1. Carol Ann Gittens, Gail Gradowski & Christa Bailey Santa Clara University WASC Academic Resource Conference Session D1 April 25, 2014

2.  Assess Core Competencies across the curriculum  Manageable assessment strategy  Leverage existing sources of evidence  Valid measurement across varied disciplines / courses / contexts

3.  Alignment of CTIL Core Competencies with existing learning goals and outcomes  Identifying performances  Rubric development  Setting performance standards

4.  Assignment or Learning Outcome  Holistic vs. Analytical  Scale: How Many Levels?  Exercise Info Literacy: Don’t reinvent the wheel!

5.  Reflection on expectations for student performance  Listing of needed skills and evidence of mastery  Grouping and Labeling dimensions and scale  Criteria with supporting explanation

6.  Already existing SLOs  CTW 1 & 2  Faculty Developed Performances

7. Critical Thinking & Writing 2 Objectives – Students will  2.1 Read and write with a critical point of view that demonstrates greater depth of thought and a more thorough understanding of the rhetorical situation than in CTW 1.  2.2 Write research-based essays that contain well-supported arguable theses and that demonstrate personal engagement and clear purpose.  2.3 Independently and deliberately locate, select, and appropriately use and cite evidence that is ample, credible, and smoothly integrated into an intellectually honest argument.  2.4 Analyze the rhetorical differences, both constraints and possibilities, of different modes of presentation.  2.5 Reflect more deeply than in CTW 1 upon the writing process as a mode of thinking and learning that can be generalized across range of writing and thinking tasks.

8.  Drawing upon existing IL rubric examples  Modification and Calibration

9.  Holistic rubric  Skills and Dispositions  Key features in each level  Break point(s)

10.  Score the sample paper #73 (Handout 1)  Use both the CT and the IL rubric (Handouts 2 & 5)  Work independently!  If time allows, compare and discussion your scores  Debrief

12.  Variability of assignment formats  Rubric not developed for a specific assignment  Not having assignment prompts  Necessary flexibility in the rubric language  Ambiguity of phrases in rubric  Scorers’ familiarity with course / assignment / texts  Insufficient training and calibration  Alignment of assignment with learning objectives

13.  Considerations – who are the students?  CT Performance Standards:  Normal distribution  Modal performance: Level 3  Average ≥ 3  IL Performance Standards:  100% Level 2 or higher  50% Level 3 or higher

14. CT Performance Standards: Normal distribution Modal performance: Level 3 Average ≥ 3

15. IL Performance Standards: 100% Level 2 or higher 50% Level 3 or higher

16. IL Performance Standards: 100% Level 2 or higher 50% Level 3 or higher

17.  Greater attention to particular components of Information Literacy  Assumptions about performance standards  Limitation of using CTW with STS / new Core  Rubric revisions  Findings require replication  LAUNCH OF PHASE 2

18.  Natural extension of CTIL project  Opportunity to refine rubrics  CTW and Advanced Writing  Faculty Developed Performances across disciplines!  ePortfolio initiative

19. Advanced Writing Objectives – Students will  1.1 Read and write with a critical point of view that depth of thought and is mindful of the rhetorical situation of a specific discipline.  1.2 Write essays that contain well-supported arguable theses and that demonstrate personal engagement and clear purpose.  1.3 Independently and deliberately locate, select, and appropriately use and cite evidence that is ample, credible, and smoothly integrated into an intellectually honest argument appropriate for a particular discipline.  1.4 Consciously understand their writing processes as modes of learning and intentionally manipulate those processes in response to diverse learning tasks.

20.  Rubric scoring – CTIL plus written communication  Core Competencies at additional points in the curriculum?  Faculty development in CTIL  Assignment design workshops