Continuing a practice I most recently iterated at the end of the November 2017 session at DeVry University in San Antonio, comments below offer impressions of class performance among students enrolled in ENGL 216 during the January 2017 term at that institution. After a brief outline of the course and statistics about it, impressions and implications for further teaching are discussed.

Students enrolled in ENGL 216: Technical Writing during the November 2017 session were asked to complete a number of assignments in quick succession. Many, and the weightiest, related to the overall course project; others were homework meant to practice skills used in the workplace and in later stages of the course project. Those assignments and their prescribed point-values are

• Online Discussions
  • Weeks 1-5, 20 points each
  • Weeks 6 and 7, 80 points each
• Homework Assignments
  • Weeks 1-4, 50 points each
• Course Project
  • Topic Proposal- 20 points
  • Annotated Sources- 50 points
  • Outline and Back Matter- 50 points
  • First Draft- 70 points
  • Front Matter- 40 points
  • Final Draft- 100 points
  • Presentation- 60 points
• Final Exam- 150 points
• Total- 1000 points

As before, most assignments were assessed by means of rubrics provided by the institution. Some few were assessed holistically, with assessment being conducted more gently in light of less formality.

The section met on Wednesdays from 1800-2150 in Room 107 of the San Antonio campus of DeVry University. Its overall data includes

• End-of-term enrollment: 7
• Average class score: 693.429/1000 (D)
  • Standard deviation: 251.505
• Students earning a grade of A (900/1000 points or more): 1
• Students earning a grade of F (below 600/1000 points): 2

Unlike previous sessions, attendance was assessed as part of classroom activities; a component of the discussion grading each week was given to in-class attendance and participation. Consequently, attendance data is available; on average, 2.625/7 students attended each class meeting, with 35 total absences noted. The absences, and their concomitant rate of non-submission, exerted negative influence on overall student performance.

On the whole, I think the session was a good one. Despite the lower average score–occasioned by student non-attendance and non-submission–I had students doing better work overall. I am unsure what else I can do to get students to show up to class, but I am doing quite a bit for those who do attend when they have signed up to do so. I expect, then, that I will continue several practices from the session into future courses.

This session, I remembered to bring “real-world” examples of various types of writing into my classroom frequently, and the students who attended seemed to derive benefit from my doing so. I am already making sure to continue the practice in my current teaching, and, as I have been advised I will be teaching ENGL 216 again, I know I will be working to replicate the January 2018 session’s success.

Some concerns still persist from previous teaching, however. Foremost is that I remain prone to tangential discussions; the idea that I will be able to set them aside is laughable. If and as I continue to teach, they will continue to have to be accounted for and accepted. But they seemed at least to have been informative for students this time, which marks a welcome change.

As ever, I remain grateful for the opportunity to continue teaching. I look forward to having a few more such.

 

For the final meeting of the session, class time was given over wholly to the course’s institution-mandated final exam. No other activities were conducted on site, although the classroom, Rm. 107 of the San Antonio campus, was made available at the expected time, 1800.

The course roster listed seven students enrolled, unchanged since the last meeting; none attended. Student participation was as would be expected in such a circumstance. As noted in the previous report, office hours for the week were canceled against the instructor’s daughter’s birthday.

For the Valentine’s Day edition of the class, discussion opened with questions from the previous class meeting and before. It continued with notes about style and mechanics before examining an example of student work and a professional example. Further, assignments were discussed, such as

• Course Project: Final Draft, to be submitted online as a Word document before 0059 on 19 February 2018
• Course Project: Presentation, to be submitted as a PowerPoint file before 0059 on 19 February 2018
• Discussion posts, to be completed online before 0059 on 19 February 2018

Students were afforded time to complete class surveys, as requested by administration. Students were also reminded that the Final Exam will take up class next week; the classroom will be open at the regular class time, although it may be closed early if no students attend on-site.

Class met as scheduled, at 1800 in Rm. 107 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster listed seven students enrolled, unchanged since the last meeting; two attended, assessed informally. Student participation was reasonably good. No students attended office hours Monday from approx. 1800 to approx. 1900 online (office hours are scheduled to 2000, but an hour in, with no attendees, they were ended).

Students are advised that office hours for Week 8, which would have occurred on 19 February 2018 at 1800, are cancelled in favor of the instructor’s daughter’s birthday.

After addressing some few procedural notes and questions from the previous class meeting, discussion turned to concerns of front matter, order of composition, and review. An example of earlier student work was treated at some length. Assignments were discussed, such as

• Course Project: Front Matter, to be submitted online as a Word document before 0059 on 12 February 2018
• Discussion posts, to be completed online before 0059 on 12 February 2018

Class met as scheduled, at 1800 in Rm. 107 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster listed seven students enrolled, unchanged since the last meeting; three attended, assessed informally. Student participation was reasonably good. No students attended office hours Monday from approx. 1800 to approx. 1900 online. (Office hours are scheduled to approx. 2000, but after an hour without student attendance, they were closed.)