Improving Policies in the Writing Center at the University of Wisconsin River Falls

Prepared for David Furniss English Faculty and Writing Center Faculty Advisor University of Wisconsin River Falls

Prepared by Ashley Dettloff, Student University of Wisconsin River Falls

November 27, 2011

581 Spruce Street River Falls, WI 54022 Dr. David Furniss Writing Center Faculty Advisor University of Wisconsin River Falls 410 S. 3rd Street River Falls, WI 54022 November 27, 2011 Dear Dr. Furniss: Here is the report on researching and adopting new policies in the Writing Center that I approached you about on October 20th. The Writing Center tutors and I agree that adopting ways to assess the students and the tutors would improve the Writing Centers quality of service. While all of the tutors are highly qualified, many feel self-confident and would benefit from student-provided feedback. Furthermore, I examined how the Writing Centers marketing and advertising is affecting the students expectations when they use the facility. This project focuses on the students who visit the Writing Center and the tutors who teach there. I used surveys and one-on-one informational interviews to gather data from tutors at the University of Wisconsin River Falls, the University of Wisconsin Stout, and the University of Wisconsin Madison. The data collected will be used to compare our policies with other Writing Centers in the University of Wisconsin system and will be used to assess how comfortable the tutors feel about their positions. I am grateful to Kathleen Hunzer, who was very candid about the ways the Writing Center could improve, and to Kaitlin Wenda, who helped remind tutors about the new policy changes that I introduced. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to work on this assignment. It has been a learning experience and it has given me the opportunity to make sure students get the best educational experience possible. A presentation on this proposal will be given to a group of peers and an English Faculty member to determine their thoughts on this project and I would be pleased if you were to there. Sincerely,

Ashley Dettloff

Enclosure

Contents
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................... II Introduction................................................................................................................................ 1 Overview of Problems.................................................................................................................... 1 Scope and Methodology................................................................................................................. 1 Policies Changes..............................................................................................................................2 Results..............................................................................................................................................2 Discussion....................................................................................................................................... 5 Conclusions.................................................................................................................,................... 6 Suggestions for Further Research....................................................................................................7 Appendix......................................................................................................................................... 8 Bibliography................................................................................................................................. 10

List of Figures
Figure 1...........................................................................................................................................3 Figure 2...........................................................................................................................................3 Figure 3...........................................................................................................................................4 Figure 4...........................................................................................................................................4 Figure 5...........................................................................................................................................5 Figure 6...........................................................................................................................................5 Figure 7...........................................................................................................................................6

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Executive Summary
This report analyzes the policies in the Writing Center and also examines the relationship between the Writing Centers advertisements and students expectations.

Assessment for Tutors and Students Is Needed

While students are guaranteed honest and helpful feedback by visiting the Writing Center, tutors are not granted that same luxury. It would be beneficial for both the tutors and the students if the feedback that was provided went both ways. Improved student-supplied feedback can do three things: Insure that tutors continue to improve upon their skills as educators Measure whether students are grasping the concepts that are taught to them Improve Practicum tutors self confidence in their ability to instruct

The best way to do this would be in issuing an anonymous exit survey when the students check out at the computer kiosk. This brief, three question survey, should measure how well the student thought the session went, how comfortable the student feels with the paper he or she came in to work on, and whether the tutor can improve their skills. This survey would be placed in a comment box and sorted through at the end of each week.

The Writing Centers Advertising Message Needs to be Universal

The Writing Centers advertising is sending mixed messages to students. Due to the fact there is no standard explanation about what the Writing Center does and does not do, we are getting students who walk in and expect that we edit their paper. Not only does this frustrate tutors, but it also disappoints students who expect a service that we cannot deliver. This problem does not offer an easy solution since the source of the problem is merely speculative. Nonetheless, adopting a solution to this problem is feasible if the English faculty agrees on one set way of advertising the Writing Center. They could come up with a generic description and put that in their syllabi (instead of the self-written description many use now) or they could refer students to the Writing Center website, which offers a complete and thorough description of the services we offer. Working with Dr. Kathleen Hunzer on this issue would be beneficial since she is the Director of Composition in the English Department is a more credible person to request that faculty members enact this policy change.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

II

Introduction
The tutors in the Writing Center take great pride in helping students with the writing process. Many are English Education majors and plan to make teaching part of their career. Because of this, it is important that the Writing Center is available for both students and tutors to gain valuable skills. The purpose of this report is to analyze how the current policies in the Writing Center can be improved, to develop a new policy to help offer a higher quality of service, and to examine its effectiveness after a 30 day trial period. The report outlines the two policy changes that should be made and offers insight into the general work climate amongst the Writing Center tutors.

Overview of Proposed Problems

Problem 1: Tutors do not feel the current assessment methods are not sufficient in meeting their needs to enhance their skills and evaluating the progress of habitual Writing Center students. As future educators, many tutors find it hard to assess whether a student is improving without tangible feedback. Because we cannot look at the paper grades they receive (unless they willingly volunteer it), many tutors are at a loss as to whether our efforts at teaching them writing skills are worthwhile. Furthermore, many tutors wish to improve their teaching skills, but lack the ability to do it without proper feedback. Even though tutor to tutor feedback is great and highly encouraged, it would be more beneficial if students had a way to offer their feedback to tutors. Problem 2: Tutors feel that the way the Writing Center is being advertised creates miscommunication between the students expectations and the service that is actually provided. While all of the English faculty members help promote the Writing Center, a few incorrectly represent it as an editing or proofreading service instead of a center to assist with the writing process. It is not uncommon for tutors to encounter at least twenty students a year (the majority who are freshman) who habitually come into the Writing Center and expect us to correct, edit, or proofread their paper. Unfortunately, this is not a one-time occurrence and it often drives tutors to hold a little anger towards those who are misinformed.

Scope and Methodology

The scope of this project focused on creating policies that benefited the students, the tutors, and the professors at the University of Wisconsin River Falls The main way I used to collect information is through anonymous surveys. I created two surveys for this project, one for the students and one for the tutors. The survey I had distributed to the students was in a paper format and is shown in detail in Appendix A.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Policy Changes
Policy Change Addressing Problem 1:
The policy I changed addresses the tutors concerns about the lack of student-provided feedback. I created copies of the survey sheet and placed them in an easily accessible spot next to the check out computer kiosk. At the end of each session, I (or another tutor) asked the students to take one. Many filled them out in front of us. This not only ensures efficient student feedback but it also makes the student reflect on his or her session. Even though tutors cannot assess the students in a reliable and tangible way, the survey allows students the ability to assess themselves. It also encourages open dialogue between the student and the tutor so that both can learn and grow through the experience.

Policy Change Addressing Problem 2:

This policy change could not be experimented with because the syllabi for fall semester have already been created. It would have been impossible to ask the entire English faculty to re-issue a revised syllabus this late in the semester. Nonetheless, the theory supporting this policy change still stands. If a standard explanation of what the Writing Center does is sent out to the entire faculty and they put it into their syllabi, then the miscommunication problem we are having with the students should end.

Results
The Online Survey for Tutors
This survey was created using the website Survey Monkey and was distributed by e-mail. All ten of the tutors who were sent this survey responded. Results for Question 1: Do you feel that the writing skills you are communicating are being understood and/or acknowledged by the students you tutor? All the tutors answered Agree for this question.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Results for Question 2: Would you like feedback from students (in the form of an anonymous survey) which assessed how well the student grasped the writing concepts you were trying to teach and offered you feedback on your own skills as a tutor?

Figure 1

30%

70%

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Results for Question 3: Would attending mandatory sessions with a faculty member on common writing errors is something you would be interested in?

Figure 2

20% 50% 30%

Yes Maybe No

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Results for Question 4: Do you feel the Practicum class helped you as a tutor?

Figure 3

10%

Yes No

90%

Results for Question 5: Would extra observation hours as a practicum student help/have helped you in feeling confident as a tutor?

Figure 4

60%

40%
Yes No

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

The Student Exit Survey

There were a total of 32 surveys collected from students at the end of a month. The students who came in multiple times and filled out more than one survey had their scores averaged. The table below (Figure 5) will show the responses given by the thirty students. To see the questions that were asked please refer to Appendix C.

Figure 5
Exit Survey Responses Very Good Question 1 Question 2 15 17 Fair 7 5 Ok 5 5 Bad 2 3 Horrible 1 0

As the statistics show, the majority of students found the Writing Center helpful and found the service they received satisfactory. Granted, this was a small sample size but it is still interesting to know that over one fourth of the students who visit the Writing Center do not feel the service was Very Good or even Fair. While this may be due to a variety of factors and should be examined if this assessment policy continues, it also means there is some disconnect in the dialogue between student and tutor. (See Suggestions for Further Research for a more elaborate analysis of this data)

Discussion
I looked at two of other Writing Centers, one at University of Wisconsin Madison and one at the University of Wisconsin Stout, to compare how they operate and what services they offer to how the University of Wisconsin River Falls Writing Center operates. To make the comparing easier, I have created two tables (Figure 6and Figure 7) to illustrate the services offered at the other Writing Centers. I have chosen UW-Madison and UW-Stout because they both have reputable Writing Centers and thought it would be valuable to take two schools that are completely different in their size, the demographic of their population, and the majors offered so I would have a wider variety of data.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

University of Wisconsin - Madison

Figure 6 Services Offered Aid students in the Writing Process Guide students in further revisions of a paper Consult with professional tutors on resume and cover letter structure and design Services Not Offered Cannot Help students in Communications, Creative Writing, or ESL classes* Proofreading or Editing

* This does not mean that tutors will refuse to help ESL students. Instead, tutors cannot devote their time to students in a Communications, Creative Writing, or ESL class because it is assumed that the professors of these classes will cover the mechanics of writing.

University of Wisconsin Stout

Figure 7 Services Offered Aid students in the Writing Process Guide students in further revisions of a paper Assist students from all classrooms Services Not Offered Proofreading or Editing

Both Writing Centers use online surveys to collect feedback on whether students learned what was needed from the session and all of the Writing Centers have a website which explains in detail what a student can expect by coming to the Writing Center.

Conclusions
The new policy that was enacted earlier this semester seemed to be beneficial to the students and the tutors. The students valued the fact that we cared about their feedback and the tutors appreciated receiving feedback from students. The time allotted to this project prevented any comparisons between the Online Writing Lab run by Dr. Kathleen Hunzer and the University of Wisconsin River Falls Writing Center. By comparing what demographic of students these centers provide service for, we could possibly research into whether combining both centers into one organization would benefit the student body at the University of Wisconsin River Falls.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Suggestions for Further Research

After completing this report, I have discovered three things that, upon further research, would benefit the development and success of the goal to improve the policies in the Writing Center. Please note that these sections are numbered, but they are not ranked in order of importance or preference. 1. Very little research was done in assessing whether English as a Second Language (ESL) students benefit from the Writing Center or the ESL department in the Academic Success Center. Researching this aspect would ensure that ESL students have a place they can go which can cater to their unique writing needs. 2. After this project was complete, it was brought to my attention that the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) has published a document detailing ten standards that should students in English classrooms should hope to achieve upon completion of the class or their degree. One standard says, Students whose first language is not English make use of their first language to develop competency in the English language arts and to develop understanding of content across the curriculum (www.ncte.org). Perhaps Dr. Robyn Tiedeman, could assist the tutors Since the Writing Center is an extension of the classroom, I think all of these standards should be researched and taken into consideration when developing any future policies in the Writing Center. 3. The solution to begin some form of assessment or evaluation for students and tutors has been examined by people from Michigan State University. Presenters, Hiep Chau and Whitney Orth, for the East Central Writing Center Association discusses methods very similar to the policy I suggested. The description of their presentation states: In response to the calls for moving beyond more traditional forms of evaluation (Bell, 2000) and providing the proof of writing center effects (Lerner, 2003), we have begun to develop a systematic assessment plan in which an initial attempt is constructing an observation form to measure how effective a writing consultant is in one-on-one consultations (writing.msu.edu). Further research should focus on the policies in other Writing Centers and not just in the UW System. This would determine whether the policies that other colleges enacted could be implemented her at the University of Wisconsin River Falls as well.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Appendix A
This is the survey sheet that was used to collect data from the students who visited the writing center to determine the overall satisfaction of their tutor and the Writing Center services. Tutors Name:______________________________ Please take the time to fill out this anonymous brief exit survey. Doing so will ensure that the Writing Center tutors improve as educators. (1 = Very good, 2 = Fair, 3 = OK, 4 = Bad, 5 = Horrible)

Works Cited 1. How well do you think the session went today?
Bell, James H. "Research Report: Better Writers: Writing Center Tutoring and the Revision of Rough Drafts." Journal of College Reading and Learning33.1 (2002): 5-20. 1 Education 2 Full Text.3Web. 20 Oct. 4 2011. 5 Drennen, Angela. Personal Interview. 19 Oct. 2011.
2. How confident you feelInterview. about starting/working on your paper? Hunzer, Kathleen.do Personal 19 Oct. 2011. 1 Center Practice." 2 3 House 71.2 4 (1997): 106. 5 Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Clearing

Law, Joe, and Christina Murphy. "Formative Assessment and the Paradigms of Writing Web. 16 Oct. 2011.

Ley, Jared. Personal Interview. 19 Oct. 2011. Is there anything your tutor could improve upon? This survey is anonymous.
______________________________________________________________________________ Parisi, Hope, and Janine Graziano-King. "Integrating Best Practices: Learning ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Communities and 39. Education

the Writing Center." Community College Enterprise 17.1 (2011): 23Research Complete. EBSCO. Web. 20 Oct. 2011.

Thonus, Terese. "What Are the Differences?: Tutor Interactions with First and Secondlanguage Writers." Journal of Second Language Writing 13.3 Sep 2004. 227-42. ______________________________________________________________________________ ScienceDirect. Web. 20 Oct. 2011.
______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Trenholm, Shiloh. Personal Interview. 17 Oct. 2011. Wenda, Kaitlin. Personal Interview. 18 Oct. 2011.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Appendix B
This survey was used to collect data from the Writing Center tutors regarding the overall feelings about working in the Writing Center and whether the policies I planned to enact would be received favorably.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

Works Cited Chow, Heip and Whitney Orth. Standards in Writing Center Assessment: Reliability and Validity of a Consultant Observation Instrument." Michigan State University. Writing Center, East Lansing MI, 448824. April 2010. Drennen, Angela. Personal Interview. 19 Oct. 2011. Hunzer, Kathleen. Personal Interview. 19 Oct. 2011. Ley, Jared. Personal Interview. 19 Oct. 2011. NCTE/IRA Standards for the English Language Arts. <www.ncte.org/standards.> Aug. 2010. Web. 1 Dec. 2011. Trenholm, Shiloh. Personal Interview. 17 Oct. 2011. Wenda, Kaitlin. Personal Interview. 18 Oct. 2011.

Ashley Dettloff

5 December 2011

10