Composition Forum 32 - Assessment as Living Documents of Program Identity and Institutional Goals: A Profile of Missouri University of Science and Technology’s Composition Program

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa

A detailed profile traces how Missouri University of Science and Technology’s composition program evolved after hiring its first writing program administrator, using evidence-based best practices despite limited program-specific evidence. New assessment methods include instructor feedback, student surveys, and skills tests, enabling standardization and tracking knowledge transfer. The narrative also shows how assessment activities strengthened curriculum cohesion, staff training, and aligned program goals with student needs in a predominantly STEM environment.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Composition Forum 32

Assessment as Living Documents of Program Identity and Institutional Goals: A Profile of Missouri University of Science and Technology’s Composition Program

Developing evidence-based curricula through assessment

University and department context (STEM majority, departmental needs)

Organic growth of assessment and staff involvement

Current Issue From the Editors Weblog Editorial Board Editorial Policy Submissions Archives Accessibility Search Composition Forum 32, Fall 2015 Assessment as Living Documents of Program Identity and Institutional Goals: A Profile of Missouri University of Science and Technology’s Composition Program Daniel Reardon and Alexander Wulff Abstract: In this profile we describe changes to the composition program at Missouri University of Science and Technology, prompted by the hiring of the university’s first writing program administrator (WPA) . We describe our efforts to implement evidence-based best practices in undergraduate writing courses in a context where very little program specific evidence was available. We also describe how challenges of effecting change at a university largely composed of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) students has meant that many of the changes have been framed by the spirit of Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) initiatives. Several new methods of assessment have been introduced to the program, including instructor feedback, student surveys, and skills tests. Allowing assessment to drive standardization has begun a process of measuring the transfer of student knowledge we believe other departments will find interesting. We close by outlining unresolved issues and ongoing challenges as the program moves forward. This profile chronicles the English and Technical Communication department’s efforts to unify the writing program at Missouri University of Science and Technology, grounded in an attempt to overhaul our Composition I and II courses. While our department was in a unique situation (because Missouri S&T had never hired a WPA and there was no preexisting, overarching structure for either Comp I or II), {1} we believe that using evidence-based practices to create this curricular structure allowed for a more united composition program. That is, assessment was not something that we began in anticipation of resisting outside “forces,” as is so often reported. While we knew that some of our data would help us make arguments for changes needing administrative approval down the line, we began to assess our students to make our program stronger. Our university has a long-established identity as an elite engineering university with a strong reputation as an affordable investment. This identity as rigorous and affordable certainly impacts some of our desire to create more empirical data about our students. Ranked seventh by U. S. News &World Report among the top 50 public colleges and universities, Missouri S&T offers 65 degree programs and 15 accredited undergraduate engineering programs (Institutional Profile, 2010) . In fact, as of the 2011 enrollment tallies, 5406 out of 7206, or 75%, of our students are engineering majors—a consistent majority that hasn’t changed in our university’s 142-year history. In contrast, the English and Technical Communication department is quite small—though there are a substantial number of exengineering students within the English majors’ ranks. In 2011, the mean ACT percentile for incoming first-year students was 27.8, a consistent score for nearly ten years ( New Freshmen ) . These numbers and this background reveal a hierarchy on campus. That hierarchy has helped us arrive at the need for more data, though less as a defensive gesture and more as a way of making sure we can speak the same language as our STEM colleagues. More importantly, the process of gathering data through assessments actually took on a life of its own, serving to foster a more cohesive curriculum and a more cohesive staff. Therefore, we believe that this profile extends Chris Gallagher’s claims about organic writing assessment made in his 2011 CCC article Being There: (Re)Making the Assessment Scene. There is no substitute for local development, Gallagher argues; “being there matters”(463) in the creation of assessment. As important as it is to reinforce

FAQs

What changes drove the Missouri S&T composition program profile?

The profile describes program changes prompted by the hiring of the university’s first writing program administrator (WPA). It focuses on implementing evidence-based best practices in undergraduate writing courses.

Which assessment methods were introduced in the composition program?

The program introduced instructor feedback, student surveys, and skills tests as new assessment methods to support program development and measurement.

How did assessment affect curriculum and staff development at Missouri S&T?

Assessment became a self-sustaining process that fostered a more cohesive curriculum and staff, improved staff training and involvement, and provided living documents for faculty unity and professional development.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa