The McGraw-Hill Guide Writing for College, Writing for Life

xliii, 927 hlm.; 24 c

Richness in writing : empowering ESL students

xiv, 306 p. ; 23 cm

A Matrix for Reconsidering, Reassessing, and Shaping E–Learning Pedagogy and Curriculum

Educational stakeholders are increasingly engaged in discussions about the effective design, distribution, and evaluation of e-learning. We invite educators to build on already existing scholarship as they make future e-learning decisions. Specifically, we combine four categories of academic scholarship from Boyer (1990) with six assessment criteria from Glassick, Huber, and Maeroff (1997) to construct a matrix that may be applied to any post-secondary learning or teaching context. We argue that while each medium in which faculty might find themselves teaching differs from others, the teaching itself, and effective teaching in general, is definable and, therefore, can be evaluated using the matrix

The McGraw-Hill guide writing for college, writing for life

New Yorkxliii, (927+170) p.; 24 c

The McGraw-Hill guide : writing for College, Writing for Life 1 Ed

The McGraw-Hill Guide to Writing dirancang untuk membantu siswa belajar menulis lebih efektif tidak hanya di program kuliah mereka tetapi juga dalam kehidupan profesional, kewarganegaraan, dan pribadi mereka. Menggabungkan pembaca yang fleksibel, retorika, panduan penelitian, dan buku pegangan, The McGraw-Hill Guide menunjukkan kepada siswa cara menetapkan tujuan untuk tulisan mereka, menggunakan strategi penyusunan yang efektif untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut, dan untuk menilai kemajuan mereka menuju pencapaiannya. Berdasarkan gagasan bahwa penulis yang efektif adalah komunikator yang kuat dalam konteks apa pun, The McGraw-Hill Guide to Writing menekankan keterampilan yang ditetapkan oleh Pernyataan Hasil Administrator Program Penulisan yang membentuk dasar praktik penilaian pada program penulisan di seluruh negeri - pengetahuan retorika, pemikiran kritis, proses penulisan, dan konvensi. Keterampilan ini membentuk dasar instruksi di setiap bab penugasan dan di seluruh teks

Handbook for the McGraw-Hill guide : writing for college, writing for life

108 p. ; 23 cm

Collaborative Assessment of Dual Enrollment: The View From Arizona

In the last 10 years, scholars in composition studies have begun to take stock of the seismic impact of dual credit and concurrent enrollment pathways (DC/CE) on the landscape of composition programs. Nearly every aspect of DC/CE has come under scrutiny with particular emphasis placed on the relative rigor of curricula, questions of equitable access for high school students, the quality of training available for faculty, growth far outpacing accreditation or even clear oversight, and the lack of reliable data about DC/CE practices in general. We describe these issues as they have emerged with the national rise of DC/CE programs. Drawing on position statements from professional organizations and a range of recent scholarship, we add our voice to those in our discipline offering a thoroughgoing inventory of the state of DC/CE practices. Using our local context in Arizona as a case study, we recommend a collaborative approach to developing criteria for assessing DC/CE curricula, exploring among other models Bob Broad's approach to "dynamic criteria mapping", which provides us with a framework for organizing collaborative assessment in Arizona. With an eye to our own local institutional history and dynamic, we recommend that our state English Articulation Task Force (ATF) is best positioned to take on a coordinating role among stakeholders in secondary and postsecondary institutions. We offer this local recommendation as one example of how states can engage pedagogical and policy issues (assessment central among them) by forming and maintaining a collaborative approach suited to local contexts in order to move more fully toward our field's emerging sense of best assessment practices. Keywords: dual enrollment; assessment; collaborative assessment; articulation; transfer agreements; state policy; Arizon

Moving Beyond the Common Core to Develop Rhetorically Based and Contextually Sensitive Assessment Practices

Much political and disciplinary debate has occurred regarding The Common Core State Standards and the development and implementation of concomitant standardized tests generated by the two national assessment consortia: The Partnerships for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC). In entering the debate about K-12 standardized assessment, the authors critique the top-down model of assessment that has dominated K-12 education and is currently being promoted by the national assessment consortia, and how the assessments associated with the national assessment consortia promote an interpretation of college readiness from a skill-based framework. Moreover, we examine PARCC by using content analysis to illustrate how it is an inflexible assessment measure that fails to capture the complexity of learning, specifically in literacy based on more than thirty years of disciplinary research. In contrast, using the construct of college readiness as defined by National Council of Teachers of English, National Writing Project, and Writing Program Administrators in The Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing (Framework), we champion the Framework as not only a viable alternative for conceptualizing effective methods for teaching and learning for college readiness, but also as a heuristic for developing rhetorically based and contextually sensitive assessment practices through the implementation of portfolio assessment