The Assignment Evaluation Process

Assignment Evaluation Process 1

The Assignment Evaluation Process

A Report for Tom Zimmerman Director, Washtenaw Community College Writing Center

by

Team Wonderful

C. Jeremy Barney ([email protected]) Jessica Hullman ([email protected]) Cat Oyler ([email protected]) Elizabeth Perry ([email protected]) Vidya Vaidyanathan ([email protected])

December 15, 2006

SI 501: Use of Information

University of Michigan, School of Information


Table of Contents

Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………………….3

Project Context………………………………………………………………………………….....4

Methodology……………………………………………………………………..………………..5

Key Findings and Recommendations……………………………………………………………..7

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………….…………………16

Appendix A: Consolidated Sequence Model…………………………………………………….18

Appendix B: Artifact Models…………………………………………………………………….29

Appendix C: Physical Models.………………………………………………………………......33

Appendix D: Communication Model…………………………………………………………….41

Appendix E: Mock-up of New Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet……………………………45

Appendix F: Mock-up of New Checklist………………………………………………………...48

Appendix G: Additional Recommendations……………………………………………………..52


Executive Summary The Writing Center plays a vital role in Washtenaw Community College (WCC) English courses through the Assignment Evaluation Process and beyond. Students enrolled in particular English courses are required to use the Center to have assignments evaluated by tutors in a pass/fail manner that provides 25% of a student’s course grade. Tutors collect and file Cover Sheets from student workbooks and administrative assistants use these Cover Sheets to record assignment completions and generate assignment reports for instructors. Although this process is well defined and routinized, with very few complications, the director of the Writing Center had us investigate assignment evaluation in order to make the system more efficient and have the ability to capture richer data about Writing Center visitors. Additionally, we were asked to address wider information issues, outside of the evaluation process, that would improve the Writing Center’s outreach to students and prove its value to the college’s administration and instructors. Our analysis of the Assignment Evaluation Process and the wider information needs and uses of the Writing Center has provided key findings within three thematic categories: 1) Managing the flow of information 2) Information-processing and record systems and 3) Broadening the Writing Center’s scope. Of great significance is that the final output, the assignment report that is generated by administrative assistants, dictates the entire evaluation process and affects the interactions tutors have with students. There is also a lack of sufficient student data because the forms currently utilized capture little information about student abilities and needs, and due to a lack of confidentiality, feedback is rarely provided by students. This leads to a lack of overall data regarding the Writing Center’s contribution to student writing and the larger college community. Inefficient forms further contribute to multiple breakdowns in the overall process in terms of information entry by the administrative assistants. The specifics of information recording and retrieval are made difficult by the current technology in place, Microsoft Word templates, and in combination with the inefficient forms, their information process flaws can detract from the Center’s ability to fulfill its mission by wasting valuable staff time and by not gathering enough data. We make the short and long-term recommendation that the Cover Sheets be re-designed to prevent illegible student names and to incorporate a place for tutors to grade assignments as high/low pass. Tracking this additional information could improve the motivation of students using the center and increase the Writing Center’s overall value. In addition, a separate, confidential feedback questionnaire could be designed by the staff in order to increase the Center’s awareness of the students it serves. Information recording, sorting, and retrieval could be solved in the long term through the creation of a database using software such as Microsoft Access. In the short term, Microsoft Excel would likewise lead to efficiency gains in the recording of assignments by administrative assistants. We also recommend that the Writing Center widen its scope in the short and long term by making website information more accessible, implementing social activities and workshops, allowing for outside campus advertising in its space, and generating an annual report. The end goal of such changes is increased support for and use of the Writing Center by the college community.


Project Context

Background The Writing Center provides walk-in writing support for the entire WCC student body. The center’s mission is to serve the writing needs of WCC students, regardless of the level or type of writing. The Writing Center plays a vital role in the WCC English department by administering course placement tests, assisting students in finding appropriate courses, and most significantly, publishing workbooks that are used by students taking one of six writing courses. The assignments in these workbooks are evaluated and recorded at the Writing Center through their Assignment Evaluation Process. In addition, the Writing Center oversees one of the few computer labs on campus and offers support for teachers who want to incorporate Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) into their courses. The center is overseen by a rotating English faculty member who serves as director. In addition to approximately thirty student tutors, staff includes both part and full-time English instructors acting as professional tutors and two administrative assistants. This paper will describe our work with the center, the goal of which was to improve the overall information needs within the organization, the most time-consuming of which is the Assignment Evaluation Process. However, during our first meeting with the Writing Center’s director, it was emphasized that the center would appreciate our analysis of the entire information flow in and out of the organization. Consequently, we have scaled our investigation and findings to emphasize the Assignment Evaluation Process while also looking into needs for record keeping systems and an increase of information for the college community. The following discussion includes the context in which the work occurred, our methodology, our key findings, and our recommendations to improve information flow, storage, and retrieval. Assignment Evaluation Process Our work with the Writing Center specifically involved examining the Assignment Evaluation Process. As part of the writing curriculum at Washtenaw Community College, students are required to take introductory composition courses, English 050/051, 067, 091, 100, and 111. A Writing Center component in each of these courses contributes 25% to a student’s overall grade. Over 1500 students use the Writing Center for this purpose. This component is calculated based on the number of assignments completed in the course workbook, each of which must be evaluated by Writing Center tutors before a weekly deadline. When brought to the center, a tutor meets with the student to review the assignment requirements and to evaluate whether the student has satisfactorily completed the assignment. Students are given the opportunity to make revisions when their assignment is not considered satisfactory. Several documents record this process. One consists of an Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet that corresponds to each assignment, on which is recorded the student’s name, course section number, instructor name, date, and proof that the student passed the assignment, indicated by the tutor’s signature. On this document there is also a space for student comments on the particular assignment. A second document, to be kept in the workbook, serves as verification that the assignment was completed in the event of a conflict between records. This “Checklist” contains


similar information to the “Cover Sheet” with the exception of the student’s feedback and the added presence of the checklist that the tutor uses to evaluate the assignment and the students rely upon to understand grading criteria. The tutor’s portion of the Assignment Evaluation Process requires the completion and filing of the Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet. After each tutoring session has ended, the tutor files the Cover Sheets in a bank of cubbyholes, each corresponding to a course section number, located behind the tutoring tables. At the beginning of each day, the administrative assistants collect the previous day’s sheets from the cubbyholes, carefully delineating the sections. The information on the Cover Sheets is entered into Microsoft Word templates corresponding to each section. The administrative assistants record completed assignments by entering an “X” under each student’s name and assignment number. Upon completion each week, the updated assignment reports are printed and given to course instructors through their Writing Center mailboxes. A duplicate of each sheet is kept in a binder on the administrative assistant’s desk and filing cabinets store further past records of assignment reports and Cover Sheets. Our investigation concludes that the Assignment Evaluation Process, while successful in many rites, is a cumbersome one in terms of information flow and processing. The process is paper-based in almost all respects, the design of the Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet leads to data entry problems, and the Microsoft Word templates are difficult to navigate. In many ways the final output, the report given weekly to the instructors for grading purposes, dictates the entire process, affecting all major users. In this report, the tutor-student interaction, the foundation of the Writing Center’s work, will be emphasized as an alternative foundation upon which to design their new processes.

Methodology

Data collection

We collected data for our project by conducting contextual interviews and by making observations. Interviewing was performed in teams of two, one team member asking the questions and the other taking detailed notes. For the sake of insuring the relevance of our findings, attempts were made to limit our data collection in several ways but to obtain a representative sample of all the roles performed in the Writing Center. Eleven individuals were interviewed, including the following: the director, two tutors, three students, three faculty, and two administrative assistants. As a team, we constructed interview templates containing both general questions and job role-specific questions. These were used as guidelines only and interview questions evolved as the interviews progressed. During interpretation sessions, these standard questions were updated to reflect what we had learned in our initial conversations. Throughout this process, we strove for professionalism in both manner and attire. Team members conducted observations both individually and in interviewing pairs. Through these observations we were able to familiarize ourselves with the Writing Center processes first-hand, in many cases blending in as students so as not to disrupt students or staff members. One group member took photographs during observations that later served useful in our data analysis.


A final source of data included literature from writing centers beyond WCC, including the Sweetland Writing Center at the University of Michigan. One group member contributed additional knowledge of writing centers based on several years of experience and training as a writing consultant in a similar center. Multiple artifacts were collected in the course of our contextual inquiry. The Writing Center director generously provided each of us with a copy of the workbook used in English 111. This contained the Cover Sheets and Checklists associated with a student’s visit to the center and the Assignment Evaluation Process. In addition, the administrative assistants provided us with copies of the Word templates, the section status reports, and the course rosters needed to enter students’ names into the templates each semester. The Writing Center stocks handouts on various aspects of writing for student use and we also obtained copies of these for reference.

Data analysis As a first step in data analysis, an interpretation session was conducted within 24 hours after every interview. During these sessions interview findings were discussed for the first time, and detailed notes generated for later use. These notes included raw data, questions for future interviews, and design ideas. Modeling enabled us to uncover breakdowns in the overall Assignment Evaluation Process and to better define our understanding of the information flow involved. Together our team designed a Consolidated Sequence Model (Appendix A), representing the overall Assignment Evaluation Process. This was our first step aimed at uncovering where breakdowns occur in the individual processes. Our data analysis was unique in that we had multiple, interlinked user processes that we were examining. Thoroughness allowed us to model the processes of the administrative assistant, the tutor, and the student in one color-coded document. Major breakdowns in the form of forgotten section numbers, misfiled cover sheets, and un-integrated data formats became apparent by this model. In addition to the Consolidated Model, our group diverged to construct other models independently, each of which contributed to our data analysis. Examples in the form of Artifact Models (Appendix B) alerted us to the facts that 1) the Writing Center keeps no record of whether a pass was a high pass or low pass 2) records of cheating are not kept 3) the slot recording the student’s name allows for illegibility and 4) student feedback is not anonymous. A Physical Model (Appendix C) tracked the path of the two essential artifacts outlined above. This model illustrated how the layout of the Writing Center is, in general, conducive to the multiple processes. A Communication Model (Appendix D) reproduces the predominantly verbal communication culture of the Writing Center. Analysis of this model yielded the important conclusions that 1) verbal communication finds no ultimate destination, or is not formally recorded, in the overall process, and 2) breakdowns exist in obtaining student enrollment information from the Registrar. Finally, through the construction of a Cultural Model the intense pressure placed on the tutor as a result of the combined Writing Center processes became apparent. We also used this Cultural Model to limit our recommendations to those that would fit the culture of the Writing Center.


Affinity diagram Building an affinity diagram was an integral step in our data analysis process. This analytical tool is a wall-sized, hierarchical diagram aimed at bringing to light key issues based on the data at hand. Unlike the models mentioned above, the affinity diagram pairs data points based on concepts that cross the boundaries of user roles, physical spaces, and process steps. As we had an enormous number of notes dealing with multiple users of the Writing Center, the process of compiling them into the diagram proved invaluable by narrowing the information into workable categories. We followed Holtzblatt, Wendell, and Wood’s Rapid Contextual Design (2005) in constructing our affinity diagram. Our affinity diagram began from the bottom up, the data suggesting the themes, as we grouped coherent notes into like-colored columns, and then labeled these columns with contrasting-colored statements framed in the voice of the user. The affinity diagram process culminated in a walk-through for which we were joined by our instructor and client. The walk-through consisted of reading through the hierarchical notes and adding suggested recommendations and lingering questions. We were fortunate that our client was willing and able to attend, as this granted the opportunity to gauge initial reactions to our interpretation of the data. The affinity building process generated several understandings. Compiling the notes helped us condense the enormous amount of information we had collected into categories, enforcing how much data we had that was not related to information systems, and allowing us to filter that which was not relevant. We took note of the breakdowns we had already observed as well as additional ones that rose to the surface via the categorized notes. In addition, constructing the diagram showed that we understood the Assignment Evaluation Process well, while the walk-through showed that we were in concurrence with the Writing Center director on many issues. The key understanding we reached in this process was that our data was accurate; this provided motivating validation for the work we had done thus far.

Key Findings and Recommendations The data collection and analysis process outlined above revealed numerous important issues. This section outlines the issues that we collectively designate as our key findings and includes managing the flow of information, information processing and record keeping, and broadening the Writer Center’s scope. This section will also address both short and long term recommendations related to these key findings. Our cumulative findings and analysis lead us to believe that several key changes might contribute significantly to the Writing Center’s success in fulfilling its mission. As stated, we find the Assignment Evaluation Process to be centered on the goal of creating the section report for instructors. Currently this output dictates the process. Our focus is to modify the process toward being a tutor-centered one as well as one that better serves the student. We hope to alleviate some of the problems that result from the current forms that are used. In addition, we seek to address the in-house information processing issues as well


as to widen the scope of the Center. The following section on managing the flow of information is further delineated into sections on the Assignment Evaluation Process, giving student feedback, and receiving feedback from students and staff.

Managing the Flow of Information Communication in the Writing Center is predominantly verbal, however, data regarding the Assignment Evaluation Process is codified through a simple paper trail. This paper form begins in the student workbook and migrates through the tutor’s possession to the hands of the administrative assistant, who then transforms the information into instructor reports and into records for Writing Center use. These forms serve a secondary purpose to collect feedback from students. This section will discuss our findings with regard to this flow of information. Assignment Evaluation Process The Assignment Evaluation Process is central to the work performed at the Writing Center. It dictates the pace of work for the administrative assistants and colors the interactions between tutors and students as they partner to complete the information form known as the Cover Sheet. Current successes. As it stands, this process has a high rate of success. Very little information is misplaced or incomplete and when problems do arise, there is a good backup system in place to verify information (through a binder with print outs of section reports). This system is viable because it is routine and simple to learn. Newcomers quickly learn their portion of the routine because the form is standardized and simple. This process has become deeply ingrained in the daily functioning of the Writing Center and fits with their cultural predisposition towards personal interaction, personal responsibility, and minimal micromanaging. Possible improvements: The simplicity of this process results in a smaller collection of data than needed. For example, because it focuses on collecting assignment information, it leaves out information on other visitors to the Writing Center. Additionally, it fails to capture information about students beyond their pass/fail grade. The Writing Center does not know much about progress being made or problems that differentiate one student from another and therefore is not learning and growing in its ability to meet diverse student needs. The form that is used now also suffers from some physical constraints including torn edges that impede filing, the illegibility of student handwriting, which is necessary for data processing, and the ability to be misfiled by section number by both tutors and administrative assistants at different points in the process. Providing Feedback to Students In addition to evaluating assignments for a grade, the Writing Center evaluates in order to assist the learning process. What students take away from their interaction with tutors or instructors is crucial to their relationship with the Writing Center as a whole. Current successes. Students are given verbal feedback on their assignment during their meeting with their tutor or instructor. In observations, this method was shown to be very helpful to students. Tutors are excellent at relaying possible improvements in a casual manner. These


interactions place little pressure on the students, who are allowed to listen passively and make corrections independently, if needed. Possible improvements. In our interviews, we found that not all tutors felt comfortable telling students where they needed improvement. We also found that students have no way of tracking their feedback, but rely on their memory to know what needs improvement for the next assignment. This lack of written feedback may create such a casual atmosphere that it hinders student motivation, which was very low in student interviews. It also creates an atmosphere where each student-tutor interaction takes place in a vacuum. Tutors do not know how students have been performing on previous assignments and English instructors do not know how students are progressing without re-reading their full assignments. Receiving Feedback From Students and Staff The Writing Center, like all educational facilities, is concerned about its own progress and ability to complete its mission. Thus, feedback from students, tutors, instructors, and the administrative assistants is actively sought in an effort to improve current policies and procedures. There are various ways in which this feedback is given, but the most predominant method is through verbal communication with the director. Current successes. Through a multi-format approach, the Writing Center has provided ways for each interested party to provide feedback. Students are given areas on their assignment’s Cover Sheets for open-ended feedback on the assignment itself. In addition, a required assignment at the end of the workbook instructs students to write an evaluative essay about the Writing Center as a whole. This two-tiered approach gathers both specific and broad feedback for the benefit of the Writing Center. Staff members communicate their concerns and suggestions openly with the director. All of the instructors, tutors and administrative assistants interviewed agreed that the director was very approachable and was a very good listener. Faculty also felt that he listened well to their concerns at faculty meetings. The Center has excelled at keeping the flow of verbal communication open. Possible improvements. The turnover of directors through rotation provides a need for institutional memory. Verbal communication cannot easily be traced, collected or conveyed to new directors upon arrival. Some written feedback from staff would help to alleviate this data loss. An added level of confidentiality might increase the usefulness of this feedback too. Confidentiality is also an important aspect missing from the student provided feedback. When connected to assignments and connected to the student’s name, it might create a conflict of interests that skews the comments. The form provided on the Cover Sheet is free form and voluntary and therefore suffers from a low rate of response. Visitors that come to the Writing Center for additional help beyond the Assignment Evaluation Process do not currently have a mechanism for providing feedback.

Recommendations Assignment Evaluation Process


Short-term recommendations. In order to facilitate the flow of information through the workbook’s Cover Sheet, more section lists should be made available for tutors and students. Knowing the section number is imperative to this process because this distinction is how tutors file Cover Sheets and how administrative assistants generate assignment reports. As long as the workbook forms remain, this system will continue to function as it does currently, with great success. Our recommendations are for a forward-looking edit to the workbook system, and these will take a year to implement. Long-term recommendations. Our assessment implies that the flow of information in the Writing Center would be greatly improved by disassociating the paper trail from the workbook itself. This action will lead to improved filing (by eliminating torn edges), but additionally, will open the form up for intermittent updates and for a broader purpose. We have drafted what this new form could entail in Appendix E. This new visitor information sheet includes a section to collect information about visitors that are not involved in the Assignment Evaluation Process. It also allows tutors to capture information about student’s strengths and special needs (ESL, learning disabilities, etc.) and to include impressions and concerns in a comment area. We have integrated a new grading system into this form that will broaden faculty and Writing Center knowledge about student achievement. This system replaces a pass/fail with a high pass/low pass/fail system and could easily be modified to include a 3-point scale, or any other grading system with differentiation. Other added benefits include additional student information such as student ID in order to facilitate the retrieval of student records, and a more formal layout to improve student handwriting (an issue for record retrieval and data entry). Most importantly, by creating a one-to-one ratio between visitors and paper forms, this system also allows for a periodic (daily, weekly, monthly) count of visitors to the Writing Center. Providing Feedback to Students Short-term recommendations. While the current workbook is still in use, it would be beneficial to train tutors to increase commenting on the assignments through the use of a colored pen. This would allow instructors and other tutors to look back through the workbook and see what issues the student has encountered and has overcome, or continues to struggle with. Long-term recommendations. When the workbook is updated, we recommend including a feedback section at the end of each assignment as demonstrated in Appendix F. This section includes space for the tutor to provide comments and replaces the current “Checklist” page by providing a section for the grade and tutor signature. This will eliminate flipping back to the beginning of the assignment at the end of the evaluation. For the students and their instructors, this record in their workbook will chronicle improvement (or lack of) through the semester and will provide a list to be reviewed upon completion. The ability to write complements will boost confidence and the critiques will hopefully motivate students to pay attention to skills that need improvement. The inclusion of these qualitative assessments will also control cheating by providing a check beyond a staff signature, which can be forged. We have included the checklist just above the feedback section in order to remind tutors of the grading criteria. This second checklist will also provide a chance to students to read through it upon first completing their assignment. Our interviews showed that students do not often refer to


the checklist, or read assignment directions completely, and this additional reminder will reinforce the need to follow the directions and to review their work before visiting the Writing Center. Along these same lines, we recommend that the checklist at the beginning move to the assignment direction page, as its current location causes it to be overlooked by many students. Receiving Feedback Short-term recommendations. For now, it would be useful to create a Word document that could collect and consolidate feedback. Verbal feedback could be dictated to the administrative assistants and written feedback could be added directly. The director currently has a file folder for feedback on his desk and this can function as a holding place for this word document. Long-term recommendations. It will greatly improve feedback from all parties if an anonymous suggestion box is provided. A questionnaire should accompany it in order to structure the feedback that is provided. It will replace the various ways in which feedback is currently provided, enabling the consolidation of this data through consistency of format and through consecutive filing. Functioning independently, this questionnaire could be changed over time to suit the informational needs of the Writing Center. Use of the questionnaire could be encouraged through the suggestion box’s placement, through handing it out while students are in line, and through tutor encouragement (the use of incentive programs is highly recommended). Instructors should be encouraged to advertise its use to students at the beginning and end of term (it could be completed in class alongside instructor evaluations). A web-based version of the form would also advertise its use. Through our interviews with students and staff, it was clear that specific questions generated more informative answers than general ones. Therefore, the content of the questionnaire should include a structured section as well as a section for free comments. Questions that would suit the structured section include tutor/instructor ratings on a 5-point scale, or overall experience ratings. Use of the Writing Center, time waited in line, the meeting of expectations, the provision of necessary information (like directions), suggestions for specific assignments, and other specifics could also be addressed in this structured area. Yes or No questions are also very helpful and easy to complete. We recommend the following resources to construct this questionnaire: Brace, I. (2004). Questionnaire design: how to plan, structure, and write survey material for effective market research. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page. Iarossi, G. (2006). The power of survey design: a user’s guide for managing surveys, interpreting results, and influencing respondents. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Information-Processing and Record Systems Much of our user data alerted us to the fact that the Assignment Evaluation Process is a successfully implemented process as it currently stands. The director as well as the administrative assistants informed us that student evaluation information is rarely if ever lost.


This section discusses the reasons why that success exists. In addition, it discusses important information concerns that we discovered. Current successes. As stated, credit for assignment completions is rarely lost or confused. “The secretaries do a very good job,” the director supplied as a reason. Another is that the Checklist in the workbook provides the needed paper trail in case of a lost Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet or an incorrect record in the assignment reports that the administrative assistants create. We learned that the sheets are filed and saved for one year. While this consumes space, it contributes to the successful record-keeping. Both administrative assistants expressed that use of the binder containing section reports also contributes toward this end. Our interviews showed the administrative assistants to be meticulous and diligent in collecting and entering the information. In addition, we observed and were told that they feel very comfortable with the simple format of the Microsoft Word templates. Overall, our cumulative data collection and analysis lead us to believe that the assistants are able to successfully complete the task of getting section reports back to faculty because the overall process is currently designed with this output in mind. Possible improvements. This section outlines a few of the issues that do exist with the record keeping process despite its success. The cumbersome nature of information entry is the most important concern. We were alerted in interviewing to the fact that the administrative assistants must multi-task constantly if they are to finish entering the information every day. Interruptions further the length of time needed to complete their meticulous, time-consuming, clerical tasks. These tasks include referencing information in the Registrar’s database in order to check student information, acting as an authority figure when students misbehave, and answering numerous phone calls (see Appendix A for breakdowns). The last of these was observed frequently in our interviews alone. Difficulty accessing the Registrar’s information and entering student names into course and section-specific Word templates was observed as one administrative assistant walked us through the task. Paramount to all of these difficulties is the poor user interface and limited functionalities of the Microsoft Word templates. While providing a quick print out for instructor use, they lack the ability to be manipulated for further use by the Writing Center. They also lack the ability to be sorted or searched for specific student information. Deadline dates and section numbers have created the need to use multiple Microsoft Word templates, and these files are housed in many folders and subfolders. Access to the Microsoft Word templates is hindered by the need for multiple mouse clicks to open the appropriate files and folders By requiring the administrative assistants to log into the computer at their desk, access the network drive, “O”, and then click through multiple folders they are sacrificing significant amounts of time that could be dedicated to other tasks.

Recommendations Short-term recommendations. To prevent the problems emerging from unknown or incorrect section numbers, we recommend that the Writing Center post sheets displaying these section numbers more prominently. The numbers could also be posted on the walls near where the line


forms (see Appendix C). A simple sign could be used to inform Students that they needed to know their number before reaching the tutor table. Information-entry and retrieval is an important problem. For the short-term, we advise that the Writing Center use Microsoft Excel. This software is easy to use and to learn. Administrative assistants could learn it themselves quickly and easily with a book. With Excel, a single spreadsheet could be used for all sections concomitantly, separating the course listings by section headers. This software enables sorting on different fields. Less mouse clicking would be necessary. Moreover, if the Center should decide to change grading to a high pass/low pass scale, student credit could be represented numerically and averages calculated easily. Long-term recommendations. To solve information retrieval problems in the long-term, we recommend that the center invest in a database. We realize that some barriers may exist, such as the cost of implementation depending on the database, need to hire outside help for initial set-up and ongoing maintenance and the start-up cost of software like Microsoft Access, FileMaker Pro, or Oracle. The best-case scenario also requires coordinating with the Registrar in order to import student registration information directly into the database. The Writing Center may have to train the administrative assistants to use it, which takes time. We did, however, observe a willingness to learn new software on the administrative assistants’ part; when asked if willing, one assistant replied “Oh yeah!” The contribution to efficiency in record keeping and information processing would be considerable. A database opens up the possibility to import information and solves student security/confidential information problems because the direct import from the Registrar’s student database would bypass the administrative assistants’ current access to additional, and unneeded, student information. Finally, a database would enable quick and easy information entry through the use of multiple types of fields, such as student name, ID number, or section number. The former of which is ideal for quick access because it requires less on the part of the student or tutor. We believe that entering assignment completions from the Assignment Evaluation Process and information about other types of student visitors would best be done by student name as opposed to the oft-forgotten course section number. Microsoft Access represents the best of these databases available. A Microsoft version offers customary user-friendliness and conventionality in interface. While Excel is more single spreadsheet-oriented, with Access, multiple records or files can be linked, enabling one to create reports based on any of the fields. Records could be linked despite the fact they contain different information, provided they had at least one common field. The individual records could be grouped by course instructor, and multiple section spreadsheets printed together. By the Writing Center’s working with the Registrar’s Office to integrate the course records, roster information could be directly imported into the database In addition, a portion of the database could be used to track information from visitor information sheets on how many students are using the Writing Center and for what purposes. Student data could be compiled from multiple semesters and used in making hiring decisions on tutors, as tutors tend to be selected based on how they did in English courses. In addition, a database could easily record data more nuanced than is currently collected from students, including notices for those who have special needs or the ability to flag a name for possible cheating. There could be fields for comments about students, or how many times a record has been disputed.


Ultimately, we envision a database that is accessible online for students to check their own grade information as well as other confidential information related to their own work with the Writing Center. The WCC IT staff might be able to aid the Center toward this end, or an outside consultant could be brought in for a fee. With regard to records systems, we recommend that the Writing Center continue its practice of filing and saving paper-copies of the Cover Sheets and assignment reports. This recommendation is based on the relative success of their current filing practices; we asked tutors, administrative assistants, and the director whether records were often lost and the reply was a unanimous “No”. Should they decide to replace the current form with our new design, a visitor information sheet, this could be kept for one year. In addition, we recommend that the Writing Center file and save the confidential student questionnaire that we have recommended for implementation. Saving this form would allow later referencing suggestions in order to implement them, or feedback on tutors that might aid in in-Center decisions. Retention of forms and questionnaires should not outlast usefulness. One administrative assistant stated that assignment reports are filed for five years and a filing cabinet in the administrative assistant’s area is labeled “Final Spreadsheets Semester Information 1984 to 2000”. It was also stated that grades for Washtenaw Community College courses could only be altered within two years, making the assignment reports dated prior to 2004 unnecessary to retain. By disposing of older assignment reports, or by moving them to a long-term storage space, the filing cabinets would be freed up for the storage of more recent, and produced at a higher level (as they will be used by both those involved in the Assignment Evaluation Process and other types of Writing Center visitors) visitor information sheets. If separate questionnaires are also adopted, more filing space will be required and, therefore, the removal of records older than two years from the administrative assistants’ filing cabinets would be useful.

Broadening the Writing Center’s Scope As stated, we were assigned to examine the specific Assignment Evaluation Process; however, data collection revealed numerous other activities of the Writing Center that were affected by information systems. Our very first meeting with the Writing Center director pointed to other facets of the Writing Center that we might want to study and suggest improvements on. The scope of our original focus was both narrow and already working quite well, so we felt that we had time to examine these somewhat tangential aspects of the Writing Center. These findings reflect data we gathered that was not about the Assignment Evaluation Process. Current successes. We found that both the director and some faculty members strongly desired the Writing Center to be a welcoming place for students to spend time studying and working on all homework, rather than only on Writing Center assignments. We observed many efforts to accomplish this including the open, welcoming physical layout of the Writing Center. Numerous tables and couches are available for student use (see Appendix C). Flat screen monitors displaying a slide show of images and information about famous authors were also present. Both the director and one faculty member indicated that the Writing Center can serve as a gathering place for faculty, and that they would like to see more faculty visit the Writing Center.


The Writing Center is doing many things well to ensure its inviting atmosphere beyond those associated with the physical space. The use of the workbooks required for English classes provides a common experience for all students and familiarizes them with the Writing Center. We learned from the administrative assistants that they enjoy helping students to solve all types of academic problems and that the favorite part of their job is assisting students. This provides evidence that an important aspect of the Writing Center is that it is a welcoming place. In addition, the tutors are encouraging and friendly with students and represent a diverse student population. Possible improvements. When talking to the director, administrative assistants, and faculty we learned that Washtenaw Community College and the Writing Center do not use computers heavily and that many students are uncomfortable with technology. The Writing Center website is not frequently used by students; this is perhaps related to the fact that the Writing Center encourages personal communication. We observed firsthand that the Writing Center’s webpage does contain much helpful information, such as writing guides, an FAQ section, and links to other pages, but that the webpage is not easy for students to navigate and it is difficult to tell what information is available. In addition, contact information for the Writing Center is missing. Room for improvement also exists in that, despite its many successes, the Writing Center can sometimes be associated too closely with the Assignment Evaluation Process, and the larger WCC community sees the Writing Center as existing for that sole purpose. Although nearly 80% of the students visiting the Writing Center are there to have assignment’s evaluated, the other 20% are students with valid writing needs. We learned from the director and one faculty member that the Writing Center is sometimes criticized by the WCC administration because they do not understand the services it provides and thus, do not want to continue to fund it. The director informed us that in defense, the Writing Center must collect statistics about student use, but that this only happens when budgetary threats occur.

Recommendations Short-term recommendations. As stated, several problems exist with the website. A short-term recommendation is to include the Writing Center’s phone number on the webpage. It is possible that an existing Writing Center faculty member or IT staff member has the HTML skills to do this free of charge. In addition, a system might be set up to answer e-mail questions and to accept submission of feedback through an online form. Though the Writing Center is already a welcoming place visited by many students, we suggest the Center seek ways to increase its relevance to students’ lives. We recommend the Writing Center provide a bulletin board for students to post and read flyers about related events on campus. In addition, we suggest that the Writing Center use its flat panel monitors to advertise for upcoming events on campus as well as in-house events. Tutors, in cooperation with the director, could be in charge of coordinating with those holding events regarding the use of the monitor. Another recommendation, designed to increase the Writing Center’s effectiveness, is the implementation of workshops and social activities related to writing. The Writing Center, in


addition to helping students to improve their writing, might also offer classes on other skills associated with the writing process. Computer use and time management are two ideas. These classes would help students learn new skills and increase the functionality of the Writing Center. Outside professionals could be brought in to teach the classes, or Writing Center faculty, including experienced tutors, might conduct them themselves. We also suggest that the Writing Center look into hosting social events like brown bag lunches, poetry readings, book club meetings, or other literacy related activities. Again, Writing Center faculty could design these events, and hold them on a regular basis. These events would encourage more students to visit the Writing Center, as well as strengthen the writing culture at WCC and diversify how students see the Writing Center’s function. Long-term recommendations. For the longer-term we recommend that the Writing Center aim to improve its webpage to be as welcoming as its physical space. We suggest that the Writing Center contact Washtenaw Community College’s IT support system, or investigate the possibilities of hiring an outside consultant to redesign their web page. The webpage offers many sources of information but its poor design makes them hard to access. A more intuitive and user-friendly design would encourage more students to go on-line for information. This would likely decrease the number of phone calls and personal questions the administrative assistants need to answer. Our final recommendation towards improving the Writing Center is that it more aggressively promote its important work within the College community. We suggest the publishing of an annual report and other guides, advertising numbers of students who use the Writing Center and also listing events the Writing Center hosts. The Writing Center staff could appoint a team of tutors and instructors to generate this report with the help of the director. By informing the WCC community about their diverse opportunities, the Writing Center will not only attract more students, but also be better able to justify its continual existence and seek additional resources.

Conclusion

While successful at present, the Assignment Evaluation Process is hindered in important ways that ultimately affect the Writing Center’s ability to fulfill its mission. Because the final output dictates the process, interactions that occur with tutors and students suffer. Students are unmotivated and denied a reliable channel for feedback to the Writing Center. This leads to a lack of overall data regarding the Writing Center’s contribution to the larger college community, as does the fact that the current form is only applicable to the Assignment Evaluation Process. We recommend that the Center design a questionnaire as well as adopt our re-designed visitor information sheet. This sheet is aimed not only at collecting vital statistics but also at preventing illegibility and incorporating a high pass/low pass option in order to motivate students in their assignments. Because the specifics of information retrieval are made difficult by the current technologies in place, we recommend that the Writing Center make use of Excel in the short term and a database in the long term. Considerable gains in efficiency and far less wasted staff time would result. Finally, the Writing Center fails to adequately market itself to the wider WCC community. Through following our recommendations aimed at better using and marketing its space and website, the role of the Writing Center could both be expanded and recognized within WCC. In combination, our recommendations would allow the Writing Center to better serve the


students involved with the Assignment Evaluation Process and the WCC student body as a whole, as well as to run more efficiently as an organization.


Appendix A

Consolidated Sequence Model

The Consolidated Sequence Model was constructed in order to ascertain the sequence of events that occur throughout the Assignment Evaluation Process and to identify breakdowns that create inefficiencies or halt the process in its entirety. Although the Assignment Evaluation Process already appeared to be rigorously defined by the Writing Center both in documentation and in practice, it was necessary to construct a Consolidated Sequence Model in order to discover overlooked or misidentified sequence steps and breakdowns. Through the creation of this model it was also possible to identify similarities and contrasts between how the Assignment Evaluation Process was originally detailed in the project proposal and how it actually functions in its daily practice. In the end, the original process and the accompany roles as defined were primarily reaffirmed. The model incorporates data gleaned from interviews with all staff positions in the Writing Center (administrative assistant, director, tutor, and instructor) and students visiting the center to have assignments evaluated. Specifically, the model consolidated the sequence of events for three individual roles: 1) administrative assistant (referred to as “secretary” in the model) 2) student and 3) tutor. In actuality, consolidated models were created for each of these roles separately and then combined into the final model found below. Colored fonts distinguish the roles:

Administrative Assistant = Blue / Student = Green / Tutor = Purple Triggers indicate events or information inputs that begin a specific part of the sequence or alter the course of a currently active sequence. Intents, located beneath Triggers, describe why a part of a sequence is beginning or being affected. Under these main distinguishing features the model describes activities being performed, and when an individual role is faced with branching paths, the word “OR” is employed. An example of this is when a tutor collects a Cover Sheet from a student. As the model describes, tutors, “at [the] end of shift get up to file in cubby holes OR get up after student [after one student visit has ended] and file individual sheet”. Breakdowns, shown in ALL CAPS, indicate moments in the sequence when a problem occurs or has been inferred to occur. The last section of the sequence model, Sample User Data, provides references to data collected through observations and interviews that describe a specific step in the sequence or that refer to a breakdown in the process.


Consolidated Assignment Evaluation Sequence

Breakdowns Sample User Data

TRIGGER: Initial student registration INTENT: Create "section spreadsheets" to track completion of assignment evaluations ("coversheets") of enrolled students

Get class rosters log in to registration system

under chair's name and password

NEED CHAIR'S INFO U1.44: Secretary logs in as an instructor or the chairperson

find each CRN (course registration number) from "Section Status Report"

U1.45: CRN is located in Section Status Report

search the CRN to pull up individual class rosters for each section

for each one print out section roster

UI.45: Prints roster generated by CRN search

OR keep section roster in window on screen

PDF CANNOT BE MANIPULATED

U2.20: There is no integration between the .pdf rosters and the Word templates

Enter section lists into section spreadsheet open O:/ drive through layers of

folders LONG PATHWAY U1.31: templates are stored on

the O:/ drive open template of section

spreadsheet TEMPLATE NOT USER FRIENDLY

U2.29: Microsoft Word templates are cumbersome

enter course name, CRN, section number, instructor, term from roster

U2.18: Two weeks before the semester beings the secretary enters data into the templates

enter all student names (last, first)

MISSPELLINGS U2.19: Looks at list of students and types each one into the template

save repeat for all sections/ all due

dates SPREADSHEETS ORGANIZED BY DATE

print copies for binder REPLACE LATER W/CHANGES

U1.27: A copy is placed in the binder at the secretary's desk

TRIGGER: Periodic checkups on shifts in class rosters

INTENT: Correct section spreadsheets Update section spreadsheets RE-DOING WORK log in to registration system

under chair's name and password

NEED CHAIR'S INFO U1.44: Secretary logs in as an instructor or the chairperson

search the CRN to pull up individual class rosters for each section

compare each with correlating section spreadsheet

make corrections one student at a time

U2.19: Looks at list of students and types each one into the template

print new for binder U1.27: A copy is placed in the binder at the secretary's desk

TRIGGER: Disjunction between student registration and listing in section spreadsheet

INTENT: Correct section spreadsheets


log in to registration system under chair's name and password

U1.44: Secretary logs in as an instructor or the chairperson

search for student name see which class section contains

student name

update student info in section spreadsheet (old and new)

CHANGE IN 2 PLACES U2.19: Looks at list of students and types each one into the template

print new for binder U1.27: A copy is placed in the binder at the secretary's desk

TRIGGER: Assignment due date is approaching INTENT: Get credit for assignment

Complete assignment consult the Writing Center Guide for

assignment number and due date

read assignment instructions in workbook

STUDENTS DON’T READ DIRECTIONS

U5.55: A common problem with students and the workbook is that they fail to read the directions

write assignment using workbook checklist

NOT ALL STUDENTS USE CHECKLIST

U5.21: There is a need to retell students to read over the checklist thoroughly U10.1: Checklist is helpful in completing assignments

Have assignment evaluated U2.10: Students visit the writing center to show assignments to tutors/instructors for evaluation

go to Writing Center when it is open

meet with Writing Center tutor or instructor

LONG LINE DELAYS MEETING WITH A TUTOR OR FACULTY MEMBER

U11.02: Students stand in a line, starting at the line formation ropes. Students also sit at tables while waiting, to study, to write, and to relax U11.11: There is occasionally a long line - 20 to 25 students

have tutor evaluate


Assess assignment grade based on checklist MOST FEEDBACK GIVEN

VERBALLY U3.02: tutor uses checklist as she works U2.11: The tutors/instructors approve the assignment or ask that the student make corrections. If approved, move to the next step in the process. If they are not initially approved, the student makes corrections until it is approved. Then move to the next step U5.18: Tutors are sometimes “too nice” with assignments and pass them too easily U5.20: The tutors should be more careful in referencing the checklist (which indicates if a student has passed an assignment) in the writing center workbooks. U4.15: She uses assignment checklist

give feedback on assignment STUDENTS SENSITIVE TO CRITICISM - TUTORS HOLD BACK; PROBLEM STUDENTS REQUIRE INSTRUCTOR HELP

U3.10: The tutor discusses her recommendations after readingU11.18 Tutors meet with students to evaluate writing, to answer questions, and to make sure a student has finished their assignment. U11.09: The writing center wants to get through waiting student numbers quickly, but also wants them to learn something. Sessions with tutors/instructors at the tables last 15 minutes. If there are not other students waiting then the meeting can go longer U3.09: Some tutors mark and talk at the same time, others mark and then talk.

If student fails assignment send away to correct mistakes U3.10: The tutor discusses her

recommendations after reading. If corrections need to be made, the student is sent away to make them. They then wait in line again for a tutor.

help them when back in line for a tutor

CANT ALWAYS RETURN TO SAME TUTOR


If student passes assignment remove cover sheet U11.36 Workbooks. Pg. 1: cover

sheet torn out by tutor. Pg. 2: checklist that tutor uses to determine if student passes – stays in the book (like “a receipt”).

record pass, date, staff signature on cover sheet

U11.37: Assignments are graded pass/fail. They count as 25% of the class grade.

record pass, date, staff signature on checklist/receipt

have student fill in name, instructor, section # on coversheet

STUDENT HANDWRITING ILLEGIBLE

U1.64: Information that the tutors need to know is provided by the director

if student doesn’t know section #, help look it up on purple sheet

STUDENTS PUT WRONG SECTION #

U3.22: The purple sheet on the tables is for section numbers, which the tutors help the students look up if they don’t know.

Follow up with student ask if have further questions U3.11: The tutor asks if there are

further questions. If not, the tutor signs both papers while the student waits.

say goodbye to student U3.12: The cover sheet is ripped out and placed in a stack on table. The tutor says goodbye to the student.

Record assignment evaluation place student cover sheets in pile next

to you U3.12: The cover sheet is ripped out and placed in a stack on table. The tutor says goodbye to the student.

at end of shift get up to file in cubby holes

INSTRUCTOR/TUTORS LEAVE WITH COVER SHEETS

U3.13: Tutor fear (breakdown): taking papers out of center to class with her, because she waits until the end of the shift to file the papers in the cubbyholes, and sometimes ends up putting the stack of coversheets in her bag and leaving.

OR get up after student and file individual sheet

U3.23: Some tutors get up after each student and file individual sheets.

at cubby holes find section # and file student cover sheets

MISFILING U4.12: Cubbyholes are by section number and are just for evaluations. Tutors find correct section number and file student cover sheet.


TRIGGER: Assignments have been evaluated INTENT: Track assignment evaluation data in section spreadsheets

Track completed assignments walk to cubby holes & gather stacks of

coversheets in section order from bottom, up.

U2.13: Collects previous day's assignment sheets U1.23: In the morning picks up cover sheets from the day before

bring back to desk and straighten the stack

FRINGES CATCH AND DISLODGE PILE

U1.24: Keeps coversheets in section order when she brings them to her desk U2.27: coversheets are often not torn on the perforations

open section spreadsheet for ENG 111 with sections due on previous day

SECTION # WRONG ON COVERSHEETS (CHECK IN BINDER)

U1.60: Spreadsheets are arranged by deadline dates and class U2.26: Sometimes students record incorrect course or section number U1.2: Students record wrong section number

enter date of recording PAPERS CAN BE MISFILED (NEED TO OPEN OTHER SPREADSHEET)

U2.28 Sometimes tutors do not place coversheets in the correct cubby U1.3: Tutors, the director, and instructors file coversheets in the wrong cubbies

for each coversheet, enter X next to each student name under the assignment number

STUDENT'S NAME ILLEGIBLE

U1.25: Records finished assignment with a bold X U2.21: Indicates that an assignment is complete by typing a bold X U1.62: Students and tutors need to make sure the student name is legible

repeat for each section TIME CONSUMING U1.81: Recording of assignments is "Tedious, boring" U2.30: Usually takes an hour to an hour and a half to enter records

save LATE ASSIGNMENTS (PROCESS REPEATED)

open section spreadsheet for other ENG class with assignments due on previous day

U1.60: Spreadsheets are arranged by deadline dates and class

enter date of recording for each coversheet in stack, enter X

next to each student name under the assignment number

U1.25: Records finished assignment with a bold X U2.21: Indicates that an assignment is complete by typing a bold X

repeat for each section U2.81: Recording of assignments is "Tedious, boring"

repeat for each section U2.81: Recording of assignments is "Tedious, boring"

save


Print completed section spreadsheet select print change copies to 2 U2.14: Assignment reports are

generated in duplicate collect printouts three hole punch one and add it

to binder BINDER COPY NEEDS REPLACEMENT FOR LATE ASSIGNMENTS

U1.27: A copy of each assignment report spreadsheet is placed in the assignment binder U2.14: assignment report is added to the binder at the secretary's desk

take other one and walk it to faculty mailboxes

U1.26: A copy of the assignment report is made for each instructor for each section U2.14: A copy of the assignment report is placed in the instructor's mailbox in the Writing Center

file under faculty name File coversheets take stack to filing cabinet U2.15: paper coversheets are

filed in the secretary's office file each coversheet under

section number RUNNING OUT OF ROOM

Receive confirmation from instructor that the assignment has been marked as turned in

TRIGGER: Assignment due date has passed but instructor will still accept assignment

U11.45: If a student misses a deadline, the writing center cannot accept the assignment directly U5.23: Instructor accepts late assignments - rather have students complete assignments than not do them at all U2.49 / U.11.46: Students who do not finish an assignment by a deadline date can ask their instructor if they can turn in the assignment later. The instructor must approve.


INTENT: Get credit for assignment

Complete Assignment consult the Writing Center Guide for assignment number and

due date

read assignment instructions in workbook

STUDENTS DON’T READ DIRECTIONS

U5.55: A common problem with students and the workbook is that they fail to read the directions

write assignment using workbook checklist

NOT ALL STUDENTS USE CHECKLIST

U5.21: There is a need to retell students to read over the checklist thoroughly U5.59: Students often have questions about or do not understand the coversheets and checklists found in the workbooks U10.1: Checklist is helpful in completing assignments

Have faculty evaluate assignment take assignment to faculty have faculty evaluate

assignment

If student fails assignment redo assignment and evaluation

process

If student caught cheating U5.29: Cheating is a growing problem at the Washtenaw Community College and occurs in writing center assignments

redo assignment and evaluation process

U5.31: If a tutor/instructor encounters cheating the student is told to redo the assignment

If student passes assignment fill out name, instructor, section #

on cover sheet DON'T KNOW SECTION NUMBER

U1.2: Students record wrong section # on coversheets U5.60: Students are confused about or forget their section # U2.26: Students are supposed to fill in their assignment forms (cover sheets / checklist) - recording their course # and section #. Sometimes students record an incorrect course # / section # U1.62: Students doing assignments need to make sure their name is legible on the coversheet.

OR have name, instructor, section # filled in beforehand

have faculty record pass, date, and signature on cover sheet

faculty rips out and takes assignment cover sheet to give to writing center

U2.50: Sometimes instructors bring in assignment cover sheets (typically these are late assignments) and hand them directly to the secretary


have faculty record pass, date, and signature on checklist

keep checklist and completed assignment as your receipt

OR if instructor wants everything turned in they take assignment and just leave coversheet

TRIGGER: Late assignment is handed in by faculty U2.50: Sometimes instructors

bring in assignment sheets (typically these are late assignments)

INTENT: Record evaluation data into section spreadsheet

Track completed late assignments open section spreadsheet

course section listed on assignment cover sheet

SECTION # WRONG U2.26: Sometimes students record incorrect course or section number U1.2 Students record wrong section number

enter X next to each student name under the assignment number

U1.25: Records finished assignment with a bold X U2.21: Indicates that an assignment is complete by typing a bold X

save Print completed section spreadsheet select print change copies to 2 U2.14: Assignment reports are

generated in duplicate collect printouts three hole punch one and

replace other in binder BINDER COPY NEEDS REPLACEMENT FOR LATE ASSIGNMENTS

U1.27: A copy of each assignment report spreadsheet is placed in the assignment binder U2.14: assignment report is added to the binder at the secretary's desk

take other one and walk it to faculty mailboxes U1.26: A copy of the assignment report is made for each instructor for each section U2.14: A copy of the assignment report is placed in the instructor's mailbox in the Writing Center

file under faculty name


File Coversheets take coversheet to filing cabinet U2.15: paper coversheets are

filed in the secretary's office replace previous coversheet PREVIOUS SHEET

WASTED

Receive confirmation from instructor that the assignment has been marked as turned in

TRIGGER: Discrepancy between instructor's list of completed assignments and what student has done INTENT: Fix discrepancy and get credit for work done

Prove student has done assignment go to see Writing Center

secretary U1.6: A binder is kept at the

secretary's desk that contains spreadsheets of finished assignments. Students can ask about missing assignment and this binder can be referenced by secretaries U1.7: Sometimes cover sheets are lost/misplaced. Corrections are made to assignment spreadsheets when coversheets are rediscovered. The binder helps keep track of these issues U.2.24: Cover sheets are kept in a filing cabinet and can be referenced if a student claims an assignment was turned in but not recorded U2.22 "Record Sheets Fall 2006" binder is divided with tabs for courses/sections. Kept at secretary's desk for referencing by secretary and faculty

show the secretary the complete and signed checklist for the assignment (if you have it)

U11.36: Checklist in workbook is used by tutor to determine if student passes assignment - the checklist is also a receipt (proof the assignment was completed and passed) U4.14: Receipts prevent misfiling U1.37: The checklist can be used to prove that a student finished an assignment if the cover sheet or reports are misplaced or incorrect


Verify record

open binder to student section number

IF DOESN’T KNOW SECTION # THEN MUST SEARCH THROUGH ALL LISTS

U1.6: A student asked about an assignment that was not recorded, the secretary referred to the binder U2.22: Binder can be referenced by secretary and faculty

see if X under student's assignment

If there is no X but the student has checklist (receipt) then update section spreadsheet If there is no X and the student does not have checklist then check

in filing cabinet for coversheet U1.7: Sometimes coversheets are lost, corrections are made when the coversheet is rediscovered

update section spreadsheet accordingly


Appendix B

Artifact Models

The paper-based forms utilized in the Assignment Evaluation Process – the Assignment Report generated by the administrative assistants, and the student workbook Cover Sheet and Checklist – are integral to the current tracking and recording of students’ accomplishments in the Writing Center. It has also been stated by the Writing Center’s director that the paper-based forms and reports should remain as part of the evaluation process because they are easy to use and deeply ingrained in the functioning of the Writing Center. In short, the infrastructure that is in place to manage the flow of information and record keeping of student assignment completions is strong and functions at a more than acceptable level. Since the Assignment Report, Checklist, and Cover Sheet (all types of “artifacts”) are all fundamental to the Assignment Evaluation Process, it was necessary to construct analytical models to ascertain how these papers functioned and to determine breakdowns, or complications, that are currently present in their physical form and in their usage. By creating such models it was possible to generate recommendations for new versions of the workbook forms, found in Appendix E and F, and for the Assignment Report, by migrating to Excel in the near future and developing a database of student assignment records at a later date. There are three models represented below: Assignment Report (referred to as an “Assignment Spreadsheet” in the model) Checklist Assignment Cover Sheet Each model contains a brief description of the artifact, an image of the artifact, and breakdowns indicated by red lightning bolts. Breakdown descriptions and other notes are provided based on data collected in interviews sampling all roles at the Writing Center: the director, administrative assistant, tutor, instructor, and student.


Appendix C

Physical Models

The physical models are based primarily on observations that were conducted during interviews with Writing Center staff and student visitors, and on standalone observation sessions where the movement of Writing Center users was recorded. Data gathered from actual interviews, sampling all user roles, was also utilized. In addition, photographs of the Writing Center were taken so that they could be referenced when constructing physical models and as additional data to be discussed in the process of generating recommendations for improving the Assignment Evaluation Process. The Washtenaw Community College Writing Center is a large physical space where acts and artifacts have a high level of motility. It was necessary to separate out two section of the Writing Center and expand them to provide more specific detail. Therefore, there are three physical models provided below that can be viewed separately or considered in totality:

Administrative Assistant Area Tutor/Instructor Area Writing Center The models presented here are based on the path that two essential artifacts take within the Writing Center as part of the Assignment Evaluation Process: 1) Workbook Cover Sheets that are completed during the student/tutor/instructor interaction and 2) Assignment Reports that are generated by the administrative assistants to report completed assignments to instructors. These artifacts are fundamental because they act as records of proof for completed assignments, and their travels through the Writing Center are closely tied to the movements of those involved in the Assignment Evaluation Process. Brief keys are provided on each model, though arrow/line affiliations are only recorded on the physical model titled Users 1-11 (U1-U11): Writing Center Consolidated Physical Model (Physical Model: Writing Center). The arrow/line affiliations remain the same in each section of the model. Red lightning bolt symbols are present in the models to indicate breakdowns in the Assignment Evaluation Process and the Writing Center’s physical space, and two document icons are included to indicate the two artifacts – the Cover Sheet and the Assignment Report. Letters found in parentheses on the models are references to data collected in interviews and observations. These references follow the three physical models. Although much of the physical space (such as the tools/equipment and the arrangement of furniture) has been included, some elements (such as the exact number of furniture pieces, the locations of plants, or the presence of windows) have been excluded. Only those elements that play a part in the Assignment Evaluation Process have been recorded in great detail. In the end, the physical models indicate that the Writing Center’s physical space, in all of its main areas, is relatively free of breakdowns and is easily navigated by both staff and students. This further affirms that the Writing Center has been designed, and continues to function, as a


welcoming environment for students seeking assignment evaluation and for members of Washtenaw Community College to study, to meet for course-related issues, and to socialize. Physical Model: Administrative Assistant Area


Physical Model: Tutor/Instructor Area


Physical Model: Writing Center


Physical Models: Data References (a) U1.3 Tutors, the director, and instructors file coversheets in the wrong cubbies – a frequent issue U1.4 There is more incorrect filing by student tutors than there are instances of students placing the incorrect section numbers on the assignment cover sheets U2.28 Sometimes the tutors/instructors do not place the assignment sheets in the correct cubby. Therefore, when the administrative assistant brings all of the assignment cover sheets from the day before to her desk she sometimes has to go back to a previous Microsoft Word template if she runs across an assignment from a different course/section. This takes up time. (b) U2.37 The filing cabinets holding the assignment cover sheets often fill up. This is why the orientation papers (the purple sheets) are not kept here. They are discarded in order to save room. This discarding was approved by the director. (c) U1.26 A copy of the assignment report spreadsheet is printed for each instructor for each section. U2.14 Every week, an assignment report spreadsheet (the completed Microsoft Word template), is generated in duplicate. One is placed in the English instructors’ mailbox in the Writing Center so that the instructors know which students have completed the assignment. Another copy is added to the “Record Sheets Fall 2006” binder that is kept at the administrative assistant’s desk. U4.13 A teacher gets a printout of a class sheet of everyone in section (d) U1.8 The assignment cover sheets are recorded in the assignment report spreadsheets the day after the deadline for those assignments. U1.9 The role of the administrative assistant in the Assignment Evaluation Process is primarily to record the completed assignment cover sheets. U1.23 In the morning the administrative assistant picks up assignments from the day before (the deadline). She only gathers the assignments once, and this occurs only the morning. U1.24 The assignment cover sheets are gathered in section order from the cubbies. The administrative assistant keeps them in section order when she takes the assignment cover sheets to her desk. U2.13 The next day, the administrative assistant collects the previous day’s assignment cover sheets and records student assignment completions in spreadsheets on the computer. (The spreadsheets are actually Microsoft Word templates.) U11.24 The primary role played by the Writing Center administrative assistants is to keep track of assignments. They retrieve assignments from the cubbies every day and make a record in a spreadsheet to indicate that a student has finished. (e)


U1.6 There is a reference binder at the administrative assistant’s desk that contains the assignment report spreadsheets. A student asked about an assignment that she had finished but was not recorded in an assignment report spreadsheet. The administrative assistant referred to the binder to find completed/uncompleted assignment records. The administrative assistant discovered that the student wrote the wrong section or course number on her cover sheet. U1.27 Another copy of the assignment report spreadsheet is printed for each instructor and section to be placed in the assignment binder kept at the administrative assistant’s desk. U1.36 The reference binder with assignment report spreadsheets that is kept at the administrative assistant’s desk can be (and is sometimes) used by instructors to check if an assignment has been finished. U2.14 Every week, an assignment report spreadsheet (the completed Microsoft Word template), is generated in duplicate. One is placed in the English instructors’ mailbox in the Writing Center so that the instructors know which students have completed the assignment. Another copy is added to the “Record Sheets Fall 2006” binder that is kept at the administrative assistant’s desk. U2.22 “Record Sheets Fall 2006” binder is divided by tabs indicating courses / sections. The binder is kept in the administrative assistant’s area of the Writing Center. This binder can be referenced by the administrative assistant and faculty. (f) U2.31 The administrative assistants are often interrupted by the telephone and by visitors to the Writing Center. This delays/lengthens the time it takes to enter assignments into the spreadsheets. The phone, especially, can be a major form of interruption. (g) U11.05 Conference rooms in the Writing Center are available for student/instructor meetings. (h) U1.41 The records – recorded on the Microsoft Word templates – are kept “for years”. They are kept on the computer and a final spreadsheet is generated on paper and filed in a filing cabinet located in the administrative assistant’s area. U1.42 The filing cabinet with the final spreadsheets from previous years is entitled Final Spreadsheets Semester Information 1984 to 2000 (i) U1.76 Every cover sheet from the workbooks is saved for a full year U2.15 The assignment cover sheets gathered by the administrative assistant from the cubbies are then filed (by course and section number) in hanging folders in a filing cabinet located in the administrative assistant’s area. One filing drawer is for Fall 2006 and another for the winter semester. U2.24 The filing cabinet sheets can be referenced if a student claims an assignment was turned in but not recorded on the assignment report spreadsheets given to faculty members. The filing cabinet drawers are labeled: “Recording Sheets – Fall” and “Recording Sheets – Winter” U2.44 Assignment cover sheets that are entered into the spreadsheets are kept for nine months then discarded. U11.25 Assignment evaluation records are kept for a year and then thrown out


(j) U2.10 Students visit the writing center to show assignments to tutors and/or instructors for evaluation and to be approved U11.02 Students stand in a line, starting at the formation ropes. Students also sit at the tables while waiting – to study, to write, and to relax. A couch is also available. U11.08 The Writing Center’s service is a first come, first serve basis. No appointments. U11.11 There is occasionally a long line – 20 to 25 students – but not often that large. (k) U2.11 The tutors/instructors approve the assignment or ask that the student make corrections. If the assignments are not initially approved the student makes corrections until it is approved U2.53 Computer lab – when tutors say an assignment needs to be reworked, sometimes the students are sent to the computer lab or choose to go to the computer lab to make corrections and then return to the tutors. U5.31 If a student tutor encounters cheating he or she tells the student to redo the assignment U7.26 Students in the queue at the Writing Center see the next available tutor. If changes need to be made to the assignment the student goes to fix it. When finished the student can skip the line and go to the same tutor again. (l) U2.12 The tutors/instructors place the assignment sheets into the cubbies found behind them. The cubbies are labeled by course number and section number. U5.26 The faculty members perform very similar tasks to what the student tutors perform in the Writing Center. They evaluate Writing Center Assignments. They are familiar with the cover sheets and checklists. They file cover sheets in the cubbies. U4.12 Cubbyholes are by section number and are just for evaluations (assignment cover sheets) (m) U5.64 Students don’t “pick and choose” often with student tutors. Students like to go back to the same person if making corrections and in general. U7.26 Students in the queue at the Writing Center see the next available tutor. If changes need to be made to the assignment the student goes to fix it. When finished the student can skip the line and go to the same tutor again. (n) U3.13 Tutor fears taking cover sheets out of the Writing Center with her when she goes to class (o) U3.07 Tutor reads paper while student sits U3.08 Some tutors mark and talk at the same time, others mark and then talk U3.09 The tutor discusses recommendations after reading U3.10 The tutor signs both the cover sheet and the checklist while the student waits (if the assignment is passed) U3.11 The cover sheet is ripped out and placed in a stack on the table


Ob1.1 Students sit at the tutor tables, tutors read the assignment and make comments when they are finished reading or they make comments while they read. Students sometimes sit for a long period of time, quietly, when the tutor is reading the entire written assignment. (p) U4.11 Computers with slideshows playing are rarely used. The director programs the slideshows. U11.03 There is a television (currently not working) that often shows PowerPoint presentations related to the Writing Center and its services. There are also at least two computer monitors by the tutor/instructor tables that display PowerPoint presentations. (q) Ob1.2 Behind the tutor tables there is a pillar and counter area that protrudes out from the wall. On this counter are two computers showing PowerPoint presentations. Currently, in the way that the tutor tables are set up, there is little room between the protrusion and the tutor tables located nearer to the administration assistant’s area. If the Writing Center is busy and there are a number of tutors and instructors working it may be difficult to traverse this area to get to the cubbies where assignment cover sheets are filed by tutors/instructors and gathered by the administration assistants. (r) U11.03 There is a television (currently not working) that often shows PowerPoint presentations related to the Writing Center and its services. There are also at least two computer monitors by the tutor/instructor tables that display PowerPoint presentations. (s) U11.04 There is a computer lab in the Writing Center that is for classroom usage, but it is also available to students (for word processing, etc.) when classes are not in session


Appendix D

Communication Model Communication in the Writing Center, particularly in regard to the Assignment Evaluation Process, takes two main forms, verbal communication between all those involved and the passage of paper-based forms (Cover Sheets and Assignment Reports) from one actor in the process to another. The evaluation process is situated within the larger infrastructure of the Writing Center and therefore, tutor training, workbook editing, teaching and other ongoing sources of communication are included as necessary resources that help with the more specific task of evaluating and tracking student assignments. The administrative assistant sits at the center of this diagram because the two staff members performing this function are responsible for the record keeping and for the conveyance of verbal communication between other parties at the Writing Center. Superscript numbers in the model are references to data collected through interviews and observations, and these are found following the actual model. Breakdowns in the communication between actors involved in the Writing Center are indicated by yellow lightning bolts and also referenced by collected data. The forms (or “artifacts”) utilized in order to facilitate the flow of information about student assignment completions are depicted in the communication model as boxes and actors in the process are indicated by circles.


Communication Model: Data References 1: U1.27: A copy of each assignment report spreadsheet is placed in the assignment binder U2.14: assignment report is added to the binder at the secretary's desk 2: U2.13: [secretary] Collects previous day's assignment cover sheets from cubby holes 3: U1.64: Information that the tutors need to know is provided by the director 4: U11.75 Faculty get course rosters in HTML format on MyWCC (intranet). U1.43 A major task with the Assignment Evaluation Process for the secretary is entering the names of students into the Microsoft Word templates based on the class rosters that are accessed through the Washtenaw Community College’s intranet. 5: U4.12: Cubbyholes are by section number and are just for evaluations. Tutors find correct section number and file student cover sheet.

6: U11.18 Tutors meet with students to evaluate writing, to answer questions, and to make sure a student has finished their assignment. U2.10: Students visit the writing center to show assignments to tutors/instructors for evaluation 7: U11.36 Workbooks. Pg. 1: cover sheet torn out by tutor. Pg. 2: checklist that tutor uses to determine if student passes – stays in the book (like “a receipt”). 8: U2.50: Sometimes instructors bring in assignment cover sheets (typically these are late assignments) and hand them directly to the secretary. 9: U2.15: paper coversheets are filed in the secretary's office U.2.24: Cover sheets are kept in a filing cabinet and can be referenced if a student claims an assignment was turned in but not recorded 10: U1.26: A copy of the assignment report is made for each instructor for each section 11: U2.49 / U.11.46: Students who do not finish an assignment by a deadline date can ask their instructor if they can turn in the assignment later. 12: U1.6: A binder is kept at the secretary's desk that contains spreadsheets of finished assignments. Students can ask about missing assignment and this binder can be referenced by secretaries. 13: U2.22 "Record Sheets Fall 2006" binder is divided with tabs for courses/sections. Kept at secretary's desk for referencing by secretary and faculty 14: U1.7: Sometimes cover sheets are lost/misplaced. Corrections are made to assignment spreadsheets when coversheets are rediscovered. The binder helps keep track of these issues


15: U11.43 The workbooks are revised every spring and new editions are issued in the fall. U11.71 Workbooks are revised every spring. Faculty contribute. Assignments written by faculty. Director in charge of editing and creation of the final product. 16: U11.66 Most feedback about assignments, etc. is verbal and lost. 17: U5.16 For late assignments, the workbook checklist, cover sheet, and assignment work are turned into this instructor. She then asks for revisions if necessary. 18: U1.41 The records – recorded on the Microsoft templates – are kept “for years”. They are kept on the computer and a final spreadsheet is generated on paper and filed in a filing cabinet located in the secretary’s area. U1.42 The filing cabinets with the final spreadsheets from previous years are entitled Final Spreadsheets Semester Information 1984 to 2000. 19: U1.55 The biggest time consumers for the secretary are answering student questions/helping students and the recording of assignments.


Appendix E

Mock-up of New Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet - Visitor Information Sheet

In order to alleviate filing mistakes and the cumbersome nature of the current system of recording assignment completions based on section numbers and due dates, this report has recommended the creation of a visitor information sheet that would replace the current Cover Sheet found in assignment workbooks. This new information sheet would perform the same function as the currently used Cover Sheet, but it would also provide additional information, particularly in regard to those students who visit the Writing Center seeking assistance outside of the English courses requiring Writing Center visitation. This recommended visitor information sheet would also provide more data on the students visiting for assignment evaluation that might give the Writing Center a better idea of how students are handling specific assignments. The letters listed indicate specific sections on the suggested visitor information sheet found below. A This section is meant to provide very basic information about the student visiting the Writing Center. Students fill in their surname, first name, and middle initial by writing one letter per bracketed space. The use of these brackets is meant to encourage clear printing by students so that the administrative assistants do not encounter illegible names when recording assignment completions. The same device is used for the numbers that are entered in the WCC ID# section. Student name and WCC ID# are located at the top of the Visitor Information Sheet because these are meant to be the primary methods of recording assignment completions in the future, particularly if a database system is implemented. Although students might not know their WCC ID#, if they do, this will add an additional method of recording and tracking student assignment completions or the recording of new students. B Section B is dedicated to those students who visit the Writing Center as part of the Assignment Evaluation Process. The student or a tutor/instructor would check the box next to “ASSIGNMENT EVALUATION” to indicate that this is why the student has visited the Writing Center. A student’s course information would be recorded by circling an English class and entering the section #, classroom instructor, and the assignment number from the workbook. It was often reported that students forget their section # or accidentally record an incorrect section #. This new form only asks that students enter their section # if it is known, but through the development of a database to record assignment completions the section # will not be used as the primary method of filing and tracking records. Therefore, this field has been made less significant on this new form, as opposed to the current Cover Sheet, and moved from the top (where a student’s name is most important) to a middle section. Section B also contains check boxes for “TIMES ASSIGNMENT ATTEMPTED”. This can either be filled out by the student or checked by the tutor/instructor after asking the student how many times they have had to have their assignment evaluated. By accumulating such data, the Writing Center could determine which assignments students struggle with the most (indicated by the amount of times they have seen a tutor or instructor for that assignment), and also see what students are struggling in


general with their writing on an individual basis. Lastly, Section B of the recommended replacement for the Cover Sheet includes a grading area to be used exclusively by the Writing Staff member that is evaluating the assignment. Currently, the Cover Sheet only collections information about whether a student has passed an assignment. On this new form it is possible to capture data on whether a student performed exceptionally on an assignment or only adequately. This mock-up includes High Pass / Low Pass, but this scheme could include other variations, such as a system of checks (√+, √, √-) or with numerals indicating level of achievement (3, 2, 1). C The suggested replacement for the currently used Cover Sheet is also meant to capture data on student visitors to the Writing Center not affiliated with the English courses providing workbooks and requiring Writing Center use. Section C has been designed so that non-required visitors are represented. The student or the instructor/tutor would check the “OTHER” box to indicate that they are not using the Writing Center for an assignment evaluation. The “First Time Visitor?” check boxes are present to provide the Writing Center with data on how many new visitors they receive, and the “REASON FOR VISIT” and “COURSE NAME” areas are meant to provide additional data on why students make use of the Writing Center. This data can then be utilized to see which Washtenaw Community College classes tend to generate visits to the Writing Center, the types of needs those not participating in the Assignment Evaluation Process have, and to justify the Writing Center’s existence to the Washtenaw Community College administration and other departments by showing that the center serves student needs outside of those English courses requiring assignment evaluation. D Section D is for use only by the staff of the Writing Center and is included to capture data on student needs or issues, to comment on a student’s writing, and, by signature, officially approve an assignment evaluation or indicate the completion of a Writing Center visit by those not enrolled in English courses requiring use of the workbook. The checkboxes are provided as suggestions, though their exact wording or inclusion would be at the discretion of the Writing Center director. By capturing English as a Second Language students (ESL) or issues with cheating, amongst the other suggestions, the Writing Center will be able to collect richer data on the students who seek help or have required assignments evaluated. The lines provided for comments is an area where tutors/instructors can record information specific to the student - problems they are having with a particular assignment, concerns about cheating, etc. – or where they can record their own comments about an assignment or the Writing Center in general. The comments section therefore can function as both a student performance feedback section and a tutor/instructor feedback section about issues outside of a student’s work. Comments and additional data could be recorded in a database in addition to the completion of assignments.


Appendix F

Mock-up of New Checklist

The development of a new checklist is also recommended for reasons closely tied to our recommendation for a new Writing Center visitor’s form that would replace the currently used workbook Assignment Evaluation Cover Sheet. A new checklist has been recommended so that student failure to read directions or to follow the checklist that is currently being utilized, which is also referenced by the tutors and instructors evaluating assignments, is addressed so that students can achieve all of the necessary requirements for the assignment. It is recommended that the current checklist be removed from future incarnations of the workbooks and its contents incorporated into the assignment itself. By placing the checklist – the required elements of the assignment – at both the beginning of the assignment, before the introductory materials and directions, and at the end of the assignment, students will be reminded twice about what is required from them. First, by eliminating the separate checklist, as it currently is, the Writing Center can avoid checklists accidentally being removed from the workbook and being mistakenly filed with the Cover Sheets by tutors and instructors, or the loss of the checklists. Secondly, by incorporating the checklist into the assignment students will more likely give it the attention it deserves instead of skipping or glossing over the separate checklist as it currently appears in the workbook. A student starting an assignment will be introduced to, at the start, what is expected of them, and, by replicating the checklist at the end of the assignment, the student will be reminded of what is required of them in order to pass. A sample is provided below as a suggestion for how the checklist might be incorporated into the beginning and ending of an assignment. Checklist: First Page A The checklist that is currently found on a separate page in assignment workbooks, following the Cover Sheet, has now been transposed to the front page of the assignment introduction and directions. This way, the assignment’s requirements are available on the same page as the assignment, providing the student with a quick list of the necessary items needed in their finished work for the assignment to be evaluated positively. Student information located on the current checklist, such as name, classroom instruction, and section number, do not need to be repeated each time an assignment is completed. Students already record this information on the first page of the workbook. Therefore, it has been removed from the recommended new checklist. B This is the same checklist, only located in a different area on the front page of the assignment. It is meant to suggest an alternative placement of the checklist. Checklist: Last Page


A This section is a replication of the checklist that is also located at the beginning of the assignment. As the student reads through the assignment’s introduction and specific directions, they may lose track of what is required in order to receiving a pass when the assignment is evaluated. The student will now be reminded of what is required, and by incorporating a phrase such as “Did you remember to… ?”, students may be more aware of what is necessary for a good evaluation. Writing Center staff will continue to use this checklist for assignment evaluations as they currently do, but now the checklist is presented in a manner that puts more responsibility on the student. B The contents of this section are primarily a derivation from the checklist’s contents in its current incarnation. The section is demarcated from A by shading and the phrase “OFFICIAL WRITING CENTER USE ONLY” in order to indicate that students are not to use this section. Tutors and instructors will evaluate the assignment and then sign and date if the assignment passes. In order to provide more information to the student in hopes of improving their writing, the inclusion of a High Pass / Low Pass and a Comments section are included in this sample. By indicating High Pass / Low Pass, a record that will also be found on the Visitor Information Sheet, the student is able to gain a better of understand of how they did on the assignment. High Pass / Low Pass is only one method of providing students and the Writing Center with further details on assignment performance. This scheme could be replaced with a system of checks (√+, √, √-) or with numerals indicating level of achievement (3, 2, 1). The Comments section, not available on the current checklist, would allow the tutor or instructor evaluating the assignment to record some relevant points that may be instructive to the student for the future assignments they will complete in the workbook and for their writing in general. This way, students have an actual record of their writing, both positive aspects and areas needing improvement, that they can refer to at a later date. Comments will also allow students to track their progress as they go through the workbook and onto other English courses. The fields that require a student’s name, the name of their classroom instructor, and their section # have been eliminated from this proposed new checklist because they have been deemed as superfluous. If the student’s name, classroom instructor, and section number are recorded at the front of the workbook, as is the format of current workbooks, than it is unnecessary for students to record this on each checklist.


Checklist: First Page


Checklist: Last Page


Appendix G

Additional Recommendations

Through the process of data collection and analysis, recommendations were generated that were deemed significant yet outside of the scope of the report’s main text. Although these recommendations do not fit within the context of the main report, and some may not deal directly with the Assignment Evaluation Process, they may be beneficial to the Washtenaw Community College Writing Center in practice or, if considered, may produce further solutions.

• Numerous tutor incentives should be implemented in the short and long term. A head tutor could be appointed, possibly chosen based on feedback on other tutors. This corresponds well with the common tutor aim to build their resumes through work at the Writing Center.

• Larger and more concise signage should be posted in the computer lab regarding printing

rules to alleviate paper wastage. It is also recommended that printing in the computer lab should be tied to student’s WCC ID# or an established printing account that would allow them to print a set limit of pages per semester. If they exceed this printing level they can print further by paying a per-page fee

• Provide periodic check-ups for students involved in the Assignment Evaluation Process

to monitor their current progress, to applaud their efforts, or to make suggestions on how to improve their writing for future assignments. Check-ups could be conducted every three or four weeks.

• At the beginning of a term, tutors could visit those English courses required to use the

Writing Center for the Assignment Evaluation Process to introduce students to the Writing Center, to the workbooks, and to how the evaluation system is conducted.

• For those students and staff who are interested and have access to web-based content, the

Writing Center could establish a blog that would provide updates on events at the Writing Center, important writing news and reports (about significant authors, for instance), and sections dedicated to a specific element of writing style. A wiki could be established in which tutors, instructors, and students could add content about writing, authors, and share their own works.

The Assignment Evaluation Process

Documents

Transcript of The Assignment Evaluation Process