Writing Across the Curriculum programs have become common in the last thirty years or so. My own undergraduate institution had one when I was a student, and it still does. As a student, I found it really beneficial. I got good guidance early on in developing my writing skills, and I knew that I’d be expected to pay attention to my writing in all my courses, not just in my English classes.
What I’d like to note here, though, are some of the potential benefits of such programs to faculty.
I currently teach at an institution that has a similar program, and I’m one of many faculty from outside the English department who teach in it. (A brief description of the basic writing proficiency program can be found here; students fulfill our advanced writing proficiency requirement in their major department.)
I’ve gained a great deal from my participation in the program. In particular:
In helping students with their writing processes, I’ve been forced to think a lot about my own. For example, I tell students to start drafting early, and not to wait until shortly before the deadline–do I follow my own advice? Well, not always (especially if I’ve been having trouble coming up with a good topic for, say, a ProfHacker post!). But I start early far more often than I used to.
I’ve been reminded how useful it can be to share drafts with others, even if they’re very early in their development. Sharing and talking over drafts can help both in the generation of ideas and in their expression, for faculty as well as for students.
My participation in our portfolio reading process at the end of each semester has helped me think about the kinds of assignments I use in my writing course, and gives me a better sense than reading only my own students’ work can of what it’s reasonable to expect from students just beginning their college writing careers. It’s also just plain fun to read portfolios from other disciplines.
Finally, having colleagues read and comment on my students’ portfolios provides me with a way to check my evaluation of students’ work over the course of the semester. If both of my readers’ judgments about a portfolio match my own, I take that as a good sign.
Readers, let’s hear from you. Does your institution have a Writing Across the Curriculum program, or something similar? If so, and if you participate in it, what’s your experience been?
[Creative Commons licensed Flickr photo by Unhindered by Talent]
Follow Profhacker through your favorite RSS reader: 
3 Responses to Faculty Benefits From Writing Across the Curriculum
limako - April 26, 2010 at 8:53 am
I have been a junior-year writing instructor in the Biology Department at UMass Amherst for nearly 10 years. As a member of the University Writing Committee, I was involved in a review of the program last year. It’s a program at risk: the support from the central administration, which has remained relatively constant, has not kept pace with inflation and no longer covers the costs that departments must bear to implement the program fully. And as budgets are squeezed, it is a place where some departments are looking to economize.At the same time, student needs are increasing. Students need more than just writing. Authoring, communication, and publication are being transformed by information technology. Students need grounded experiences writing with modern tools of communication and collaboration. Some of us have students use wikis and blogs to collaborate and have our students collaborate to make posters, which is how most young scientists present their first work now. Providing these enriched experiences is important for students, but is an added burden on departments.
11274135 - April 26, 2010 at 10:17 am
Gee, finally an op-ed on writing in the CHE written by someone who knows what she is talking about! Congratulations! Limako: It is problematic that WAC and WID programs are still considered as an “add-on”–and therefore expendable in hard times–rather than as an essential part of education across the board.
hurricane - April 26, 2010 at 12:06 pm
As I am now retired, you should read my comments with that in mind. I never worked in a University where WAC or a similiar program emphasized communication. However, from the first class I taught on my own until the end of my career, students were always graded on a half-and-half basis, 50 percent of their grade was based on what they said and 50 percent on how they said it. Once I made that clear, I didn’t have much trouble with the grading process as long as I was working in an arts and sciences department.However, for the last part of my career, I taught primarily in the areas of computer science and programming where the students usually thought writing and other forms of communication were not so important as developing their technical skills.Once I raised the question in class, “If you can’t communicate your technical ideas, how do you expect to have a positive impact on the organization that employs you?” In that class, I heard utter silence. So, following up with each individual student when I returned their graded projects, I nailed each one individually with the same question and noted their responses. By the next class meeting, I had put together a 20-25 minute talk on why they ought to be worried if they weren’t good writers. Then, I gave them their next writing assignment, both addressing the technical aspects of their project AND writing out the paper in clear, correctly spelled, grammatically correct English. The results of that assignment weren’t so wonderful. But, by the end of the term, I could depend on my not having to spend more time correcting the spelling and grammar than addressing the technical arguments presented. Consequently, I developed a half-hour talk for each new group of students to my courses followed by a discussion of 33 common errors to start them thinking about how to improve their writing. (Often, I didn’t cover all 33 points in class, but ultimately all of them were a question on their beginning-of-class quiz before the end of term.)The problem with implementing this kind of system is that it certainly takes a lot of time when grading and also when going over graded papers with the students. My usual practices also irritated most of my colleagues in the technical departments. Finally, unfortunately for the students who really need this kind of work, their instructors tend not to be good writers, even as far as spelling and grammar are concerned, let alone clarity!JMHO.