California State University Graduation Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR)

Course Criteria & Rationale

Academic Policies Committee (APC) and

Committee on Written English Proficiency (CWEP)

April 9, 2008

In its Spring 2007 revision to the University Policy on Written English Proficiency (S07-14), the Academic Senate directed the University Committee on Written English Proficiency (CWEP) to begin to develop criteria for writing-intensive courses in the disciplines proposed to fulfill the California State University Graduation Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR), currently satisfied by the Junior English Proficiency Essay Test (JEPET)/English (ENG) 414/ENG 410/411. As part of the process, CWEP, whose voting membership includes representatives from every College, was asked to organize a Writing Colloquium, the purpose of which was to bring together faculty from across campus to formulate criteria. Departments were asked to send faculty with an interest in writing to the Writing Colloquium, which took place on Wednesday, January 23^rd, 2008.

Led by our incoming Director of Writing Across the Curriculum/Writing in the Disciplines (WAC/WID), Dr. Mary Soliday, the Writing Colloquium was attended by 84 faculty members, representing 47 departments across campus. After an introductory discussion, the participants broke into smaller groups by college and, using models of criteria from other universities and national standards, worked toward developing criteria specific to San Francisco State University (SFSU) in the following areas:

1) Number of pages/words required

2) How writing will affect the final grade

3) Revision of assignments

4) Types of assignments

5) In-class attention to writing

In addition, each group responded to an open-ended question about “where we go from here” with the Writing in the Disciplines program.

Additional Criteria (new # 1, # 7, and # 8): The new first criterion, class size, was added by CWEP during discussions from March-April, 2008, because, while it was not a topic of the Writing Colloquium, the issue of class size was of concern to many of the Writing Colloquium participants (“Analysis of faculty responses to third prompt, 1-23-08 Writing Colloquium,” compiled by Dr. Mary Soliday, p. 3). In early April 2008, the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate suggested adding the seventh criterion regarding number of units required for a GWAR Course, and, based on discussions at CWEP and APC, the eighth criterion regarding the placement of GWAR courses within majors.

Following the Writing Colloquium, the Committee on Written English Proficiency (CWEP) collated the information from the breakout groups and shared this and other relevant information with the Academic Policies Committee (APC) over several meetings, to come up with the proposed criteria now being presented to the Academic Senate. In the following table, APC presents eight criteria for Senate approval, followed by the rationale developed by CWEP and supported by APC.

Criteria	Criteria Language	Rationale
1. Class Size	Courses satisfying the GWAR should have an enrollment of 20 students or fewer.	In a document entitled “Statement on Class Size and Teacher Workload:  College,” the College Section of the National Council of Teachers of English endorses the following standard: No more than 20 students should be permitted in any writing class. Ideally, classes should be limited to 15. Students cannot learn to write without writing. In sections larger than 20, teachers cannot possibly give student writing the immediate and individual response necessary for growth and improvement. Also, in a report from the CSU Chancellor’s Office entitled, “A Review of the California State University Graduate Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR) in 2002,” the writers offer the following recommendation: Recommendation #6: So that students can have effective individualized instruction in GWAR courses, course section enrollments should be capped at 20. At the colloquium, faculty from the disciplines suggested class sizes ranging from 15-30 as being appropriate; in consideration of national and CSU recommendations, CWEP recommends 20. Some departments, such as English and History, currently run upper-division writing-intensive courses with enrollments of 20; other departments will need to offer more sections to bring their enrollment down to 20.
2. Number of Pages/ Words	The overall assignments for the course will include a minimum of 15 pages, meaning the equivalent of 4000 words, of formal writing that demonstrates upper-division written English proficiency within the given discipline.	This criterion is based on the premise that students’ writing will improve if they write regularly, and frequently, across the semester. As quantity of writing can be measured by words or pages, CWEP includes both a minimum number of pages and a number of words to which that number of pages approximately corresponds. The amount of writing may include both informal and formal writing. CWEP defines informal writing as that done for the purposes of learning, understanding, responding to a prompt, or remembering, or for some other purpose. It is not necessarily polished and may or may not be graded. Formal writing is defined as writing that is turned in for a grade, that is polished, and that is sometimes revised after being peer- or faculty- reviewed. There are other possibilities between these two categories, e.g., in-class examinations or papers that are expected to meet the standard of writing for the discipline but that are not revised.
3. How Writing Will Affect the Final Grade	At least 60% of the grade in GWAR courses is based on written assignments that are evaluated for both content and quality of writing.	Many WAC/WID programs across the country stipulate that grades in a writing-intensive course will be based on writing done in the course, and that writing will make up a “substantial” portion of the final grade. Since SFSU’s GWAR courses are intended to satisfy the CSU Graduation Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR), it makes sense that a substantial portion of the grade be based on discipline-based writing done for the class. This means that significant attention will be paid to content. In “Ways of Knowing, Doing, and Writing in the Disciplines,” Michael Carter points out that “writing in the disciplines is founded on an integrative relationship between writing and knowing . . . a specialized conception of disciplinary knowledge is integrated with a specialized conception of writing.” Since learning outcomes will be defined by disciplinary faculty, and those outcomes will be linked to particular forms of writing in the course, it is not only impractical but in fact impossible to separate content and form. Grades given for writing assignments will be based on an evaluation of the success of the piece of writing as a whole, including the content. Of the five colleges that came to a decision on how writing should affect the final grade, all recommended at least 50%. APC increased this percentage to 60% based on the belief that students should not be able to pass courses satisfying the GWAR without passing the discipline-based writing components of such courses.
4. Revision	GWAR courses’ assignments must include substantive revision of at least one major, graded assignment in response to feedback.	WAC guidelines suggest that students “improve their writing and their grasp of course material if they write regularly and receive feedback on their writing early in a term.” The term 'revision' refers to changing content and structure not to correcting surface-level errors. CWEP recognizes that feedback can be provided in a variety of ways, including faculty feedback and peer review. Overall, the Writing Colloquium breakout groups agreed that the GWAR courses in the disciplines should include at least one revised writing assignment, with detailed feedback on a first draft and subsequent revision, so that students have the opportunity to develop and improve.

5. Types of Assign-ments.	GWAR courses should include a variety of writing assignments that are distributed throughout the semester, rather than concentrated at the end.	Faculty at the Writing Colloquium suggested the following kinds of assignments for GWAR courses, some of which overlap: 1) Writing students will produce in their careers using standards appropriate to the discipline; 2) Tasks that require analytical or critical thinking central to the discipline; 3) Multiple, staged assignments that build on each other; 3) In-class writing; 4) Out-of-class writing; 5) Informal writing-to-learn tasks that are not necessarily graded; and 6) Formal, graded assignments that are revised based on faculty or peer feedback. This criterion is intended to build in sustained attention to writing throughout the semester, not just at the end, when students have been conventionally expected to produce a term paper. The rationale is that continuous exposure to writing throughout the semester in a variety of assignments supports the integrated learning of course content and writing.
6. In-class Attention to Writing	GWAR course syllabi should reflect significant class time devoted to instruction in writing within the given discipline.	Faculty in the disciplines agreed that class time should be devoted to discussing and teaching writing within the discipline. Most often, faculty suggested that such in-class attention would take the form of 1) providing and discussing models and examples of good writing within the discipline; 2) discussing or reading successful student papers aloud; 3) discussing the uses of writing in the particular discipline; 4) using low-stakes, informal in-class writing to stimulate class discussion and 5) organizing peer review sessions in class. Taking the time to discuss writing within the discipline in the classroom brings students into the particular disciplinary community of writers and contributes to their growth as practitioners of their discipline. Moreover, such attention to writing in the classroom is supported by the National Council of Teachers of English, which asserts that “writing has a complex relationship to talk,” and that “literate practices are embedded in complicated social relationships,” in the classroom and in the workplace (“NCTE Beliefs about the Teaching of Writing”).
7. Number of Units	GWAR courses should be at least 3 units.	These courses are expected to have a significant disciplinary content and a strong writing focus; they should be at least 3 units because of the significant role writing plays in the education of SFSU students.
8. Location of GWAR Courses	GWAR courses should be required within all majors.	The GWAR Course will be a key upper-division introduction to the major as it focuses on the development of discipline-specific language and structures of discourse.

References

Carter, Michael. “Ways of Knowing, Doing, and Writing in the Disciplines.” College Composition and Communication 58:3, February 2007.

CSU GWAR Review Committee. “A Review of the CSU Graduation Writing Assessment Requirement (GWAR) in 2002.” California State University Chancellor’s Office, http://www.calstate.edu/AcadAff/GWAR_review_2002.shtml

National Council of Teachers of English. “Statement on Class Size and Teacher Workload:  College.” http://www.ncte.org/about/over/positions/level/coll/107620.htm

Writing Study Group of the NCTE Executive Committee. “NCTE Beliefs about the Teaching of Writing.” http://www.ncte.org/about/over/positions/level/coll/118876.htm