This study highlights the use of the writing process not only to enhance preservice teachers' skills as writers of classroom experiences, but also as a tool to combat the stereotypes with which many preservice teachers enter urban field experiences with diverse learners.

from the publisher's Website: * Features fifty highly realistic scenarios that anticipate situations faculty confront in WAC programs * Narratives are readable and engaging * Focuses on problem-solving * Organized into eight chapters that address the primary concerns of faculty incorporating writing into their courses * Includes a list of web-based resources

Abstract: Since the early 1970s, many educators have touted writing as a means of enhancing learning. Several reasons have been suggested for this purported enhancement: that writing is a form of learning, that writing approximates human speech, that writing supports learning strategies. Alternatively, some researchers have cautioned that the educative effects of writing may be contingent on the contexts in which it occurs. The research on writing's effects on learning is ambiguous. This meta-analysis of 48 school-based writing-to-learn programs shows that writing can have a small, positive impact on conventional measures of academic achievement. Two factors predicted enhanced effects: the use of metacognitive prompts and increased treatment length. Two factors predicted reduced effects: implementation in Grades 6-8 and longer writing assignments.

A collection of essays on the changing relationship between Writing Centers and WAC programs. The essays raise many issues: The expanding role of Writing Centers on campuses. The "housing" question - should WAC run the Writing Center? Or be run by it? The Writing Center as a site for uniting disciplinary writing projects. Writing Centers as ambassdors for WAC. Writing Centers and WAC research. "Taking WAC away" from the English Department and housing it in the Writing Center. English faculty's concept of Writing Centers. A Center's role in a school without WAC. High-school Writing Centers.

Form the website: “(1994-96) The Epiphany Project was a two-year national grant project funded by an Annenberg/CPB grant. The grant supported the project as it provided strategies and support to assist mainstream writing faculty with integrating technology into their classroom. Epiphany provided materials and workshops for over 40 institutions across the United States.” The Field Guide to 21st Century Writing offers articles on a variety of topics related to using computers in writing and teaching the use of technology in writing, including instructions in the use of MOOs, creating websites, and rhetorical considerations related to writing and teaching with technology.

In Shaping Written Knowledge, Charles Bazerman traces the history and character of the experimental article in science, calling attention to the social and rhetorical forces that shaped its development. The book provides a broadly interdisciplinary exploration of an important genre and offers insights that extend far beyond its immediate focus of study. This book is available online as part of the Academic.Writing series, Landmark Publications in Writing Studies.

Essays concerning the history of WAC, WAC principles, research on students and classrooms, research on writing in the disciplines.

from the publisher's Website: This foundational volume examines the potential of electronic portfolios: * Rationales for creating an electronic portfolio * Features * Examples of current practice * Cautions * Recommendations Chapters by 19 portfolio practitioners from a range of disciplines and institutions describe the constructing of electronic portfolios: * By students to display and reflect on work for a specific course or program * By faculty to document and reflect on their classroom practice and allow comment by colleagues or others * By institutions to demonstrate accountability to their stakeholders and as a vehicle for institution-wide reflection, learning, and improvement

A brief review of this study of 20 writers over four years at Pepperdine is at: http://chronicle.com/teaching/books/2003030401b.htm "Focusing on first-year writing courses as a point of transition, not a final destination or a detour to fix literacy problems before students begin their real journey, means that many types of courses can be effective as long as they truly challenge students to move beyond their comfort zones and solve problems that are just beyond their reach."

View the presentation slides, available in PDF, for this panel.

This article suggests that WAC can be used to foster critical thinking even in very simple writing exercises, and gives examples of some useful exercises. Cohen says teachers are obligated to help all students think critically, in this age of globalization.

A brief overview of the history of online community as a construction of virtual public space. As online space is constructed space, Condon maintains that teachers, administrators, and rhetoricians bear responsibility for participating in the construction of that space rather than allowing other interests to prevail. He argues that as the Age of Information gives way to the “Age of Interaction,” online interactions are and will be shaped by the online spaces in which they take place. If the online agora is to live up to its potential as an equitable public forum in which individual voices may have a real impact, a larger and broader audience may participate, and ideas will carry more weight than the speaker’s status, online learning environments must be broadly accessible and must provide some means of privacy so as to mitigate the risk of the OLE acting as “the ultimate panopticon.”

This edited collection provides 17 essays about assessing writing. The essays share some common assumptions: that there are differences between grading and evaluation; that we need to connect teaching and evaluation; that we need to continually reexamine the assumptions and practices that guide our evaluation of student writing.

Dialogically links scholarship in rhetoric, composition and English Studies to the perspectives of faculty outside of English, both challenging and expanding current thinking about writing pedagogy. Recognition of the centrality of writing in undergraduate education leads to extensive conversations with faculty from a variety of disciplines about writing's role in their own degree programs, scholarly disciplines, and professional practices. Explores how composition specialists might effectively talk writing with faculty across disciplines, leading to writing instruction integral to every program of study. A contemporary liberal arts quadrivium is recognized, as is the need for full involvement of faculty in every academic discipline to implement such a comprehensive rhetorical education.

David Crystal understands the language evolution on the Internet in terms of "netspeak." His linguistic analysis offers insight into the ways electronic communication is changing our understanding of language.

Available online as part of the Academic.Writing series, Landmark Publications in Writing Studies, Language Connections focuses on general language skills teachers in all disciplines can use "to enhance student learning and, at the same time, reinforce the more specific language skills taught by reading, writing and speech teachers" (ix). The 12 chapters address issues including journal writing, problem solving approaches to writing, transactional writing, writing to learn, reading processes, and conferencing. An annotated bibliography is provided.

Ghnassia and Dix describe an interdisciplinary writing class on "Epidemics and Aids." The course incorporates science, service learning, and writing both research papers and for a public awareness campaign. Teachers from different disciplines work with the class

Meta-analyses were performed on 26 studies conducted between 1992–2002 which focused on the comparison between K–12 students writing with computers vs. paper-and-pencil. The analyses indicate that, on average, instructional use of computers for writing has a positive effect on the quantity and quality of writing students produce. Studies focused on revision behaviors between these two writing conditions (n=6) revealed mixed results. Others studies collected for the meta-analysis which did not meet the statistical criteria were also reviewed briefly. These articles (n=35) indicate that the writing process is more collaborative, iterative, and social in computer classrooms as compared with paper-and-pencil environments. For educational leaders questioning whether computers should be used to help students develop writing skills, the results of the meta-analyses suggest that on average students who use computers when learning to write are not only more engaged and motivated in their writing, but they produce written work that is of greater length and higher quality.

Condon and Hamp-Lyons conducted a study of how readers of assessment portfolios at U of Michigan handle the cognitive task of reading and evaluating student portfolios. Their research led them to identify and critically examine five common assumptions about portfolio-bases assessments and to conclude that PBAs offer increased accuracy only as a result of the approach that is taken by faculty and programs to the task of portfolio assessment, rather than as quality that is inherent to PBAs. The authors suggest that further research may reveal whether PBAs are more accurate tools for assessment than a holistically evaluated timed writing, but that PBAs offer such a range of additional benefits, including faculty development, pedagogical benefits, that they are nevertheless worth using.

A landmark article on Brown's WF program. Available now at Academic.Writing Landmark Publications in Writing Studies.

Harris asks if making Composition a discipline has improved the working conditions of teachers; it's still TAs and adjuncts who teach first-year composition. He describes "Writing 20," the only course at Duke required of all undergraduates. It is run, not by the English Department, but by the Duke University Writing Program. The classes are taught by "fellows," non-tenure-track teachers, mostly with PhDs, from a wide range of disciplines. Harris says many are young teachers who want to improve their teaching skills before specializing in their fields. The Duke UWP is an interesting model, although of course it wouldnt work everywhere.

Originally published as "Transactional Dynamics of Paired Fiction Writing," this is the best writing lesson I have ever used. I believe that students and teachers can use story writing quickly and easily to experience a wide range of topics and this lesson plan will enable teachers across the curriculum to use writing to build an improved sense of community and creativity in their classes.

Argues that faculty involved in WAC are often blissfully unaware of the motives of administrations that support WAC. Argues that WAC, which started as a "bottom-up" effort, can become institutionalized or "top-down." Observing a listserv, Holdstein finds that teachers think problems with WAC are peculiar to their university, rather than symptoms of a general problem: WAC being used deceitfully by universities. Holdstein warns that WAC can be used to avoid the issue of improving student writing. WAC can become public relations. Writing instruction may be shifted to teachers who have no interest in it; with no oversight, writing suffers. "Writing Intensive" classes may compartmentalize writing, counter to the spirit of WAC. Some universities are saying that WI classes should take the place of required composition classes. Holdstein warns that WAC may be "hijacked." Eric Martin wrote a rebuttal to this article. Available online via MUSE database.

In this special issue of Across the Disciplines, the contributing authors explore new ways of understanding Writing Fellows programs and the connections between them and WAC.

After teachers articulate their goals for incorporating writing into courses, working backwards from the goals to specific assignments can be relatively straightforward. This article provides a process for teachers to determine goals and then devise writing assignments to fit those goals.

For teachers across the curriculum, responding to student writing is often one of the most time-consuming and even dreaded parts of teaching. This article reviews some strategies for in-process as well as final evaluation of student papers.

Argues that teachers in all disciplines can act as insiders in helping students to write more effectively within academic contexts. Teachers who write are even more effective because they bring expert knowledge of content and language from tacit to conscious awareness and engage themselves and their students in the teaching exchange.

Abstract: Kincead illustrates how assessment “can help students, teachers, and administrators in writing across the curriculum (WAC) programs learn about what they are doing well and about how they might do better.” (ERIC)

Abstract: “Argues that successful interpretation of writing tasks demands writers' authority, confidence, and knowledge of rhetorical choices, allowing them to take charge of their own writing rather than catering to the imagined demands of a teacher.” (ERIC)

Abstract: Writing produces generally positive, but inconsistent, effects on learning. The reasons for this inconsistency are unknown. This review examines four hypotheses about writing-to-learn: Writers spontaneously generate knowledge "at the point of utterance" (Britton, 1980/1982); writers externalize ideas in text, then reread them to generate new inferences (Young and Sullivan, 1984); writers use genre structures to organize relationships among elements of text, and thereby among elements of knowledge (Newell, 1984); and writers set rhetorical goals, then solve content problems to achieve these goals (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1987; Flower and Hayes, 1980a). These four hypotheses invoke different aspects of writing, and so are mutually compatible. The genre hypothesis has been supported by empirical research; the other three hypotheses have been tentatively supported by research concerning writing-to-learn, or indirectly supported by other research concerning learning or writing. Further investigation is needed concerning: The empirical validity of the four hypotheses, and interactions among the processes that they identify; the declarative and procedural knowledge that underpins writing-to- learn; and the educational effectiveness of applying cognitive strategy instruction to learning through writing.

Abstract: LeCourt extends McLeod’s notion of WAC consultants being agents of change and experimentation by suggesting that WAC consultants move beyond their current perceptions of disciplinary communities as being too rigid and resistant to changes in the teaching of writing within their disciplines. As the “third stage” of WAC, LeCourt suggests that WAC consultants not only to use students as “active partners” in creating change within foundationalist disciplines, but also use critical theory to bridge the gap between the two communities.

Examines student ethos in computer-assisted English classrooms. Lenard claims that these classes are more "egalitarian," but lists potential problems with online discussion forums. Students may not consider their audience, or forget they are talking to other individuals, and be rude, inappropriate, racist, homophobic, etc. Lenard suggests strategies for avoiding thse problems.

“Argues that questions implied by Writing across the Curriculum (WAC) have been muted to insulate the tenuous consensus on which WAC is built from the clash of powerful and professional ideological interests in the university. Includes discussion of British expressivism as curricular critique, and the U.S. retreat from institutional critique.” (ERIC)

“The development of Writing-across-the-Curriculum programs has been an effort to make writing an integral part of the learning process in all courses. This effort reinforced the shift in composition pedagogy from a product to a process orientation because the learning process and the writing process work together. Writing across the Curriculum has also promoted collaborative-learning techniques. Process pedagogy requires many drafts and much feedback, and small groups of students can provide each other with audience feedback that may be even more valuable than the teacher's responses. Writing-across-the-Curriculum programs are helping students find "an authentic voice in the community of educated people." (Bedford Bibliography)

“Explores and puts to rest the misconceptions that faculty members from English as well as other disciplines hold about teaching writing. Makes suggestions that may help English teachers who want to establish an institution-wide program of writing gain the cooperation of other departments.” (ERIC)

Chapter includes samples of LaSalle's "Program Fact Sheet," forms for faculty nominations, fellow-faculty agreement, letter to potential writing fellows, and program evaluation reports.

Martin is responding to Deborah Holdstein’s article “”Writing Across the Curriculum” and the Paradoxes of Institutional Initiatives.” He agrees that WAC programs have become “top-down,” and that programs don’t always work. But he disagrees about the cause. WAC proponents are aware that they need to convince teachers from other disciplines that writing is worth the effort, he says. The real problem is resistance from these teachers, and the solution is to not impose WAC from above, but begin with dialog with faculty. Martin also disagrees that universities use WAC deceptively. In his experience, administrators feel real pressure from businesses and community members, and really want writing to improve. But WAC directors are often not given enough access to upper administration, and so don’t have enough input. With all the different faculty agendas, WAC gets lost in the absence of clear leadership. Martin also has seen no evidence that WI classes will replace composition classes. In his experience, administrators push for more writing classes, because they feel pressure to do so. Martin says there are no sinister motives behind WAC, although mistakes have been made in implementation.

“James Britton's colleagues, who worked with British schoolchildren of elementary- and high-school age, offer assignment suggestions and samples of student writing. Included are Nancy Martin, Peter Medway, and Harold Smith, "From Information to Understanding: What Children Do with New Ideas"; Nancy Martin, Peter Medway, Harold Smith, and Pat D'Arcy, "Why Write?"; Peter Medway, "From Talking to Writing"; Pat D'Arcy, "Keeping Options Open: Writing in the Humanities"; and selections from Writing in Science (essays by Sue Watts and Jeff Shapland) and Language and Learning in the Humanities (essays by Bryan Newton, and Peter Medway and Ivor Goodson).” (Bedford Bibliography)

“Describes a two-year study of one college student's efforts to produce appropriate content area writing in different disciplines. Using observation, interviews, composing-aloud protocols, and text analysis, evaluates the student's performance according to the Gricean rubric of conversation. Concludes that success was affected by unarticulated social aspects of classroom contexts for writing as well as explicitly stated requirements and instructions.” (ERIC)

“Examines the extent and nature of continuing writing across the curriculum (WAC) programs. Describes how these successful programs have survived and changed with the years. Speculates about the future of the WAC movement.” (ERIC)

McLeod and Maimon respond to “WAC Myths” they have encountered at conferences, and particularly in articles by C. Knoblauch and Lil Brannon, and by Daniel Mahala. They feel that the history of WAC is misunderstood, leading to misconceptions about WAC today; therefore, they try to re-historicize and redefine WAC. They deny that WAC began as “grammar across the curriculum.” They deny that there is a “technical correctness” camp in WAC, and that this camp’s goals are expressed in WID. They answer Mahala in particular, and say that WAC has always taught both exploratory, “writing to learn” assignments, and disciplinary writing. But the latter does not imply teaching “correctness.” Instead, WID is rhetorical. It allows students to learn the purposes and expectations of writing in their field; it also makes faculty express and clarify what they expect out of disciplinary writing. For the authors, WID is part of WAC, and should be, and always has.

Available online as part of the Academic.Writing series, Landmark Publications in Writing Studies, this collection of thoughtful, thoroughly grounded essays explores the design of writing-across-the-curriculum programs in new and maturing programs. The collection also contains an appendix listing the results of the first comprehensive survey of writing-across-the-curriculum programs in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada.

Available online as part of the Academic.Writing series, Landmark Publications in Writing Studies, this important collection addresses the design, funding, operation, and underlying pedagogical principles of WAC programs.

An important new collection updating WAC theory and practice.

Writing and Revising in the Disciplines consists of a series of essay on practical strategies for teaching writing in the physical sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities.

“Noting that the term ‘assessment; sounds formal and institutional and frequently generates fear and anxiety, this [essay is taken from a book which] presents 14 essays that demonstrate that assessment can help students, teachers, and administrators in writing across the curriculum (WAC) programs learn about what they are doing well and about how they might do better.” Morgan’s essay “discusses more formal efforts to access WAC.” (ERIC)

“Intended for college faculty in all disciplines, this guidebook offers practical methods and ideas intended to help teachers clarify writing assignments so that students' writing will improve, as has been seen to happen when teachers sharpen their responses to students' papers. Contents include: (1) "Assigning Writing," which describes ways of designing effective assignments including journals and ungraded writing, provides 17 suggestions for making and presenting writing assignments, and includes a checklist for evaluating assignments; (2) "Assignments That Work," which consists of a collection of writing assignments developed by instructors in various fields, including agricultural engineering, American studies, biology, chemistry, counseling, and criminal justice; (3) "Essay Examinations," which discusses how to write effective essay questions and how to help students write better exams; (4) "Strategies for Helping Students," which includes guidelines on brainstorming, research, and planning, drafting and revising, as well as a writer's checklist; (5) "Integrating Reading and Writing," which examines anticipation guides, selective reading guides, graphic organizers, vocabulary previews, and student journals; and (6) "Evaluating Students' Writing," which covers pre-evaluation, evaluation, paper marking, scores and scoring guides, and post-evaluation. (Eleven references are included, and appended are a sample of on-the-job writing tasks for professionals, a sample accounting assignment, and a techniques inventory for assigning writing and reading in the disciplines.)” (ERIC)

“Examines how school writing tasks (notetaking, answering study questions, and essay writing) interact with three measures of learning (recall, concept application, and gain in passage-specific knowledge).” (ERIC)

This review considers evidence cited in support of and in opposition to Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) and Writing in the Disciplines (WID). After defining WAC and WID terms and concepts and reviewing the literature on key developments of the WAC/WID movement, the authors recommend that key terms be defined more precisely and that multimodal learning be adopted more consistently to address varied learning styles. Noting the complexities of affirming student achievement, specifically when success is attributed without qualification to WAC/WID initiatives, the authors question evidence cited in support of WAC/WID goals and pedagogies. They also consider the monetary costs of WAC/WID initiatives.

Orr suggests that teachers end their classes with a one-minute, anonymous writing on what each student thinks the "point" of the class was, and what they were confused about. This is instant feedback for the teacher, and gives shy or uncertain students a space to ask questions.

“Discusses the contributions of Polanyi, Ziman and Kuhn toward a conception of a scientific community and offers a rhetorical perspective on the construction of scientific knowledge. Outlines a scheme for analyzing scientific discourse and illustrates its application.” (ERIC)

Recent advances in computer and computer-network technologies make it possible to consider an alternative to the indirect, top-down pedagogy used in most writing-across-the-curriculum (WAC) programs (e.g., a pedagogy that views faculty as the primary audience for WAC training). Drawing on the results of a 4-year effort to establish a campus-wide, computer-supported writing environment, we suggest that computer networks and specifically designed instructional software (e.g., multimedia instructional materials and interactive writing exercises) can provide the basis for a network-supported writing-center-based WAC program. Our discussion focuses on development of network communication tools and hypermedia courseware to support WAC.

This article describes and analyzes specific institutional impediments to CAC and the solutions that include targeting students rather than faculty as the primary audience of CAC, use of computer technologies, and placement of CAC function in the Writing Center.

This article reports on how a computer science professor and a Ph.D. student in English turned a graduate seminar into a vehicle for teaching reviewing to graduate students. The evaluation and conclusions may help others do likewise. This is an extended version of the article, available on the first author's Web site.

Argues for extending writing programs to grade school and community groups. The authors say WAC has taken writing instruction out of mechanics-based classes, and moved it to the disciplines. In this model, community literacy suffers. The authors call for links between Composition and Education departments: shared classes, more TA’s from Education in Comp, and more grad students working in high schools. They support “literacy centers” which are located in universities but are resources for public school and community teachers as well. Here, teachers in the community could learn to make their classes interdisciplinary. And university students would be involved in these classes through their own service-learning classes.

Electronic Communication Across the Curriculum is an edited collection in which teachers and program heads throughout the United States present adaptable models of computer-supported communication using the pedagogies of writing for learning and writing with computers -- including science, math, history, philosophy, technical writing, accounting, literature, and marketing. Edited by Donna Reiss, Dickie Selfe, and Art Young (NCTE, 1998) Also available at http://bookstore.ncte.org/default.asp?id_product=3066

Ronald cites the influence of the writer Marshall Gregory on two of her recent projects at Miami University. She was a WAC administrator, in charge of a WAC initiative in the School of Business, and she was part of a team that redesigned the University's core composition class. In both cases, Gregory's theory that pedagogy is as important as curriculum guided her. In particular, she feels that a writing administrator must "embody" the "good news" of WAC and of teaching academic and public contexts for writing. WAC people must "befriend" other teachers and create community. Curricular change is not enough.

Explains how to incorporate writing into drama classes. The author examines writing in her field, observing that drama students improvise, and learn by doing. Thus, teachers need to teach revision and structure. At the same time, writing should be practical: journals about students' own acting, group scene writing, and research papers that culminate in performances. Also explains how to work in peer response.

Robert Samuels examines the new role that Writing-Across-the-Curriculum (WAC) programs are playing in the rethinking of academic culture and discourse at contemporary universities.

A valuable site created by Peter Sands that offers links to bibliographies in Africology, anthropology, art history, biological sciences, chemistry, communication, economics, foreign languages, general science, geosciences, history, mass communication, mathematic sciences, philosophy, physics, psychology, and sociology.

Explains how to use “inkshedding” in lower-division classes, and cope with the mass of student writing produced. Sargent defines inkshedding as focused writing, on class topics, that students expect to share. The term avoids the baggage that “freewriting” carries: inkshedding is not private or “personal.” Students read each other’s inksheds and respond; Sargent says this helps them conceptualize an academic field as an ongoing conversation. In her courses, students write responses every day. To cope with the mass of responses, she sets up student groups in which students read most of each other’s responses. She describes the logistics in detail.

The authors' first year of experience in the Writing Fellows Program they started suggested that crossing individual instructors' pedagogies was a more central part of the Fellows' work than crossing disciplines, as assignments in the courses that they fellowed in different fields involved similar critical, analytical, and interpretive tasks.

edited by Jean Sheridan ; foreword by Thomas G. Kirk, Jr. ; afterword by Elaine P. Maimon.; Includes bibliographical references (p. [221]-231) and index.; An Overview and some observations / Jean Sheridan -- Talking the discourse: composition theory / Ross LaBaugh -- Connected communities: encouraging dialogue between composition and bibliographic instruction / Barbara Fister -- Research skills across the curriculum: connections with writing-across-the-curriculum / Craig Gibson -- Making the library connection with process writing / Jean Sheridan -- Making the connection in the classroom: a model for a library-based writing course / Jean Sheridan -- What writing-across-the-curriculum instructors can learn from librarians / Marilyn Lutzker -- What bibliographic instruction librarians can learn from writing-across-the-curriculum instructors / Jean Sheridan -- Happy endings: creating collaborative relationships / Jean Sheridan.

Sherman situates WAC in a broader movement towards “Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environments.” He calls for all disciplines, particularly his own, Psychology, to adopt these online environments. He gives examples of these, including Blackboard, and one he developed for his own department. Sherman argues from a Postmodern position, saying that now more than ever students are aware of difference in their lives and in the university, and tend to distrust information from the teacher presented as fact. If it is presented as part of a forum, in which they can see ideas and conflict and join the debate, the knowledge they take away will seem “real” to them.

What the Writing Tutor Needs to Know is a book for training peer tutors in Writing Centers and Writing Fellows programs. What makes it unique is that it deals more directly with the issues related to tutoring in Writing Fellows Programs than other peer tutoring materials, and it has numerous exercises and student sample papers. It should be equally useful for training tutors in Writing Centers. It is based on my 15 plus years of training writing tutors.

Describes an experiment using a writing assistant (fellow) in an upper-division sociology course, details the benefits and costs of the experience for the assistant and for the faculty educator, as well as the "practicality of the experiment."

Waldo argues for a "discipline-based WAC," housed in the Writing Center and designed with all the disciplines in mind. English should be just one department, or language community, that WAC serves. He says each discipline needs to examine what it expects from writing. WAC programs should join in this discussion and learn from each discipline what it values, then help in program design. Waldo stresses respect for the goals of Biology, Music Theory, Economics, etc. On the other hand, he shows how disciplines can be confused about what they value about writing: sometimes, student writing does not prepare students for the professional writing they will encounter after school. He also calls for an end to assessment tests designed to judge writing from students in all the disciplines.

An account of the "Writing Wars," the struggle at UW-Madison to define the goals of a commications component added to the gen. ed. requirements in 1994. The conflict was between a centralized, rhetoric-based course taught by Communications and English faculty, and a WID model. Compromise and conflict continue there to this day.

Surveys recent developments in writing assessment within the context of the assessment field as a whole. Includes practical examples, applications, and teaching tips.

Divided into four sections -- theory and power, pedagogy, teaching and professional development, and technology -- this collection offers a comprehensive treatment of the uses of portfolios to support the teaching, learning, and assessment of writing.

A collection that traces the development of the writing across the curriculum program at Michigan Technological University in the 1970s and 1980s.

Available online as part of the Academic.Writing series, Landmark Publications in Writing Studies, Teaching Writing Across the Curriculum provides a comprehensive, accessible discussion of teaching writing across the curriculum. Written by one of the leaders in the field, it offers a brief introduction to WAC and then discusses how writing can be used to help students learn and communicate.