Wac Writing Survey Fall 2012 Report

WAC WRITING SURVEY FALL 2012 REPORT

I. Introduction/ Rationale

In December of 2012, the Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) program at Appalachian State University conducted its third survey of students in the Writing in the Discipline (WID) classes and in English 2001, Introduction to WAC, to get feedback pertaining to their attitudes about how well they are being prepared for writing in their majors, and to find out how they feel about themselves as writers. WAC’s main goal is to offer faculty development to support the vertical writing curriculum in order to help students write better while in college and to prepare them for the writing they will do outside academia. This survey helps WAC strengthen faculty development for the English 2001 course, which is students’ introduction to writing in their disciplines.

II. Methods

WAC consultant Dennis Bohr developed the original survey with help from the other

WAC consultants (Sherry Alusow Hart, Elizabeth West, Travis Rountree and Erin Zimmerman) and Georgia Rhoades, Director of WAC. The questions were divided into questions about WAC and English 2001 and general questions about writing. The survey was completed on ASU’s Select Survey instrument, and Bohr went through IRB training to get approval for the survey. (Graphics were supplied by WAC research assistant Victoria Lozano.)

The survey was sent to teachers of all Writing in the Disciplines courses and all English 2001 teachers, with a link for the students to access and complete the survey. The survey was purely voluntary and anonymous. Teachers were free to pass on the link to the survey or ignore it entirely, while students had the option of taking the survey or not.

III. Results

Seventy-nine students took the December 2012 survey, down significantly from the previous semester when 172 students completed it. While the numbers of participants was down, more upper-level students took the survey: in Fall 2011, the majority of students were sophomores (49%) with 40% identifying themselves as juniors or seniors; in Spring 2012, 60% of participants were sophomores, with17% juniors and 16% seniors; and in Fall 2012, 33% of respondents were sophomores, 38% were juniors, and 20% were seniors, the first time that more juniors took the survey than any other class.

There were twenty different majors taking the survey, with the highest concentration being Psychology majors (17), followed closely by people in Health, Leisure and Exercise Science (16). (People who claimed Health Promotion as a major were also included in this latter group.) Education majors were the third highest number (7) while they were predominant major in past surveys. Sixty-seven percent of survey respondents had taken English 1000 at ASU, 70% had taken English 2001, and 20% had taken a WID course. The latter number is an increase in the number of people who have taken a WID course.

In December 2012, 78% said that writing is important to their major, which has been consistent with the previous two surveys (79% in Fall 2011, 78% in Spring 2012). Similar consistency applies to the question “Has English 2001 prepared you for writing in your major?” with a slight decrease each semester of the survey (from 76% in Fall 2011 to 70% in Spring 2012 and 67% in the latest survey). (See chart 1.)

The question, “What was most helpful about English 2001?” has produced similar results as earlier surveys:the most helpful element about 2001 was “further practice with writing” (52% in Fall 2011 to 57% in Spring 2012 and 59% in Fall 2012). The number 2 choice was teacher feedback on papers in Fall 2011 (45%) and Spring 2012 (50%), but in Fall 2012, teacher feedback fell to 42% while “Developing an awareness of different documentation styles” was the second choice (46%). Teacher feedback was third in the latest survey along with “Peer Feedback” (also 42%), closely followed by “Learning how to rhetorically analyze a text” and “Becoming aware of different writing conventions for different disciplines” (both at 41%). Oddly enough, “Conferences with teacher” fell from the third choice in Spring 2012 (43%) to second-to-last on the list of what was helpful at 25%. (See chart 2.)

Students are becoming more aware of the Vertical Writing Model at ASU. In Fall 2011, the question was “Are you familiar with the Vertical Writing Model?” and only 14% responded yes. In Spring 2012, we added an explanation to the question, since we thought that students might be aware of the program but not know its name: “Are you aware that as part of the new Gen Ed requirements, you are expected to take a third-year writing course and a capstone course in the major (referred to as the Vertical Writing Model)?” In Spring 2012, 56% answered in the affirmative, and in Fall 2012, 61% did.

Students have consistently seen themselves as “good writers” (86%, 81%, and 87%) in the three semesters of the survey, with organizational skills (68%, 57%, and 67%) being the top category in the accompanying question, “What do you do well as a writer?” “I supply good detail” was the second choice in Fall 2011 (65%), but in Spring 2012 and in Fall 2012 the second choice was “I’m creative” (50% and 59% respectively).

The answer to “What helps you as a writer?” has been consistent in all three surveys as well: “Teacher feedback” on writing has been the top choice of all three, increasing each semester from 42% in Fall 2011 to 85% in Spring 2012 and 95% in Fall 2012. The second choice, “Clear, specific instructions,” also remained the same as the previous two surveys and also showed an increase in percentages (23%, 65%, and 75%). The third choice has once again fluctuated from “One-on-one conferences with teacher” in Fall 2011 (16%) to a tie between examples of good papers and conferences (56%) in Spring 2012, to peer feedback (58%) in Fall 2012, followed closely by examples of good papers (56%). (See chart 3.)

The top two responses for the next question, “What areas do you struggle with as a writer?” once again provided consistent responses across the semesters. The number one answer was “I procrastinate a lot” (67%, 59%, and 52%), and the second response, closely related to procrastination, was “I have problems getting started and writing conclusions” (51%, 48%, and 47%). (See chart 4.) Once again the third highest response has changed: in Fall 2011, 34% cited “I am not good at revising my work”; in Spring 2012, 29% said “I don’t like to write”; and in Fall 2012, 30% said they had problems with grammar and correctness.

As far as portfolios, only 10% (eight people) who took the survey said that they had not created a portfolio. This suggests that these eight people have not taken English 1000 or English 2001 at ASU, since both of those classes require a portfolio as a final product for the class. This number is the same percentage that had not created a portfolio for the Spring 2012 survey, though the total number of people was fourteen who had not created a portfolio. (The question was added to the Spring 2012 survey.) Fifty-six percent of the respondents on the latest survey felt that they improved as writers as a result of creating a portfolio, which is an improvement from 41% on the previous survey in Spring 2012. (See charts 5 and 6.) When asked about which statements they agree with about portfolios, the number one response was the same as the previous survey’s number one response: 53% (44% earlier) said that the portfolio was “an extra assignment at the end of the semester.” The majority of respondents also checked, in descending order, the following statements about portfolios:

• “They give me more time to polish a paper” (43% in Spring 2012, 52% in Fall 2012);
• “They allow me more time to revise my thoughts” (42%, 44%);
• “They allow me to improve my grades” (42% on each);
• “They allow me to showcase my best work” (39%, 38%);
• “I like being able to choose which papers I want graded” (38%, 37%);
• “They allow me to reflect on my writing and my progress in class” (34%, 38%);
• I like being able to see my progress across the semester (30%, 37%).

IV. Conclusions and Analysis

The Fall 2012 survey was WAC’s third survey, and we now have the responses of 377 students. While this is not a huge sample, we will continue to build on the results in upcoming semesters. Despite the relatively small sample, we can draw some general conclusions.

That more juniors are taking the survey than sophomores could mean that (a) English 2001 is a required course for entry into most majors and students are becoming more aware of this requirement; (b) more WID teachers are emphasizing that their students take the survey; or (c) fewer English 2001 teachers are encouraging their students to take the survey. WAC should probably allow more time for people to complete the survey to hopefully increase the numbers of people who will respond to the survey.

The number of students who have taken a WID course has gone up from 11% to 20%, which could be a direct correlation with English 2001 being required and more juniors taking the course. Perhaps teachers and advisors are explaining the writing courses better than before, or perhaps more professors are encouraging their students to take the survey.

While the slight decrease in whether 2001 has prepared students for writing in their majors is not a significant decrease in percentages (76% to 70% to 67%), it could suggest that English 2001 teachers work harder at making the course more relevant to students. It is also possible that since more juniors are taking the survey, they have already begun their WID classes and the 2001 class is a little late to preparethem for the WID classes. Perhaps a wider sample of respondents will reveal more possibilities.

One-on-one conferences with the teacher decreased somewhat in the newest survey (from 29% to 43% to 25%) in the question about what was helpful about 2001. This may be because teachers are doing more group conferences rather than individual conferences, and this may be due to the higher enrolment in writing classes. (Twenty students in a writing class is the MLA recommendation—with 15 suggested as ideal—while most English 1000 and 2001 composition classes at ASU now have 26 students.) It is reassuring that major components of the Introduction to WAC class (rhetorical analysis, developing an awareness of different documentation styles and different writing conventions for different disciplines) are seen as important to students. It is refreshing (and a bit surprising) that peer feedback is seen as so important to students. Writing teachers have employed peer feedback for years, but have been told by students that peer feedback is often “too nice” or not specific enough and thus not very helpful.

The question about the Vertical Writing Model—with an increase of people who are aware of it from14% to 56% to the present 61%—suggests that students are becoming more aware of the terminology of the WAC and Composition programs, another point of emphasis we hope to continue to develop.

“What helps you as a writer?” is one of the most important questions as it can lead writing instructors to the best practices that students value. “Teacher feedback on papers” is consistently the number one choice for this question, which is another good argument for keeping class sizes manageable, as the more students a professor has, the less time he/she can devote to each paper. The second choice—clear, specific instructions—can be valuable to all writing teachers across the university as they devise writing assignments.

At first look, when students see portfolios as “an extra assignments at the end of the semester,”this may be somewhat disheartening to teachers who implement and value portfolios, but portfolios are an extra assignment at the end of the semester, whether seen in a positive light or a negative one. The question probably needs to be revised to make it clear whether this is a negative aspect of portfolios or simply a statement of fact. However, most students see portfolios favorably (56%), andall of the other responses about portfolios are favorable and emphasize what composition teachers value about portfolio teaching. Portfolios allow students more time to polish papers, give them more time to revise their thoughts, improve students’ grades, allow students a choice of what they want to have evaluated, allow them toshowcase their best work, and allow them to reflect on theirprogress as writers. The main philosophy behind portfolios is that they train students to become metacognitive and to write the way most people write in the real world, with multiple drafts before reaching a final product. It is gratifying to see that Composition teachers are conveying the importance of these ideas to their students and that the students also see the value of portfolios.

A couple of comments on the survey illustrate what WAC and Composition would like students to gain: “I like not knowing my grades; it takes any pressure off and allows me to concentrate on the writing and the learning”; and “Having a good teacher makes a HUGE difference in a writing class. I have been so lucky to have had teachers that are very nice, understanding, helpful, clear, and knowledgeable about writing.” In addition, only small numbers of students expressed what many Composition teachers have worried about with portfolios, grades: The response “I'd rather have a grade on each paper during the semester” was selected by only 23% of students in Spring 2012 and only 19% in Fall 2012. Since revision is also an important component of portfolios, it was also heartening that only 6% said “I don't like to revise; I don't see the importance of revision” (down slightly from the 8% on the previous survey).

V. Action Plan

The immediate outcome of this survey report will be to present the data to Composition faculty so that we can continue to improve the teaching of English 2001 and make our students better writers and better prepared for writing in their WID classes. After that, the results will be posted on the WAC website.

WAC will edit the survey to clarify ambiguous responses, streamline the survey, and expand the response time in the upcoming survey to elicit a wider response. We also have plans to complement the survey with interviews of student volunteers who would be willing to discuss their responses and their views about what is and is not helpful about the teaching of writing at ASU.

1