Lists six recommendations made by consultants who evaluated a writing program at Lehigh University. Gives a brief history of the problem that led to each of the recommendations. Offers five tips for others who are thinking of doing a writing program evaluation. (MG)

Presents a draft (representing a massive revision) of the guidelines that have directed campus self-studies (preceding visits from WPA consultant-evaluators) for over a decade. Requests interested persons to make comments and propose changes to the draft document. (RS)

Describes the institutional and programmatic context in which a consultant-evaluation visit was requested at Washington State University and the evaluators' recommendations and subsequent changes that have taken place. Lists five reasons for requesting an evaluation. (MG)

Discusses why, despite successes in other universities, some writing across the curriculum (WAC) programs are struggling to survive. Discusses faulty assumptions about WAC and competing priorities within the university. Concludes that WAC forces institutions to reexamine their identity. (RS)

Proposes a model for writing program administrators to use to assess the effectiveness of composition programs. Argues the need to consider local conditions, evaluate the internal coherence of programs, and consider the external relevance of programs. Describes how using this model led the Writing Center at Northern Arizona University to make…

Argues that the writing program administrator's role of developing and maintaining a program that embodies and tests theoretical principles is a scholarly activity and should be recognized as such. Claims that the traditional disciplinary view restricting scholarship to written publication must be broadened. (RS)