Members Present: J. Carter, N. Hinman, M. Medvetz, E.
Reamer
Members Excused/Absent: A. Harrison, V. Hedquist, C. Jacobson, A. McKeown, A.
Walker-Andrews
Ex-Officio Present: N. Mattina, D. Micus, K. Ryan
Chair Hinman called the meeting to order at 1:20 p.m. when a quorum was present.
Approval of the minutes was postponed.
Communications:
ECOS is still trying to find a replacement for Professor Justman.
The members from the English department will be late due to a departmental meeting.
Unfinished
Business:
The committee revisited the draft guidelines and made
several revisions. Camie will send out the latest draft so members can make
further recommendations at the next meeting.
Items pending are: the definition of a writing task, explanation of the
UDWPA, refinement of the upper-division writing course section, and further
discussion of faculty support.
New Business:
There was discussion regarding the rational behind ENEX 200
serving as a placement option and a writing course. Professor Ryan explained
that the Arts and Science Dean asked Composition to pilot a program of placing students
that scored higher on the placement exam in the second composition course
rather than ENEX 101 because there have been anecdotal reports of student
boredom. These students have been
performing well in the second composition course (now ENEX 200).
The Committee should consider how a second placement option and its
ramifications fit with
the recommended changes to the writing program. It is confusing to have the
course serve as both a writing course and placement option. There is also an issue with finding
instructors with the expertise to teach in the various areas (science,
business, social science). Some of the
courses have had low enrollment. It may
be that only one version of ENEX 200 is appropriate to be a placement
option. Do there are still some issues
that need to be worked through. Current catalog language gives students that
test out of ENEX 101 the freedom to choose their writing course. Although there
are relatively few students who test out of ENEX 101, the option should still
be available as an incentive. The changed language does not allow for testing
out and does not give the students a choice of writing course. Would these students fulfill the ENEX 101
requirement and a second writing course with ENEX 200? What are the criteria for placing students in
200?
The Committee agreed that catalog language would remain the same and not list
ENEX 200 as a placement option for now.
This issue will be revisited after the guidelines have been
finalized. In addition, Professor Ryan
is on a committee of the Board of Education working on guidelines for writing
proficiency. It will be beneficial to
consider the scope of how the various components fit within the program.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:00
p.m.