Writing Intensive Hub Guide

Writing-intensive (WIN) courses enable students to build on and practice skills learned in the First-Year Writing Seminar and, in some instances, of Writing, Research & Inquiry. WIN must, therefore, have WR100 (or its equivalent) as a pre-requisite.

WIN courses must have at least outcomes 1 and 2 below.

1. Students will be able to craft responsible, considered, and well-structured written arguments, using media and modes of expression appropriate to the situation.
2. Students will be able to read with understanding, engagement, appreciation, and critical judgment.
3. Students will be able to write clearly and coherently in a range of genres and styles, integrating graphic and multimedia elements as appropriate.

If you are proposing a WIN course or if you want to learn more about these outcomes, please see this Interpretive Document. Interpretive Documents, written by the General Education Committee, are designed to answer questions faculty have raised about Hub policies, practices, and learning outcomes as a part of the course approval process. To learn more about the proposal process, start here.

• Charney, D. H., Neuwirth, C. M., Kaufer, D. S., Geisler, C. (2006). Having your say: reading and writing public arguments. New York: Pearson/Longman. Introduces students to analyzing and synthesizing arguments through key rhetorical frameworks.
• Glasman-Deal, H. (2016). Science research writing for non-native speakers of English. London: Imperial College Press. A succinct, clearly written book that not only addresses ESL concerns, but considers key generic features of academic science writing (Introductions, Methodology, Results, Discussion sections of journal articles) that are relevant to all student writers, regardless of language.
• Howard, R. M. (1995). The Bedford guide to teaching writing in the disciplines: an instructor’s desk reference. Boston: Bedford Books. Includes practical advice and spans the entire teaching experience from preparing a syllabus with schedules for writing, designing assignments, teaching the writing process, responding to/evaluating/grading student writing, as well as teaching reading and research. Each chapter also has an extensive bibliography.
• Johnson, J. Paul, & Krase, Ethan. (2012). Coming to learn: From first-year composition to writing in the disciplines. Across the Disciplines, 9(2). Retrieved October 4, 2017, from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/johnson_krase2012.cfm This longitudinal study makes compelling claims about incorporating writing deliberately and thoughtfully throughout a student’s academic career in ways that are sensitive to the different development stages that students experience during college.
• The Pearson series, A Short Guide to Writing About …, includes the following titles: Art, Biology, Film, Psychology, Literature, Social Science, History, Law, Chemistry, and Theater. These are very useful texts for helping to guide student reading and writing in the discipline — often with specific questions and texts that can be used for assignments.
• Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2016). Academic writing for graduate students: essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. Offers very specific assignments and tasks that teachers can implement when teaching advanced undergraduates. Focuses on vocabulary and style, defining terms, summarizing, commenting on data, and constructing research projects. The text attends very closely to language issues (using gerunds, passive voice, etc.) even as it deals with higher order concerns. For teaching research techniques, Swales and Feak’s ideas about “creating a research space” (or CARS) can be useful.
• Tinkle, T., Atias, D., McAdams, R. M., & Zukerman, C. (2013). Teaching close reading skills in a large lecture course. Pedagogy 13(3). Retrieved October 4, 2017, from http://pedagogy.dukejournals.org/content/13/3/505.abstract. Explains how to make large classes writing intensive without also being grading intensive.

• Resources at BU
  • CAS Writing Center
  • CGS Writing Center
  • Comm Writing Center
  • Core Curriculum Writing Fellows
  • SPH Public Health Writing and Presentation Skills Programs

• External resources:
  • Carnegie Mellon University’s Global Communication Center
  • Purdue University’s Online Writing Lab
  • The University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill’s Writing Center
  • The University of Michigan’s Center for Research on Learning and Teaching provides resources on providing feedback on student writing
  • Carnegie Mellon University’s Open Learning Initiative course on argument diagramming

The following are assignments that faculty have developed for this Hub area:

Reflective writing, such as a short free-write exercise in response to a discussion question or prompt, or an exam wrapper. Although originally developed for exams in STEM fields, exam wrappers can be applied to any written assignment. For example, after students submit their final essay draft, the instructor might ask students to consider what aspects of the drafting and writing process they found most useful, and what practices they might change for future assignments. Other instructors have introduced a reflection assignment during the planning stage, such as a pre-writing assignment, or a revision plan, which students complete after developing an early draft. Both of these strategies prompt students to view their writing process strategically and thoughtfully.

Some faculty have developed explicit training and tools in how to read effectively for their specific course. Models from rhetoric and philosophy include: ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos; claims, grounds, and warrants; close reading (see Tinkle et al.); or visually depicting written or spoken arguments with argument diagramming.

Leveraging the University of Michigan’s multimodal literacy guide, one instructor leveraged writing-intensive outcomes into digital projects.

One humanities instructor found that effective reading skills can be developed through low-stakes practice exercises. She first introduced students to examples of effective (and ineffective) writing within her discipline. As a class, she and her students then spent time reading and explicitly discussing these written models, considering what did and what did not work well –and why.

Many instructors have introduced course scaffolding to help students transition from simple to more complex writing tasks. For example, before handing in their final research paper, one professor introduced “checkpoints” throughout the semester: brainstorming the topic, writing the project proposal, evaluating sources and developing an annotated bibliography, drafting an abstract, and composing the first draft.

Another instructor developed assignments that built upon one another over time. In this case, students first learned to analyze and synthesize — as well as cite sources — before they wrote their first research paper.

Faculty value scaffolded writing assignments because they allow students to receive timely feedback and explicit guidance during each step of the writing and draft processes, thus producing a higher quality (and more on-target) final product.

Incorporating frequent opportunities for instructor or peer feedback can allow students to see how others interpret their writing and assignments. Faculty have discovered that this may also expose students to different models of writing. Peer review also introduces an extra layer of accountability, and allows students to provide constructive feedback to others.

Faculty have found that effective peer review is carefully structured to guide students to provide focused, targeted feedback and to remain on task. 

If you often find yourself wishing for more data during office hour consultations, peer reviews can complement your own feedback and provide you with more topics to discuss.

Additional sample assignments and assessments can be found throughout the selected Resources section located above.

As you are integrating Writing Intensive into your course, here are a few questions that you might consider:

• What framework/vocabulary/process do you use to teach the key elements of writing in your course — such as argument structure, genre, medium, and audience — as well as critical reading skills?
• What assigned readings or other materials do you use to teach writing (and reading) specifically?
• What assignments — both graded and ungraded, high- and low-stakes –are you developing to evaluate students’ writing and reading skills?
• Do students have opportunities throughout the semester to apply and practice these skills and receive feedback?