This morning the Research Team led the second in-service of the autumn quarter. For the past year the Team has been assessing the effectiveness of UCWbL practices and programs. And since you, the tutors, fellows, and staff members, are the people daily implementing these practices and programs, we figured it was about time we let you know how you’ve been doing.
During this in-service, we invited a roomful of UCWbLians to consider charts, numbers, and comments extracted from three of our recent reports. The first was a statistics report derived from WCOnline data; the second was a report formed from responses to the Writing Center End of Year survey, and the third report had been generated from the survey students with writing fellows fill out at the end of each quarter.
The good news on all fronts is that the UCWbL is growing, expanding, and generally keeping people happy. Check out the facts below to feel encouraged about your work:
The Total demand for Writing Center appointments has continued to increase.
- Number of appointments increased 19.8% from 2009/10 to 2010/11.
- Number of appointments increased 85.6% from 2006/07 (when the UCWbL began) to 2010/11.
The Loop Writing Center has grown in popularity.
- The Loop accounted for 50% of all face-to-face appointments in 2010/11, compared to 39% in 2009/10.
Online Tutor Module (OTM) appointments have become more and more popular.
- OTMs increased 35.8% from 2009/10 to 2010/11.
- OTMs increased 1110.6% from 2007/8 (when they were first offered) to 2009/11.
Students who visit the Writing Center have higher GPAs than the average DePaul student.
- Undergrad university average: 3.15 Undergrad Writing Center users: 3.22
- Graduate university average: 3.52 Graduate Writing Center users: 3.6
Of the writers who took part in the Writing Fellows program during the 2010/11 academic year:
- 81% said their fellow helped them feel confident.
- 94% said that, overall, their papers were better because of working with a Writing Fellow.
In addition to being invigorated by all these compellingly positive numbers, those of us at the in-service were able to engage in discussion about what these numbers signify, how our research methods can be improved, and how we might continue to raise positive response rates. Particularly interesting topics conversation included: historical factors of UCWbL growth, the occasional value of not reading papers out loud, and the effects of Spring Quarter doldrums on the Writing Fellows program.
Our thanks to all who joined us for your thoughts, attention, and insights. And congratulations to us all for continuing to assist writers in meaningful ways.