SUNY GENESEO PROGRAM ASSESSMENT REPORT
FORM C: RESULTS
To complete this form, replace the text below each question with your own
text. Complete a separate form for each outcome assessed. Save the
completed form, making sure to include your four-letter program prefix
(e.g., Geog, Engl) and the word results in the filename. Deposit the file in the
Assessment InBox by navigating to \\files\inbox\admin and dragging the file
into the folder named “assess”. (Note that you cannot open the folder;
access is restricted.) If you are filing multiple forms, filenames cannot be
identical; distinguish filenames with numbers. Sample filename:
Geog_results_1.doc. Place ancillary documentation such as charts and
graphs in a separate file or files. Name these as appropriate, but again,
please include the program prefix. For help using InBoxes and OutBoxes,
consult CIT’s QuickGuide, In and Out Boxes at Geneseo.
PROGRAM: Critical Writing and Reading Core (INTD 105)
DEGREE LEVEL: 01
ASSESSMENT PERIOD COVERED: 2004-2005
DATE SUBMITTED: 27 September 2005
YOUR NAME AND POSITION: Celia Easton, Chair, Critical Writing
and Reading Core.
INTENDED EDUCATIONAL OUTCOME:
Students will demonstrate the ability to produce coherent texts within college-level forms.
What was your first means of assessment for this outcome?
Class sets of papers and their revisions were collected from each section of INTD 105
during the 2004-05 academic year. Papers were sampled from sections to represent
student writing across the program. Some sections failed to include revisions and were
not included in the sampling. In all, 79 different essays and their revisions were
assessed by teams of two readers, following the 2005 version of the SUNY General
Education Assessment Rubric (see attached rubric file) for production of coherent texts
and revision and improvement of texts.
To improve inter-rater reliability, most assessors gathered to review the rubric together
prior to scoring essays. Because it is proving increasingly difficult to recruit faculty
volunteers, some assessors worked independently, following written instructions from
the Chair of the Critical Writing and Reading Core Committee.
Scorers demonstrated fairly close agreement on student essays, but there is little room
for difference on a four-point scale. Our data are reported in two ways: averaged scores
for 79 essays and unaveraged scores (158—each paper read twice).
