[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-597762-105":59,"doc-detail-597762-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","the-cea-forum-summerfall-2010-a-bold-move-reframing-composition-through-assessment-design","THE CEA FORUM - Summer/Fall 2010 - A Bold Move: Reframing Composition through Assessment Design","","A university writing program turns assessment into a catalyst for institutional accreditation and instructional improvement. Beginning with an inadequate, heartfelt assessment approach, the Art Institute of Pittsburgh adopts quantitative, rubric-based evaluation for English Composition I using defined categories, then confronts faculty concerns about decontextualization and impersonality. Through consultation and continued experimentation, the department shifts toward qualitative, interactive portfolio assessment to deepen faculty discussion, mutual understanding of grading, and insight into complex teaching-and-writing processes.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-cea-forum-summerfall-2010-a-bold-move-reframing-composition-through-assessment-design/597762/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-cea-forum-summerfall-2010-a-bold-move-reframing-composition-through-assessment-design/597762.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"SANS","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":81},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What prompted the Art Institute of Pittsburgh to implement rigorous program assessment?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The decision was motivated by the promise of Middle States accreditation and the need to expand and evaluate general education and course practices after entering bachelor’s-degree programs.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Why did the team move from a qualitative portfolio model to quantitative rubric-based assessment?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The consultants and administration argued that a quantitative approach would better fit the initial accreditation process by producing statistical data.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What led AiP to pursue qualitative assessment instead of relying on rubrics?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Faculty felt rubric assessment was decontextualized and impersonal, and subsequent qualitative expertise encouraged an interactive portfolio approach that could support deeper discussion of grading and writing values.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},597762,1792904086,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":81,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},962090760505,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","THE CEA FORUM  \nSummer/Fall 2010  \nA CEA Forum Roundtable  \nA Bold Move: Reframing Composition through Assessment Design  \nJEFFREY CONDRAN  \nArt Institute of Pittsburgh  \nLike so many moments of significant change within organizations, the Art Institute of Pittsburgh’s decision to implement rigorous program assessment was motivated by the promise of a carrot: Middle States accreditation. A little over a decade ago the college, which had been primarily recognized as an associate degree-granting career/technical school, decided to expand into bachelor’s degrees, creating a need to radically expand its General Education department and to examine course offerings and teaching practices within its major programs. In the spring of 2006, this work entered into a critical phase when AiP became a candidate for regional accreditation. It was quickly revealed that our assessment practices up to that point were heartfelt, but woefully inadequate. Therefore, it was decided that we needed a little help.  \nThe college hired the noted assessment experts James Nichols and Karen Nichols (formerly of the University of Mississippi) to act as consultants. They are the authors of General Education Assessment For Improvement of Student Academic Achievement: Guidance for  \nAcademic Departments and Committees and The Departmental Guide and Record Book for  \nTHE CEA FORUM  \nSummer/Fall 2010  \nStudent Outcomes Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness, among others. While neither Nichols was a specialist in writing assessment, their wide range of successful consulting experiences were generally admired at AiP. As we began to plan our department’s approach to assessment, especially writing program assessment, my idea was to follow a model I’d been part of at LaRoche College where faculty shared student portfolios and used them as a point of discussion about problems in writing and the classroom and about pedagogical best practices. While this was not truly qualitative assessment, I felt this was an important and potentially viable alternative to quantitative, rubric-based assessment. However, when this model was proposed to the consultants, Jim Nichols ultimately rejected it. While Nichols could see the advantages of such an approach, it was argued that a quantitative model that would provide statistical data would be a better fit for AiP’s initial accreditation process. The model borrowed from LaRoche would have to wait until accreditation was more firmly established. While neither I nor the other English faculty enthusiastically supported this decision, we conceded and embarked upon a program of quantitative, rubric-based assessment.  \nThe focus of the quantitative assessment was our English Composition I course. Rubrics were generated that attempted to represent the holistic writing experience in six categories: Writing Process, Structure, Use of Sources, Use of Standard Rules of English Grammar, Understanding Reading and Writing as Interconnected Processes, and Use of Critical Thinking through Argument or Narrative. Deciding on these rubric categories and the attendant wording of each was a time-consuming and sometimes nettlesome process. The ideas and subsequent revisions of all faculty members, full and part-time, were considered. After months of debate  \nTHE CEA FORUM  \nSummer/Fall 2010  \nand multiple drafts, the rubric was approved by the faculty and particular rubric points such as“Writing as a Process” and “Reading and Writing as Interconnected Processes”were singled out for special examination, using the Nichols’ trademark “five column” method. Data were gathered and analyses written and discussed. However, as my colleagues mention here, the faculty found the process of quantitative assessment decontextualized and impersonal, despite all the work we had done to generate the rubrics. At about this time, the college was also in the process of opening a writing center and I had suggested my former colleague from La Roche, April Sikorski, to be i","cbCaimN4lMWFcCIj","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimN4lMWFcCIj","pdf",117867,"English","# A Bold Move: Reframing Composition through Assessment Design\n## Motivation: Accreditation and the need for rigorous assessment\n## From quantitative rubrics to faculty concerns\n## Developing a qualitative methodology\n## Qualitative assessment benefits for faculty collaboration","[{\"question\":\"What prompted the Art Institute of Pittsburgh to implement rigorous program assessment?\",\"answer\":\"The decision was motivated by the promise of Middle States accreditation and the need to expand and evaluate general education and course practices after entering bachelor’s-degree programs.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the team move from a qualitative portfolio model to quantitative rubric-based assessment?\",\"answer\":\"The consultants and administration argued that a quantitative approach would better fit the initial accreditation process by producing statistical data.\"},{\"question\":\"What led AiP to pursue qualitative assessment instead of relying on rubrics?\",\"answer\":\"Faculty felt rubric assessment was decontextualized and impersonal, and subsequent qualitative expertise encouraged an interactive portfolio approach that could support deeper discussion of grading and writing values.\"}]","THE CEA FORUM - Summer/Fall 2010 - A Bold Move: Reframing Composition through Assessment Design | PDF",1792085658,13]