[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-598978-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-598978-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","cultivating-change-from-the-ground-up-developing-a-grassroots-programmatic-assessment","Cultivating Change from the Ground Up - Developing a Grassroots Programmatic Assessment","","To meet the needs and interests of primary stakeholders in a writing program, the article proposes a “grassroots” assessment model that engages instructors across ranks and students in developing, facilitating, and interpreting assessment results. Two assessment plans examine how students and instructors perceive curricular changes, connect those perceptions to individual findings, and evaluate lessons learned about stakeholder breadth. The study emphasizes value and challenges of inclusive assessment participation.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/cultivating-change-from-the-ground-up-developing-a-grassroots-programmatic-assessment/598978/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/cultivating-change-from-the-ground-up-developing-a-grassroots-programmatic-assessment/598978.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"jay","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":30},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What is the grassroots curricular assessment model proposed in the article?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"It is an assessment approach that involves instructors from all ranks together with their students in developing, facilitating, and interpreting assessment results, moving away from top-down assessment.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How do the authors handle stakeholder needs in programmatic assessment?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"They argue that assessments should align with the needs and interests of the primary stakeholders—teachers and students—rather than being driven mainly by institutional or accreditation time constraints.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What kinds of evidence do the two assessment plans examine?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"The plans measure students’ and instructors’ perceptions about the effectiveness of curricular approaches, using multiple snapshots to form a broader picture of program impact.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},598978,1792210844,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":30,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},3985747858866,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Current Issue  From the Editors  Weblog  Editorial Board  Editorial Policy  Submissions Archives  Accessibility  Search  \nComposition Forum 37, Fall 2017  \nCultivating Change from the Ground Up: Developing a Grassroots Programmatic Assessment  \nMaria Conti, Rachel LaMance, and Susan Miller-Cochran  \nAbstract: To address the needs and interests of primary stakeholders in a writing program, this article presentsa model of “grassroots” assessment that involves instructors from all ranks as well as students in the development, facilitation, and interpretation of assessment results. The authors describe two assessment plans that measured student and instructor perceptions about curricular changes, the individual results of those assessments, and the conclusions the authors came to about the importance and challenges of involving a range of stakeholders in assessment.  \n1. Introduction  \nSeventeen years ago, Joseph Harris urged Writing Program Administrators (WPAs) to involve faculty at all ranks in teaching the first-year course. We argue that not only should WPAs involve all faculty--non-tenure-track (NTT), graduate instructors, and tenure-track--in teaching, but those faculty should also be involved in developing, conducting, and interpreting assessments of those courses. Such involvement fosters “authentic assessment,” in the spirit of Daniel J. Royer and Roger Gilles, by avoiding a top-down model. And as Edward White, Norbert Elliot, and Irvin Peckham point out, when done well, this kind of assessment development can be a community-building enterprise.  \nProgrammatic assessment in writing programs is often governed by institutional processes, accreditation requirements, and administrative interests. Often assessments are mandated with specific time constraints and a quick turnaround in an effort to produce data that demonstrate a program’s effectiveness. Yet none of these exigencies arise from, and often do not even align with, the needs and interests of the primary stakeholders in the assessments: instructors and students. Instead, these exigencies often produce monolithic programmatic assessment approaches that are not always responsive to local contexts.  \nTo address the needs and interests of local stakeholders, we present an approach to curricular assessment that involves instructors from all ranks along with their students in the development, facilitation, and interpretation of assessment results. We call such an approach a “grassroots curricular assessment model,” and it presents a way to develop what Cindy Moore, Peggy O’Neill, and Brian Huot describe as “assessment cultures” that move away from the common top-down approach to assessment. Instead, a grassroots model moves toward fostering the kind of professional development that invites all teachers--including graduate teaching assistants and faculty of all ranks and tracks--to have a meaningful role in shaping the direction of a program. Ideally, such involvement also offers the kinds of opportunities Ann Penrose identified that include NTT faculty as professionals in program-wide conversations. Likewise, grassroots models include the voices of undergraduate student writers as essential partners in understanding the effectiveness and impact of curricular choices.  \nThe approach we propose does not solely focus on achievement of learning outcomes or direct assessment of student learning, although our broader assessment plan certainly involves such measures. Rather, the two examples we describe involve measuring students’ and instructors’ perceptions of the effectiveness of curricular approaches. Both assessment examples provide snapshots of what is happening in the program, and together, multiple snapshots provide a larger picture of the effectiveness of various curricular and pedagogical approaches in a writing program.  \nA grassroots approach to programmatic assessment responds to two recommendations made by the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CC","cbCaiiHCXSBpGTg0","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiiHCXSBpGTg0","pdf",70753,13,"English","# Introduction\n## Programmatic Context\n## Grassroots Curricular Assessment Model","[{\"question\":\"What is the grassroots curricular assessment model proposed in the article?\",\"answer\":\"It is an assessment approach that involves instructors from all ranks together with their students in developing, facilitating, and interpreting assessment results, moving away from top-down assessment.\"},{\"question\":\"How do the authors handle stakeholder needs in programmatic assessment?\",\"answer\":\"They argue that assessments should align with the needs and interests of the primary stakeholders—teachers and students—rather than being driven mainly by institutional or accreditation time constraints.\"},{\"question\":\"What kinds of evidence do the two assessment plans examine?\",\"answer\":\"The plans measure students’ and instructors’ perceptions about the effectiveness of curricular approaches, using multiple snapshots to form a broader picture of program impact.\"}]","Cultivating Change from the Ground Up - Developing a Grassroots Programmatic Assessment | PDF",1792087947,33]