Writing in the
Disciplines: What We
Know about Teaching
and Learning
Professor Stephen A. Bernhardt
Kirkpatrick Chair in Writing
Department of English, UD
Guiding Questions




What is at issue in writing instruction?
What do we know about how students
respond to writing instruction?
How have universities addressed issues
of undergraduate writing?
What should we do if we hope to
improve the writing of our graduates?
What should writing be?




Frequent and guided
Varied in purpose, audience, and
situation
Short and long, planned and
spontaneous, formal and informal,
personal and objective, graded and
ungraded, exploratory and determinate
To learn as well as to do; to perform as
well as to demonstrate learning
Writing and Learning

Writing is a way of learning.

Writing is thinking made visible.
(We don’t know what we think until we
see what we say.)
A Lesson from WAC
(Writing across the Curriculum)
We want students to become good writers,
but we also want students to be good
learners.
Faculty don’t necessarily need to be
writing teachers—they can use writing to
promote learning.
Is writing the best way to learn?



Not for broad recall of content--note
taking and study questions do better.
Writing encourages selection, analysis,
and transformation.
Writing tends to encourage students to
pick out a subset of relevant connected
bits and ignore the rest.
Geisler, Cheryl. Academic Literacy and the Nature of Expertise
WAC or WID?



Writing across the curriculum stresses
writing to learn, emphasizing learning
logs, reflection and synthesis, and
frequent, informal writing.
Writing in the disciplines works to help
students become professional—to
become members of a discipline.
Both make a lot of sense…
Why writing in the disciplines?



Writing constructs professional identity-writing is a way of being (and becoming)
a civil engineer or an accountant.
Writing well means working within
expectations and constraints of highly
socialized genres.
Outsiders to a discipline are unable to
say what is at issue—what the
questions and concerns are that
motivate the discipline.
What are we after?





Literate, critical, thoughtful readers and
writers
Resourceful students, comfortable in
various communication situations
People who can plan, manage, solve
problems, and deliver results
Team players, collaborators, helpers
People who make good use of
communication technologies
Even more . . . we want
To see students engage with disciplinary
knowledge
To set students upon trajectories toward
their chosen professions.
To help students gain identity as members
of a discipline or profession.
We succeed remarkably well
with some students.
Why don’t we succeed well
with many more students?
With all students?
Prevailing myths




Crisis mentality: we are in a downward
spiral of illiteracy
Transience: writing is a problem to be
fixed by a remedial course or tutoring
Transparency: writing merely records
what is already thought—writing is
transparent transcription
Transference: Writing is a generalizable
skill that ports easily to new settings.
Universities marginalize
writing




Staffing: teaching relies on large staffs
of part timers, adjuncts, TAs.
Structure: writing programs have
trouble finding a home.
Economics: large lecture classes
preclude working closely with students
as they write.
Change: even well-conceived initiatives
crumble over time.
Universities resist writing in the
disciplines





Academic specialization is the strong
force.
Reward systems run counter to
demands of working with writing.
Faculty may not know how writing is
practiced outside the academy.
Faculty unprepared to teach writing.
Faculty tend to reproduce themselves.
There’s something about
research universities . . .


Average faculty salary negatively
correlates with student satisfaction and
learning
At schools with strong research
orientations, students display decreased
satisfaction with faculty and the overall
quality of instruction, decreased
leadership skills, and decreased selfreported growth in public speaking skills
and other measures of student
development.
Astin, UCLA Higher Education Research Institute
Deep difficulties



Difficult to get students to engage with
writing tasks and “service” courses.
Difficult to structure tasks in writing
classrooms that have situational
complexity.
Difficult to transfer—what is taught in
writing courses does not seem to
transfer to other classes or work
situations.
Subversive or obtuse?

Sociology students did not enter the
frame of original fieldwork: observation,
gathering data—”just another paper”
Nelson, “This Was an Easy Assignment: Examining
How Students Interpret Academic Writing Tasks”

Business students tended not to apply
the specific evaluative criteria presented
and discussed in class.
Walvoord & McCarthy, Thinking and Writing in College
Professionals-in-Training
Students consistently had difficulty, across
all disciplines:

gathering sufficient specific information

constructing the audience and the self

stating a position

using appropriate discipline-based
methods

managing complexity and organizing
the paper
Walvoord & McCarthy: Thinking and Writing in College
Writing ≠ Writing
“Even within one discipline, chemical
engineering, different courses may
represent distinct forums where different
issues are addressed, different lines of
reasoning used, different writer and
audience roles assumed, and different
social purposes served by writing.”
Herrington, Anne J. Writing in Academic Settings: A Study of the
Contexts for Writing in Two College Chemical Engineering Courses.
It is hard to perform in a classroom



Writing is evidence of work—a measure
of performance—an end product.
Writing is a socializing activity—a way of
a form of discipline and control.
In classrooms, the evaluative function is
always present.
Such forces work against clear, open,
“normal” communication.
Communication in context



Difficult to provide real contexts for
communication in classrooms
Even case studies go only so far
Need real audiences and purposes—
real situations that call for writing
What do students say?




Writing is the one skill students most want to
improve—mentioned >3X as often as any other
skill.
Students are most engaged with courses that
assign writing.
Writing increases the time students spend on the
course, the extent to which they feel intellectually
challenged, and their level of interest.
Writing instruction is best during junior and
senior years—organized around a substantive
discipline.
Light, Richard J. Making the Most of College
NSSE: Student Engagement





Sp01; 880 UD students (44% response)
300 institutions
Top: Beloit, Elon, Sweet Briar, and
Centre colleges
UD quite comparable to peers
UD students enthusiastic about their
experiences; respond favorably to
academic emphasis at UD
Academic Challenge at UD
UD NSSE Findings(2)


Seniors tend to read, write, present, and
participate more in class than freshmen.
Students relax and socialize a bit more
than they prepare for class (11-15
hours/wk).
UD NSSE Findings(3)



Each year, UD students write a few
papers of 5-20 pages and several short
papers (very few >20 pages).
Students say they often work on papers
and projects that call for integration,
application, and evaluation of information.
UD students use email to communicate
with profs with high frequency.
Harvard Class of 2001




13 papers first year; 17 sophomore; plus
numerous response papers
Writing gave first year its depth—writing
helped transition from high school
Freshmen: lots to say, no form, no
discipline
87% of freshmen: "detailed feedback" is
the most important element of writing
instruction.
Sommers, The Harvard Writing Project
Harvard Class of 2001




More writing in humanities and social
sciences after sophomore year
Evident growth in argumentative skills
Juniors began identifying themselves
more as scholars, as originators of ideas.
Need sustained approach in
disciplines—need disciplinary tool belt
Sommers, The Harvard Writing Project
Reading as a professional



From seeing texts as sources of information to
be learned or memorized toward reading within
rhetorical frames, where authors have
purposes or motives, are taking action, and
acting within a sphere of activity.
Students come to recognize intertextuality and
the social dimensions of text.
Subject’s work in a lab situation alongside
graduate students contributed to her
awareness and ability to interpret journal
articles.
Haas, Christina. Learning to Read Biology
Writing within
“Communities of Practice”



Formation of a disciplinary or
professional identity
A tool kit: shared practices, ways of
working, artifice, constructs, methods
Collaborative projects, research and
problem solving
Establishing
Communities of Practice



Intellectual apprenticeships
Legitimate peripheral participation
School to work trajectories
Lave and Wenger, Situated Learning
Taking advantage of our university







Commitment to undergraduate education
Problem-based learning
Life, Pathways, Capstone courses
Mentored and collaborative research
Internships, community service, and field work
Rich communication technologies
The University as a work environment
Good practices in place






Well conceived First Year Comp: E110
Established Writing Center
Innovative Writing Fellows
Strong student demand for advanced
courses
Writing intensive courses in place
Supportive faculty and administration
Where is UD now?

Over-reliant on marginalized labor

Dependent on “fix by requirement”



Behind the growth curve of writing programs
in rhetoric and professional communication
Under-resourced in the disciplines: few faculty
with research interests in communication
Without resources committed to Writing in the
Disciplines or Writing across the Curriculum
As a campus, we should . . .






Clearly identify the target outcomes we
desire
Provide instructional support to faculty
Set disciplinary standards and develop
tailored, discipline-centered approaches
Professionalize the teaching of writing
Assess programs and learning outcomes
Create formal institutional support