There's always plenty to say, just never enough time to say it. That's not entirely true, but it's an easy colloquial excuse.
WRT 407 started last week. I love teaching this course. This year, the College of Engineering is up for ABET re-accreditation. The last time we went through the process, the ABET reviewers were thoroughly impressed with the embedded nature of the writing instruction in WRT 407. Yet as I review the list of materials I need to provide to the reviewers this time, I'm struck by the request for an assessment summary. I don't recall how I handled this the last go around -- or if it was even requested.
Writing assessment, and the range of emotional responses it generates, continues to be an interesting topic. To meet the ABET requirement, I'm considering focusing specifically on the prevalence of genre in WRT 407 instruction. When I peel away the onion skin, assessment in WRT 407 is conducted exclusively through a review of each student’s work with a range of engineering and technical genres. Students work with different genres in highly contextualized instructional spaces to expose the differences among document types, while reinforcing the many types of associated writing requirements and activities they will encounter as practicing professionals.
I've blathered about this before, but I'm coming back to it now as another means of validating the design and pedagogical strategy we've adopted for WRT 407.
There will certainly be more on this later. It's preoccupying too much of my time for it not to be a series of boring blog posts. But not that there's anything wrong with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment