1. Advanced Writing Requirement
First developed in a subcommittee and then reviewed extensively by the entire General Education committee, the faculty who have participated in developing and writing the Advanced Writing Requirement are:
William Ashbaugh, Thomas Beal, Mary Lyn Benson, Suzanne Black, Gwen Crane, , David Fieni, Hugh Gallagher, Sallie Han, Roger Hecht, Matthew Hendley, Andrew Kahl,, Zanna McKay, Eileen Morgan-Zayachek, Chuck Maples, Rhea Nowak, James Ruffo, Elizabeth Seale, Renee Walker, Bianca Tredennick
Drafts were sent to departments for feed back in December of 2016 and February of 2017.
We are currently in the process of finalizing this proposal

2. Advanced Writing Requirement (AWR) Criteria: Revised 02/27/2017
Drafted by the Working Group on Advanced Writing, a sub-set of the General Education Committee, and revised in Full Committee
Rationale:
To fulfill the responsibility given to the General Education Committee by the Senate in Resolution to develop criteria for reviewing courses that would provide a second level writing experience required for graduation.
To build upon the basic writing competency offered by COMP 100 (BC3)
To ensure that all graduating SUNY Oneonta students, including transfer students, have dedicated training in advanced writing
To respond to the 2015 ACT Student Opinion Survey’s findings that SUNY Oneonta was in the upper rankings of frequency writing assignments but ranked 11th out of 12 comparable schools in supporting development of writing skills
To better position SUNY Oneonta graduates for employment. A 2008 Association of American Colleges and Universities Study revealed that writing was one of five areas in which employers felt applicants needed more skill.
Be it resolved that: That all students seeking a bachelor’s degree from SUNY Oneonta must successfully complete a course approved by the college to fulfill the Advanced Writing Requirement (AWR) before graduation.

3. Primary Course Criteria:
Students who complete courses that receive the AWR designation will
receive support in further developing expository, technical, professional, argumentative or research writing skills introduced in COMP 100 and in exploring advanced modes and styles of writing
and/or
receive support in developing discipline-specific writing skills.

4. Additional Course Criteria:
To distinguish between courses that qualify as AWR courses and those that include writing assignments only as a means of assessing students, AWR courses must show that, in addition to the general objectives above, students will
receive explicit instruction in writing. This might include such things as how to write a thesis, how to structure an essay, how to incorporate source material or evidence, how to analyze source material, how to employ the academic voice and discourse appropriate for the discipline, or how to use grammar and mechanics to achieve clear communication.
revise their work in response to instructor and (if desired by the professor) peer feedback. The revision component does not require professors to collect and comment on complete drafts (though they may). Thesis workshops or collection of outlines, bibliographies, or partial drafts (for example) are considerably more time-efficient for professors, while remaining of great benefit to students.
2. Completion of the BC3 General Education Requirement will be a pre-requisite for any AWR course.

5. Be it further resolved:
That upon approval of this resolution, all courses previously approved for the WS2 Gen Ed attribute would temporarily qualify as AWR courses with a timeline and set of procedures developed to guide submission of courses for permanent AWR designation
That AWR courses must have low caps in order to facilitate writing instruction (no more than 20 students/section recommended).

6. Recommendations:
That since the AWR is designed to help students develop writing skills that will support them throughout their college studies, it is recommended that the AWR be taken as early as possible in the student’s undergraduate career.
That for the above reasons, senior seminars and other capstone courses are unlikely to be appropriate for AWR designation
That the administration should support faculty who choose to take part in the AWR through faculty development to create meaningful and effective strategies for integrating writing instruction into their courses
That the Faculty Center, CADE, and some online tutorials be sufficiently funded to become useful supports in the AWR initiative
That a simple process be developed by which AWR instructors might refer students at-risk in writing skills to CADE for support (dependent on CADE’s resource availability)
That upon completion of the initial “review of existing [WS2] courses, as delineated in Senate Resolution , responsibility for development, maintenance, oversight, and assessment of the AWR become the charge of a faculty body dedicated to that purpose