WAC/WID and the Urban Minority University

Now, we come full circle, back to the purpose of this blog. Why WAC, why the HBCU, why the two together?

Many of our students will be entering into careers where knowing the language of the profession is perhaps one of the most important tools we can give them. Despite our desires, we live in a country that still has its perceptions of who belongs where, and  how we present ourselves in situations where the perception can be changed are few and far between, with the change being difficult to enact. AAVE (African-American Vernacular English) is looked down upon while SAE (Standard American English) is celebrated.

Therefore, giving students the ability to represent themselves as masters of the language of their profession is key. More importantly, the sooner we start, the sooner students can become comfortable with that language. By introducing WAC in our general education courses, we start giving students the tools they need to succeed in their major courses. By promoting students to use their major disciplines as an entryway into the material of a general education course, we can develop the a collective, collaborative, communicative atmosphere that will serve these students beyond just their university educations. In using WID in the more content heavy courses, especially in the majors, students will discover the process of developing material, hopefully go beyond the idea of the grade, become experts in their fields, and, most importantly, hopefully, become better writers who can see the joy and importance of writing itself.

In addition, WAC and WID have the opportunity to divorce ourselves from the endless AAVE and SAE debate by presenting each discipline as having its own language. When a student is learning the language of their discipline, it is as if they are learning French or Spanish or some other foreign language. It allows us, then, the opportunity to present SAE and AAVE as not aspects of a hierarchy, but as just two equally important languages, just like every other language. Each has its own place in the world, just like the language that engineers or educators speak. Letus stop looking at them on a hierarchy, just presenting it linguistic purpose (Plus, no matter what, this doesn't have to be an either/or situation).

It is also the opportunity for instructors to collaborate. We should be communicating, not pretending that departments exist in a bubble. It is time to expand our spheres.

I hope those who have been reading my blog have received something from it. I hope to continue making posts as I see experiences out in the world that our relevant. This is my last official post, however. I hope to see you all commenting on what you think. Continue the conversation in person, in the comments, wherever you go. If you took one thing away, I hope it is the importance of communication and discussion. Keep the talk alive!

Process and WAC/WID

Today let's talk process pedagogy and WAC. Before I start, I want to be clear that I support a fully process based classroom, and it would not work anyways with WAC, as some direct instruction is necessary with WAC and WID. That said, emphasizing to students the process of revision helps students understand that, just like learning any other language, it is a process, and they will make mistakes along the way.

Let's look at a couple of examples of how this can be implemented. First, we'll look at a more WID-based example. For example, let's say that I am teaching a theater class, and one of the skills I would like my students to leave with is the ability to write a theatrical review. From my experience as a student, when I was asked to do this without much instruction, it was a bit overwhelming. First of all, I would provide students with strong examples of what I would like them to accomplish. We would, of course, cover the language key to theatrical reviews as well as language used within the profession. We would all attend the same theatrical production, so that everyone has a base point to write from. In WID, however, this is where the teacher steps back and let's students work through the process. I would instruct the students to write drafts and then we would share them either electronically or in person. Students, at this point, using the guidelines I have already provided, would show each other how to improve their drafts. The teacher would now function as a coach, guiding students when they are on the right track--when they realize where aspects can be improved or are seeing their entry into the discourse--while not offering direct feedback on their drafts. As a class, we would go through this process together on this first assignment, staying as far away from grading as possible (it is difficult but possible). Then, we would ask students to attend a production of their own choice and write a review of it. This would be the graded project, where they are then able to apply everything they have learned throughout the process.

So, how then can we use process in a WAC classroom? One way is the use of the expert's notebook. This can take on different forms, depending on the subject matter. Architects have sketchpads; mathematicians have their practice problems; engineers use both; and psychologists have their notes on their experiments and therapy sessions. Therefore, we can use these as the basis for writing and part of the process. One aspect to consider for the WAC classroom is to encourage the use of these notebooks and to connect them with more constructed, generalized academic discourse. For example, perhaps one assignment to use can be a journal. Have students write informally about their experiences in their major classes. In order to promote it, it may be necessary to assign some sort of completion grade; however, the instructor will not be reading these journals in detail. Let students vent, take notes, and comment upon their experiences. perhaps, then, at the ned of the semester, the instructor can then assign a more traditional narrative essay where the student gives an overview of their experiences in their semester.

These are just options, though. How do you think process writing can be used in conjunction with WAC/WID pedagogy? Let me know in the comments.

In the next and semi-ultimate post, we will go back to the beginning: WAC/WID and the HBCU.

Social Reform and WAC/WID Part 2

So it has been some time, but here is the continuation of the last post. Just as a reminder, here are the three questions that I posed:

• How do we approach writing about social issues in a composition classroom?
• How do we encourage learning the language of multiple discourses in a composition classroom using social issues as the point of origin?
• How do we approach social issues within the disciplines while teaching writing in the disciplines?

The first question applies to all composition classrooms, no matter what pedagogy you are using. At some point, a student is going to write about a social issue, and how you respond as an instructor will be very important. It is important to remain objective, open-minded, and respectful of your students and their point of view. I actively encourage students to use social issues as argumentative topics because they generally make it easier for the student to argue. However, there is always a possibility that you may actively disagree with the student's argument. This is where that objectivity comes in. This has actually only happened to me on one occasion; when it did occur, I separated myself from the content and instead examined their evidence, argument construction, and evidence usage. At some point, too, there are also certain topics that you, as an instructor, will no longer accept. I call mine  "the dead list." I always present it with a bit of humor and don't present the topics as offensive; I always present them solely on the basis of over-saturation and difficulty, so as to not make it seem personal or picky.

That said, where does WAC fit into this? For one, many of these topics should be ones that students are engaging with in some form in their other classes. No doubt, as instructors, there are psychology, sociology, education, journalism, and media studies majors in our classrooms. Making sure there are pre-approved topics in your provided topic lists (which I always provide for students who struggle with coming up with a topic) that cater to these students helps them feel as though you are inviting them into the conversation. I also include a "problem within your major" as an option for the essay, so that students can get their feet wet in their major field. As instructors, we can then guide them in the construction of essays that they will, no doubt, have to write as they progress, especially argumentative essays, which make up the bread and butter of most college level writing assignments. Additionally, we can prepare them for the necessary process of evaluating sources within their disciplines. How do the people they hope to work with write about these topics? How do they construct arguments? How do they use evidence? I highly recommend using the rhetorical analysis assignment here, which asks students to analyze how others construct their arguments. In this assignment, students look at a published piece of writing and analyze the structure and argumentative moves a writer makes.You can use this as a way point for students to begin learning the language of their discipline, and how to construct arguments within their discipline at the same time. When students make connections between social issues and their disciplines, it is something that should be encouraged. For example, in my composition class this semester, I have a student, a mass media major, who is arguing how social media provides a more accurate picture of current events than other media outlets. Encourage these connections when they spring up, so that students can start developing these languages before they go out into their major discipline classes.

Finally, how can we provide assignments within the disciplines that engage with social issues? Here are two examples that could work, using the events in Baltimore as an example. In a journalism class, students could examine how different news outlets represent events and their accuracy and use that to discuss the process of fact-checking, presenter bias, and press neutrality. In a psychology class, students could write about how the events showcase certain aspects of crowd psychology and use that to discuss the tenets of crowd psychology and its representation here. Each of these assignments teaches students the content of their discipline, engages with current events, and teaches them important aspects of the discipline's discourse.

So, does this approach to WAC/WID and composition seem viable to you? tell me why or why not in the comments.

Next up: process pedagogy and WAC/WID.

Social Reform and WAC/WID

Now that the definitions are out of the way, let's discuss some practical applications and ramifications of Writing across the Curriculum. One aspect that I hope readers will notice in the following posts is how well WAC interacts with other compositional pedagogies. Process pedagogy--the idea that writing is a skill that improves via practice and revision--is an underlying concept of the pedagogy. However, this approach is not the only one that pairs well with WAC. Today's post will focus on how WAC interacts with Critical Pedagogy.

Critical Pedagogy, in its simplest form, revolves around the idea that writing is political and can be used to change the world. Writing can serve as an act of social justice. At its most radical, it would turn the classroom into a democracy where students determine the assignments, the syllabus, the readings and more. At the other end of the continuum, this approach involves students writing about current social issues or issues that affect their lives.

The reason I bring this up as our first example is because of what is going on in Baltimore, my current home, right now. Students will want to talk about the issue, and it is one that has been percolating across the some time. If we, as instructors, can refocus that energy in a way that explores the issues objectively and gives our students an outlet while also enhancing and embracing intellectual curiosity, we are preparing these young men to interact with the world and become our leaders of tomorrow.

The question, then, is threefold:

• How do we approach writing about social issues in a composition classroom?
• How do we encourage learning the language of multiple discourses in a composition classroom using social issues as the point of origin?
• How do we approach social issues within the disciplines while teaching writing in the disciplines?

 Before I offer my approaches, I'd like to know what you think. Please comment below with your answers to the questions. In the next post, I'll offer how I think we can tackle these questions effectively in the classrooms.

Writing in the Disciplines

Now, onto the sister pedagogy to Writing across the Curriculum, Writing in the Disciplines.

In many ways these two pedagogies complement each other, and the terminology (WAC and WID) is used somewhat interchangeably. That said, there are some key differences as well. WAC implies that there are multiple teachers across many fields working together to instruct students and increasing their writing skills as a whole and within a particular discipline; WID is more concerned with the distinct disciplines themselves, how they communicate, and what genres of writing works best within a particular discipline. However, it is more concerned with disciplinary knowledge, as evoked in the name, and uses Writing to Communicate as its main pedagogical approach. Remember, though, that these approaches are complementary, not antagonistic.

Writing to Communicate emphasizes just that--communicating content to an audience outside of the self and for a formal purpose. Part of the pedagogy involves receiving and applying feedback, especially peers and experts in the discipline, and using that feedback to improve upon the writing itself. It is all about learning the methods of communication within a discipline and applying them--through analyzing published documents as well as working documents within the discipline. As is also represented in the name of the pedagogy, communication is key; social interaction defines this pedagogy, both within the classroom and in how to teach students how to write, for example, a history paper, a case study, a critical theatrical review, etc. Using this pedagogy requires instructors to talk to each other about how to teach writing and content; it also requires discussions about who is best suited to teach how to write these particular examples and, sometimes, it might not be the composition teacher.

This does not mean composition teachers cannot offer their expertise, serve as team teachers who help students structure their writing, or any additional roles. It just means that, perhaps, there is a need to rethink our approaches and purposes. It's a little scary, though, in the end. More on this later.

So what do you think about these approaches? Are they feasible? Or just a bunch of pipe dreams? Comment below!

Introduction to WAC (Writing Across the Curriculum)

Here I'd like to discuss what exactly WAC is and involves, to give us a basis for what will follow: putting the pedagogy into practical classroom use.

At its core, WAC is centered around learning the particular content of a discipline and, in so doing, teaching students the language and communication strategies of said discipline, hopefully via the usage of writing. WAC revolves around the Writing to Learn pedagogy, which involves the following:

• A plethora of writing assignments, mostly informal and ungraded, to help students express their progress and understanding of the content they have been exposed to
• Using writing as both a test and a tool for learning content
• Considers writing as unpolished work not meant for an outside audience--it is there to express what the writer is working through as a learner
• Sees the teacher as a facilitator and coach rather than a judge

As you can see here, this is a stern shift away from the way writing is treated in many classrooms, especially composition classrooms. In the comments below, I would like to see what concerns you, as a teacher, a student, or otherwise,would have with this particular style of teaching, especially viewed through your personal or professional experience.

Next up, the other side of this pedagogy: WID.

Some Questions to Consider

After some thought, I believe I'll take the next couple of posts to explore some questions the WAC and WID present, the basics of the pedagogy, and some problems it faces overall within the university academic and political climate. After that, I'll go back to looking at how we can expand the conversation before dipping into some practical applications. Expect at least one post a day for the next two weeks--barring any major kerfuffles or other life interferences.

There are five basic questions these pedagogies want us to consider, all of which have to do with how instructors--and not just writing instructors--prepare our students both for their post-secondary education and post-university careers. I'm going to present the questions here in a list. What I would like to see in the comments section is a conversation that attempts to answer these questions, and, perhaps, my later posts will cause you to come back to this one to add to the conversation. This is the appetizer to what WAC is--creating communication and conversation. On to the questions!


•What is the purpose of first year writing courses?
 
•What is the purpose of the writing instructor?
 
•How do instructors prepare students for the multiple discourses of the university?
 
•Can writing instructors prepare students for the multiple discourses of the university?
 
•How can universities become more interdisciplinary in their approach to the teaching of writing?


So, now, let's start talking! I look forward to seeing your answers!