Published scholarship in writing assessment has expressed a growing consensus around the value of locally-controlled assessment practices, as well as the relationship between writing assessment and social justice. At the same time, this scholarship has little representation of student perspective. This project responds to these disciplinary exigencies, as well as local interest in the first-year writing (FYW) placement process, and proceeds with a methodology of epistemic decolonization, informed both by writing assessment scholarship, as well as by indigenous and decolonial scholars. In this project, I ask two central research questions: (1) What did FYW students want to know about FYW placement? and (2) What were FYW students' experiences of placement? In response to the first question, I found that FYW students wanted to know about the technical operation of FYW placement, whether the placement process expresses biases, and whether students found their FYW courses helpful. In response to the second question, I was able to draw the following conclusions: (1) the current FYW placement model expresses biases toward specific racial and ethnic formations at Michigan State; (2) students' perceptions about their courses' helpfulness revealed a lack of distinction between Preparation for College Writing (PCW) and 100-level courses; (3) some interview participants found unique benefits associated with the ethnic and racial segregation that was a consequence of the placement process's biases. On the basis of these findings, I offer several recommendations for the FYW program at Michigan State, including alternatives to the current placement process. Additionally, I offer methodological considerations for writing assessment scholars.
Read
