Category: CFP

Reclaiming Accountability:

Using the Work of Re/Accreditation to Improve Writing Programs

Edited by Wendy Sharer, William Banks, Tracy Ann Morse, and Michelle F. Eble

In an era of increased public scrutiny and accountability, faculty and administrators at colleges and universities often shudder when they hear the word “accreditation.”  For many, implementing, tracking, and sustaining large-scale assessment of student learning for accreditation or reaccreditation purposes are daunting and joyless, but necessary, tasks. Yet, within the accreditation cycle, writing program administrators (WPAs) across the country have found the impetus for substantial, long-term change in composition and WAC programs. WPAs, in fact, are in a unique position to lead the development of a culture of assessment on their campuses and, through their efforts, to change campus understandings of and approaches to writing instruction in ways that have not been possible since the birth of the WAC movement. For example, as a condition for reaccreditation, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) requires institutions to design, implement, and assess a Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP), a university-wide, long-term (5 year) program aimed at improving some aspect of student learning. Many SACS-accredited schools have used the QEP to advance and improve writing instruction at their institutions because writing is central to endeavors across campus.

The editors of this proposed collection are faculty at a large, regional state university in the Southeast who chose to use reaccreditation as an opportunity, in a time of economic scarcity, to garner institutional and financial support for significant revisions to their composition and WAC programs. We seek to build a collection that will help faculty use accreditation to gain the kinds of benefits that we have witnessed, both at our own institution and through our studies of accreditation-related initiatives at other schools around the country.

More specifically, we hope to bring together a series of critical case studies of writing programs that have planned, implemented, and/or assessed the impact of large-scale, accreditation-supported initiatives. In addition to providing examples of how others in the profession might approach such work, the book will illustrate how faculty can use accreditation to cultivate campus-wide discussions of writing and to better meet local student learning needs.

We envision that the collection will be divided into three sections that correspond to the key stages of writing program enhancement projects: Development, Implementation, and Improvement.

Possible questions addressed in these sections include:

• How have faculty from different areas of the country used accreditation / reaccreditation to cultivate campus-wide support for writing program development and change?
• What strategies have WPAs used to engage faculty from across the university in productive discussion about changes to existing writing programs?
• What kinds of large-scale changes to writing programs have WPAs undertaken in response to accreditation processes? Why? What theories inform these university-wide plans?
• How have writing centers been part of accreditation-driven institutional change?
• How can university-wide conversations help faculty across the institution move from the notion of remediation and inoculation in first-year writing courses to focusing on improving writing throughout the college experience?
• What challenges—financial, curricular, administrative, etc.—do WPAs face in their efforts to develop and implement accreditation-related changes to composition and/or WAC programs?
• How can WPAs increase faculty buy-in for large-scale changes?
• What kinds of assessments have faculty used to measure the impact of the changes they have implemented in support of accreditation efforts? And what alterations have been made to improvement plans as a result of these assessments?
• How might the fields of composition studies and writing program administration contribute to WPAs efforts to improve writing instruction through the accreditation process?
• What have faculty learned about the processes of programmatic change through their work with accreditation? How are conversations about accreditation reshaping the field?

Submission Guidelines

We welcome proposals for case studies and critical essays, addressing successful implementations as well as challenges, that speak to the field’s role in re/accreditation. Please send an abstract of no more than 500 words and a short bio of approximately 150 words by October 1, 2012 to Dr. Wendy Sharer (sharerw@ecu.edu).

The Challenges of WPA Work in the 21st Century

This session seeks to bring to the fore the most pressing issues of WPA work. Possible questions to be addressed by participants in this roundtable include, what are the current and most important challenges of doing WPA work? How should we respond to those challenges? How have facets of WPA work changed, declined, or improved within the past five years? What factors have contributed to changes in WPA work? Abstracts that address these questions or issues of ESL, technology, professional development, adjunct labor, graduate student development, etc. will be considered. We seek proposals that identify and address current issues affecting writing program administrators in the south Atlantic region of the country. Proposals from current WPAs are encouraged, but instructors of all ranks and all levels of experience are welcome to submit.

By July 1, 2012, please direct brief abstracts of approximately 250 words to Anthony Atkins, University of North Carolina Wilmington, at atkinsa@uncw.edu.

Making the Most of the QEP: Building Stronger Programs through the Accreditation Process

The Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP), a requirement of SACS accreditation, involves a five-year set of assessable initiatives aimed at improving some area of student learning. Because writing is so frequently identified as an area of student learning that needs improvement, and because writing often serves as a medium through which to measure and assess student learning, many WPAs and writing instructors have become heavily involved with the QEP on their campuses. This session seeks to bring together writing program personnel who have worked on a QEP to share insights about the various stages of the QEP process. Questions participants might address include the following: What are the advantages and/or disadvantages of a writing-focused QEP? What can a WPA do to raise administrative and campus-wide support for a writing-focused QEP? What are some common hurdles encountered in implementing a writing-focused QEP? What methods of assessment can be used to determine and document the impact of QEP initiatives that focus on improving student writing? In what ways can a composition and/or WAC program contribute to and benefit from a QEP that focuses on a topic other than, but closely related to, writing (i.e., critical thinking, global awareness, civic participation, etc.)?

By July 1, 2012, please direct brief abstracts of approximately 250 words to Wendy Sharer, East Carolina University, at sharerw@ecu.edu.

CAROLINAS WRITING PROGRAM ADMINISTRATORS, SESSION III

Alignments and Transitions: Preparing High School Students for Freshman Composition

Applebee and Langer’s snapshot of secondary writing instruction (2011) notes comparatively slight use of “evidence-based practices” in actual high school classroom writing instruction. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and similar nationally normed assessments also indicate that in high school settings, even with the availability of new technologies for writing and research, writing instruction typically consists largely of English teachers presenting a “typical assignment” to be completed in class, consisting of a few sentences setting out a pre-digested topic with expectations of a page or less to be graded. Thus many students, especially first-generation college attenders, are not prepared for the rigor of postsecondary education. When high school writing is more carefully aligned with college-level expectations, entering freshmen are more prepared and more likely to succeed in the college writing classroom. This panel will focus on local and state initiatives designed to increase articulation between the high school and college setting, such as the South Carolina Course Alignment Project. This call for proposal asks for panelists who have collaborated formally with articulation projects to examine how writing administrators and FYC instructors have collaborated intentionally with high school teachers to foster writing instruction that moves beyond formulaic testing. How can administrators reach out to secondary teachers? How can we better coordinate and align expectations for college-bound students during their secondary years? How can we better communicate expectations for regional campus writing programs?

By July 1, 2012, please direct brief abstracts of approximately 250 words to Lynne Rhodes, University of South Carolina Aiken, at lynner@usca.edu.

A “NON-PLACE” TO VISIT:

Exploring the Employment Practices and Working Conditions that Affect Writing Instructors

As we celebrate the 25^th anniversary of the Wyoming Resolution and English Departments and writing programs continue to face challenging budget issues, there has been a recent groundswell of public discussion regarding contingent labor. The March 2011 issue of College English, for example, revisits the Wyoming Resolution and includes a statement from the NCTE College Section Working Group on the Status and Working Conditions of Contingent Faculty. Then in June 2011, the MLA Committee on Contingent Labor in the Profession issued its Professional Employment Practices for Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Members: Recommendations and Evaluative Questions. And currently, Open Words is calling for papers for its “Special Issue on Contingent Labor and Educational Access.” In their article in the aforementioned issue of College English, Lisa Meloncon and Peter England discuss how the department can be a “non-place” for instructors who feel disconnected from that department. The North Carolina Symposium on Teaching Writing is interested in exploring the conditions under which writing instructors currently work as well as facilitating discussion about how instructors and departments can connect–or reconnect. Symposium organizers welcome proposals for panels and papers on a variety of topics; those addressing any of the above concerns will be given special consideration.

Continue reading CFP: The 4th Annual North Carolina Symposium on Teaching Writing; February 10-12, 2012