Interchanges: Response to Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein’s “Everything-but-the-Kitchen-Sink Assessment” and “Graff and Birkenstein Response” in Symposium: Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs

References

1. Adler-KassnerLindaWardleElizabetheditorsNaming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing StudiesUtah State UP2015
   [Google Scholar]
2. BehmNicholas N.et al.editorsThe WPA Outcomes Statement—A Decade LaterParlor P2013
   [Google Scholar]
3. DryerDylan B.et al.“Revising FYC Outcomes for a Multimodal, Digitally Composed World: The WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition (Version 3.0).”WPA: Writing Program Administration381201412944
   [Google Scholar]
4. GallagherChris W.“Gallagher Response.”“Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs,”50305
   [Google Scholar]
5. GraffGeraldBirkensteinCathy“Everything-but-the-Kitchen-Sink Assessment.”“Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs,”47985
   [Google Scholar]
6. HarringtonSusanmarieet al.editorsThe Outcomes Book: Debate and Consensus after the WPA Outcomes StatementUtah State UP2005
   [Google Scholar]
7. HerzbergBruce“Assessment, Coherence, and Standardization in the Writing Program.”“Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs,”48592
   [Google Scholar]
8. HirschE. D.Cultural Literacy: What Every American Needs to KnowVintage1987
   [Google Scholar]
9. LeverenzCarrie S.“Redesigning Writing Outcomes.”WPA: Writing Program Administration4012016349
   [Google Scholar]
10. PoeMyaet al.editorsWriting Assessment, Social Justice, and the Advancement of OpportunityPerspectives on WritingWAC Clearinghouse and UP of Colorado2018
    [Google Scholar]
11. SillsEllery“Making Composing Policy Audible: A Genealogy of the WPA Outcomes Statement 3.0.”College Composition and Communication70120185781
    [Google Scholar]
12. “Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs.”Symposiumedited byGallagherChris W.College Composition and Communication7032019476507
    [Google Scholar]
13. WardleElizabeth Ann.“Contradiction, Constraint, and Re-mediation: An Activity Analysis of FYC Motives.”2003Retrospective Theses and Dissertations1471Iowa State Uhttps://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/1471
    [Google Scholar]
14. WhiteEdward M.et al.Very Like a Whale: The Assessment of Writing ProgramsUtah State UP2015
    [Google Scholar]
15. “WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition.”WPA: Writing Program Administration23119995970
    [Google Scholar]
16. “WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition (3.0), Approved July 17, 2014”WPA: Writing Program Administration381201414246
    [Google Scholar]
17. GallagherChris W.“Gallagher Response.”“Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs,”50305
    [Google Scholar]
18. GraffGeraldBirkensteinCathy“Everything-but-the-Kitchen-Sink Assessment.”“Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs,”47985
    [Google Scholar]
19. HolidayJudy“Competing Discourses within the WPA Outcomes Statement.”The WPA Outcomes Statement—A Decade Lateredited byBehmNicholas N.et al.Parlor P201324256
    [Google Scholar]
20. ThonneyTheresa“Teaching the Conventions of Academic Discourse.”Teaching English in the Two-Year College384201134762
    [Google Scholar]
21. “Standardization, Democratization, and Writing Programs.”Symposiumedited byGallagherChris W.College Composition and Communication7032019476507
    [Google Scholar]
22. WardleElizabeth“‘Mutt Genres’ and the Goal of FYC: Can We Help Students Write the Genres of the University?”College Composition and Communication604200976589
    [Google Scholar]
23. “WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition (3.0), Approved July 17 2014.”WPA: Writing Program Administration381201414246
    [Google Scholar]