Skip to main content

Faculty Resources: WR 121

Library Resources for Chemeketa faculty

Workgroup Members and Timeline

WR 121 Workgroup Members:

Donna Bernhisel (YVC), Sara Dennison, Matthew Hodgson, Karl Meiner (Woodburn), Jill Rupert (workgroup lead), Theresa Yancey, and Michele Burke

Timeline

  • Fall 2016- Winter 2017 =  Workgroup revises assignment and rubric
  • Winter 2017 = Workgroup distributes assignment and rubric. WR 121 instructors will be asked to complete one rubric per student bib and to complete an end-of-term survey about student performance on the annotated bib. Use of rubric and end-of-term survey are opt-in for Winter 2017.
  • Spring 2017 = Use of annotated bib, rubric, and survey are mandatory for Spring 2017 term 

WR 121 Common Assignment / Common Assessment. March 2017.

WR 121 ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ASSIGNMENT

I. First, identify the question you are exploring (sometimes called the question at issue). (You need state this question only once, at the head of your first page. It should apply to all your sources.) Your eventual claim or thesis statement will be the answer to this question.
 

II. Then, for at least FOUR sources, complete the following. One of your sources MUST be a scholarly source; the others can be serious popular sources. Most of your sources should be accessed through the library.
 

1. Citations

  • Write both a correct MLA and a correct APA citation (entries for a Works Cited page and a Reference list).

  • Remember that citations from databases are often not correct; they need to be checked against the most recent [MLA 8th edition and APA 6th edition] guidelines in The Chemeketa Handbook and modified to match the appropriate models.

2. Retrieval of Information Write one paragraph that includes discussion of the following:

  • The type of source (For example, is it a book, magazine article, newspaper article, website from a reputable organization, or an academic publisher? Is it a reference work, serious popular source, or peer-reviewed scholarly source? If it is a scholarly source, from which section/s of the source was the information found?)

  • Reasons it appears to be this type of source

  • How and where the source was located (For example, was it found through a library search, library database, or general internet search?)*
     

*For a book, note whether it is an eBook or print copy and cite accordingly. For a database source, give the name of the database. (NOTE: Gale PowerSearch is NOT a database name). For an Internet source, give the name of the website.
 

3. Quality of Information Write one paragraph that includes discussion of the following:

  • Authority and credentials of the author(s) 

  • Currency of the source

  • Reliability of information

  • Potential biases


4. Application of Information Based on reading each source, write two paragraphs that include the following:
      a. A brief summary of the information contained in the source that is useful to the specific research
          topic.
      b. An explanation of how the source’s information specifically relates to the research question.

 

III. Last, using the information you have gathered from annotating these sources, revise and narrow your original research question.

WR 121 Rubric for Annotated Bib. Instructors complete one rubric per student bib.

Department of Liberal Arts & Social Studies | English Program                    
WR 121 Assessment: Annotated Bibliography Assignment

Check One:

 

Yes

No

Comments

1. Does this AB use at least one scholarly source? Use the comment section to state the number of scholarly sources used.

     

2. In this AB, are sources other than the scholarly source serious popular sources?

     

3. Does this AB correctly and consistently use both required  documentation styles (MLA or APA)?

     


Evaluate:

 

Proficient =
meets assignment objectives (A or B)

Competent =
meets nearly all assignment objectives (C)

Emerging =
begins to meet assignment objectives (D)

Does Not Meet (F)

No Basis to Evaluate = did not attempt

Comments

Identifies and differentiates the kinds of sources used
(Wb, ILcde)*

           

Evaluates information and its source critically
(Wb, ILcde)*


 
           

Demonstrates understanding of how information from different sources might contribute to project and its argument
(Wbc, ILacde)*

           

Meets objectives of this assignment overall
(Wabc, ILabcdef)*

           

* Denotes State of Oregon AAOT Writing and Information Literacy Outcomes

WR 121 Research Expectations

In  WR 121, students practice navigating research landscapes where they encounter a variety of sources using the online library and other types of internet searching. Students learn how to distinguish between popular and scholarly sources, and how to choose credible sources to integrate into their own writing. While scholarly and peer reviewed journal articles are discussed, the focus is on choosing credible sources that compliment but do not overwhelm the student's voice. Students are encouraged to be very choosey about what they use in their own work, and they will practice integrating  source material with eloquence and integrity. All sources will be cited. 

Explore databases by choosing from the Database List or by doing a full Library Search to discover articles and eBooks. 

WR 121 Course Outcomes: Research and Documentation

  1. ​Use MLA style documentation and attribution (signal) phrases to integrate resource material into writing, including in-text citations and bibliography.
  2. Recognize APA style and be able to produce in-text citations and/or bibliographic entries using a writer’s handbook.
  3. Use library, databases and the Internet to obtain information and evidence, including the effective use of key word searches.
  4. Evaluate source materials for authority, currency, reliability and bias.

WR 121 Instructional Activities

Focus: Source Evaluation

Popular and Scholarly Activity

  • Students work in pairs or groups of three (no more than three)
  • Each group gets one popular periodical and one scholarly periodical
  • What subject do the two have in common? Which is the scholarly?
  • Each student has something to write with and something to write on
  • Each student keeps his/her own notes
  • Make a simple table and label one column "popular" and one column "scholarly"
  • Find an article in each (to use as a starting place)
  • Detective work...make observations and follow up by answering "why" questions
  • Take what you learn and move into the electronic environment

You might also like How to Evaluate Sources.

Instructions for WR 121 Instructors, March 2017

Dear WR 121 Instructors,

Earlier this term you received the revised mandatory Annotated Bibliography assignment from us. We are now sending the next part of that project, a rubric with which to assess that assignment. 

The attached “assessment rubric” will be required beginning Spring Term 2017. You will complete it for each student in your WR 121 classes, keep hard copies of each rubric (to submit to WR 121 Workgroup and use for future norming), and report the aggregated results through a Google form survey (linked here) at the end of the term. (You may remember the “drop-down” surveys we did last academic year to assess how many students met course outcomes. The Google form survey updates that tool to more closely assess the Annotated Bibliography). 
 

You will notice that this assessment rubric is a revised version of the rubric we used during our group norming session during the Fall 2016 Inservice. We have updated and defined the terms for evaluating specific aspects of each annotated bib. Completing this rubric, keeping the copies, and filling out the follow-up survey is mandatory for assessment purposes starting Spring 2017. If you choose, you may also use the rubric to grade your annotated bib assignments, but that is not required. We recognize that your grading scheme may differ from our program-wide assessment.
 

The WR 121 Workgroup will complete this rubric and the survey at the end of this term as a pilot. If you would like to join this endeavor, please let us know and we will help you opt in!

During our Fall 2017 Inservice meeting, we will discuss this assignment and examine the results of this assessment.

We welcome your feedback and questions.

Thanks,

The WR 121 Workgroup (Donna Bernhisel, Michele Burke, Sara Dennison, Matthew Hodgson, Karl Meiner, Jill Rupert, and Theresa Yancey)

Timeline:
Winter 2017: receive revised AB and assessment rubric; optional participation in assessment survey

Spring 2017 and after: mandatory AB assignment, assessment rubric, and survey

Fall 2017 Inservice: mandatory meeting on these endeavors

Attachments: 
Mandatory Annotated Bibliography Assignment
Mandatory AB Assessment Rubric
Link to WR 121 Annotated Bibliography Survey: https://goo.gl/forms/ciooXh80pTeRNGPG3

Liberal Arts & Social Science Department 
Chemeketa Community College 
Bldg 1/204 |(503)399-5184

WR 121 Workgroup Updates

Meeting Summaries, Notes, Minutes

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
March 6, 2017,
3:00-5:00 pm, Library 9/240, Writing 121 Workgroup Meeting

In attendance: Jill, Matthew, Sara, Donna, Theresa, Michele, (Matt B. joined 4:15ish)

Agenda:

  • Discussion of use of required text in WR 121 classes

  • Review and finalize WR 121 end-of-term survey

  • Next steps and communicating with WR 121 instructors

Meeting Minutes:

Discussion of use of required text in WR 121 classes
The WR 121 workgroup discussed concern around an instructor who does not use the required text. Group reviewed the required text policy and identified follow-up questions-

  • Does instructor know the required text is the Humble Argument?

  • If so, which parts of the text are troublesome? Feedback on the text is appreciated and encouraged.

  • Is instructor aware that the Humble Argument is relatively affordable?

Action Item: Jill will contact the instructor, review policy, and answer questions

Review and finalize WR  121 end-of-term survey
Theresa  revised the WR 121 end-of- term so that survey questions focus on the elements identified in the WR 121 Annotated Bib rubric.

Theresa displayed an online version of the revised survey on the 9/240 computers so the group could see updates immediately.  The group refined the survey with Theresa updating the draft in real time so group could suggest and approve revisions immediately. Significant changes were made in coding the questions, section headings, and wording for consistency. Group agrees on importance of including specific questions about why students fail, plagiarism, and library instruction.

       Action: Survey finalized

[Matt. B. joins meeting]

Next steps for communicating with WR 121 instructors
After approving the survey, the group agreed that Jill will draft the message to WR 121 instructors. The message will include the final rubric as an attachment, the annotated bib assignment as an attachment, and a link to the end-of-term survey (i.e., a link to the Google form), and instructions for use.

The message will describe the use of the rubric and survey:

  • The rubric will be used to assess the annotated bibs

  • The WR 121 group recommends that the instructor complete one rubric for each annotated bib  

  • The WR 121 group points out that completing one rubric per bib will make it easier for the  instructor to report class results on the end-of-term survey

  • Completing the end-of-term survey will be opt-in for Winter term 2017

  • Completing the end-of-term survey will be mandatory for Spring term 2017 and forward until further notice

The message to WR 121 instructors with the rubric, annotated bib assignment, and survey link should go to all WR 121 instructors in all locations, all modes (e.g., face-to-face at any campus or outreach center, online, evening and weekend, and College Credit Now).

The group agrees that use of the annotated bib, rubric, and end-of-term survey created in the meeting should move forward now and not be postponed while eLearn capability is explored and developed.

The group recognizes that having the rubric embedded in eLearn, perhaps as part of a grade book, will be helpful for gathering data. However, the group feels strongly that the Google Form version of the survey should be used now and updated with an eLearn version only after the eLearn version is available and tested.

The group agreed that Theresa would work with the Hub, perhaps with Mark, on an eLearn version of the survey. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
February 15, 2017 Update Meeting 

Present: Jill Rupert, Theresa Yancey, Sara Dennison, Matt Blankenship, Don Braise, Natalie Beach, and Michele Burke.
Meeting intent: Discuss goals and action on WR 121 assessment.

Notes From Michele Burke and Jill Rupert:

Don articulated the group's commitment to meaningful assessment that uncovers actionable opportunities for student centered instructional and program level improvements. He explained how some confusion has arisen over the workgroup's assessment efforts and how some missteps in implementation occurred. This helped everyone clarify that the workgroup's intention is to work simultaneously on two assessment fronts: the common Annotated Bib assignment and assessment rubric as well as the "drop-down" Google Forms survey.
 
Workgroup members confirmed their consistent support of the annotated bib as a common assignment and assessment focal point (i.e., the survey never replaced the annotated bib).
 
The group agrees that an end-of-term survey that focuses on rubric elements is useful as a tool for collecting meaningful data from instructors. The group reiterated that the survey is a collection tool and is not intended to replace, but rather complement assessment activities such as norming of annotated bibs using the rubric.  
 
To maintain clarity, the group decided to call the Annotated Bib Assessment Rubric the "individual rubric" because it will be used for every AB submitted. Michele's draft of a rubric that could be used to understand wider achievements and challenges with the AB assignment will be called "the global rubric," and it will be integrated into the Google Forms "drop-down" survey.
 
The group agreed on the following steps for revising the survey
  • The WR 121 workgroup will meet on March 6 (specific time and place TBA) and draft survey questions that focus on elements of the Global Rubric
  • The workgroup will include useful and necessary questions from the prior survey (e.g., where did you teach, what modality, CRN for your course, number of students, did you have scheduled library instruction, did you use the annotated bib assignment....etc)
  • Matt may join the workgroup for this meeting to stay in the loop regarding the content of the survey
  • When the questions are finalized, Matt and Theresa will create the online survey
  • Another workgroup member will review the survey prior to distribution
  • When approved, Matt will send the survey to all WR 121 instructors (all campus, outreach centers, CCN, online, evening and weekend...) in Week 10
  • Jill will send Matt the Individual Rubric with a message from the workgroup introducing and explaining it. Matt will send this to all 121 instructors this term as information and with the instruction that it will be used by all 121 instructors in spring term and beyond.
  • The workgroup will draft instructions to go with the survey and rubric
  • W
    inter term instructors are encouraged to complete the survey to the best of their abilities understanding that it will be required Spring term. 
*Rubric notes
  • Winter term instructors are encouraged to use the rubric
  • Spring term instructors will be expected to complete one rubric per student/annotated bib. 
  • There is some concern about impact on instructor workload. 
  • Jill will talk to Mark Rediske to explore ways the Individual Rubric could be integrated into eLearn, possibly even automatically populating the Global Rubric.
  • The group agreed that assessment activities will move forward with a low tech alternative while Matt, Theresa, and Jill explore technical distribution options. 
Instructors who indicate that they have not implemented the WR 121 annotated bib assignment will be put in contact with a workgroup member for guidance appropriate to the kind of assistance needed.
 
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Canceled  Monday, October 24, 2016 Workgroup Meeting Rescheduled for January 23, 2017
Agenda 
1. The drop-down assessment used during academic year 2015-2016
2. The norming/assessment conducted in September and compiled results (prepared by Abby Grewatz), attached
3. Our planned revision of the AB assignment
4. A rubric for assessing the AB assignment
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
September 21, 2016, Fall Inservice Meeting, follow-up message to instructors

As part of the college-wide focus on assessment, we discussed the assessment of our common assignment for WR 121, the Annotated Bibliography. We spent time norming our scoring of the assignment and discussing how both the assignment and rubric might be improved. 

Here are two important considerations for WR 121 instructors as you begin fall term:

1. The Annotated Bibliography assignment is required in every section of WR 121. It should be used during the second half of the term as a prewriting activity for the final researched essay. A copy of the assignment is attached and should be used as is so that we truly have an assignment in common. Please contact any WR 121 Workgroup member if you have questions or want help with teaching suggestions.

2. Monday, Oct. 24, 3:30pm (location TBD) will be our next WR 121 meeting to work on revisions to the assessment rubric for the Annotated Bibliography assignment. Everyone is invited, and while this is a paid meeting, we understand that not everyone will be able to attend.  

Additional notes for workgroup:
For fall we are using the same assignment. We will work to revise the assignment and develop a rubric this term. We'll distribute it winter, and collect ABs to assess in spring.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
September 21, 2017 Norming with WR 121 Instructors
 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fall Meeting with Mary Ellen Scofield in Preparation for September 21, 2017 Inservice Norming with WR 121 Instructors.

Our objectives for the  WR 121 assessment meeting on September 21, 2017 are as follows:

  • Emphasize and uphold mandatory Annotated Bibliography assignment for all WR 121 sections 
  • Connect with part-time instructors
  • Conduct the meeting as follows:
    • Welcome and brief introductions (all)
    • Explain AB rationale and requirements (volunteer?)
    • Announce workgroup goals and meeting times for year (see below) (all)
    • Discuss the use of the research question in the AB assignment and planned revision of assignment (see below)
    • Norming session: all read five selected ABs and score using assessment rubric and discuss (all)
    • Read selection of collected ABs and score. Note: Abby will make three copies of each AB for this reading. At the meeting we agreed to use a weighted sample from F2F, Online, and Outreach sections. Thank you Mary Ellen for helping with this!. Donna suggested we work in small groups of three and discuss in small groups (we will need to distribute ourselves among part-timers)
    • Debrief (all)

Our objectives for the workgroup this year are as follows:

  • Continue to revise AB assignment based on our discussions, feedback from PT instructors, and assessment
  • In particular, those revisions should include adding "what is your revised question at issue/problem statement" to the AB assignment
  • In fall, develop a draft rubric to be used by all instructors for assessment. This rubric would be in addition to, not taking the place of, their own grading of the assignment
  • Consider ways to standardize the timing and weighting of the assignment to make assessment more valid
  • In winter, pilot the "assessment rubric"
  • In spring, deploy the "assessment rubric" to all sections
  • Presumably, do another large assessment event the following fall