Dr Mary Pryor & Dr Christine Laennec Student Learning Service Centre for Learning & Teaching

1. Bridging the Gap: Possibilities for Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC)Presentation to the Curriculum Review Steering Group Dr Mary Pryor & Dr Christine Laennec Student Learning Service Centre for Learning & Teaching 28 February 2008

2. Guiding principles In our previous presentation, we focused on: • The importance of contextualising writing: • By discipline • By level of study • The need to take into account the ‘shorthand’ culture many students live in • The need to communicate expectations and offer reasonable guidance, i.e. Bridging the gap with stepping stones rather than by a giant leap!

3. Possibility 1:Multi-disciplinary ‘foundation’ course (not labelled as a writing course but with explicit emphasis on writing) • By studying different disciplines, students experience different approaches, modes of thought and discourses • Writing is contextualised: the student is writing on a topic related to the field of study • Written articulation of thought can be reinforced by verbal articulation of thought in discussion groups • Inclusive of all staff, including those who do not see themselves as ‘writing teachers’

4. Possibilities 1a & 1b • 1a: Student takes one core course which runs alongside others • Several discrete core courses could be offered, e.g.: • Arts • Social Sciences • Sciences • 1b: All Level 1 courses across the university are redesigned to emphasise writing

5. Possibility 2:Stand-alone generic writing course at Level 1 • WAC is standard practice in USA where lecturers have themselves been through this system and expect to teach writing, as well as discipline-specific content, at all levels • Would all teaching staff at Aberdeen want to contribute to a writing course? • What about levels 2 - 4 and beyond? • Risk that teaching staff assume that writing has been ‘taken care of’ • One size does not fit all – different discipline expectations

6. A few examples of different writing aims in the disciplines • test a hypothesis • fully demonstrate a knowledge of theories • reflective writing • test a thesis • close reading • give an interpretation of a cultural phenomenon • compare and contrast

7. Possibility 3:Practice in writing ‘little and often’ across all courses • Students are led step by step: 500 words, 1000 words; analyse primary source, incorporate secondary sources, etc. • Disciplines define what is important at each level • Must consider what status formative / shorter pieces will have

8. Possibility 4: Feedback on writing is given in all courses, at all levels • Current practice is widely varied: some markers give feedback on writing, some do not • This causes confusion for students • Examples at University of Aberdeen • Not just at Aberdeen: • “One of my third-year dissertation students looked at the corrections I’d made to her draft thesis with absolute disgust and said to me: ‘I don’t understand why you’re so picky about my spelling and punctuation. Nobody’s ever told me there’s a problem before.’” Anonymous university lecturer, “The kids aren’t all write: functionally illiterate and frankly not bothered,” Times Higher Education 21 Feb. 2008, p. 27

9. Possibility 5: Every level ‘counts’ • Incentive to perform from the start • If marks at Level 1 and 2 ‘counted’, students would be more motivated to do well

10. Current good practice • Some courses give full guidance as to expectations • Many staff give full feedback on writing (as well as thinking) • Some courses are incorporating formative writing assignments, with good results • In-course workshops in collaboration with Student Learning Service contextualise expectations of writing skills at different levels and across disciplines