spurts (eg. faculty surveys, focus groups) that may be more invasive (122-123).
“don’t do assessment alone. Find out what other units on campus are assessing and consider building on that” (125)

Reports have 3 goals: readable, useful, and “true to the story that needs to be told” (140).What is the story?
Be creative in results (eg a symphany gets more standing ovations as well as more ticket sales) (146)
“The right rhetorical strategy for your campus is whichever one helps you to be heard” (161)

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book offers good, clear advice on the "whys" of assessment, ultimately suggesting that there isn't a proper way to go about building assessments as much as there is a proper orientation to have toward the act of assessing. Specifically, one should build assessments that align well with institutional goals as well as personal missions. The book also has an excellent annotated bibliography that provides some more in-depth examples of prior assessment procedures, but I'd surmise that this book is the best place for anyone looking to build a writing center assessment (or strengthen a procedure that is already in place) to start.