Chapter 13. Developing Writing-Intensive Courses for a Globalized Curriculum through WAC-TESOL Collaborations

Abstract

Johns, A. M. (2001). ESL students and WAC programs: Varied populations and diverse needs. In S. H. McLeod, E. Miraglia, M. Soven, & C. Thaiss (Eds.), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing-acrossthe-curriculum programs (pp. 141-164). Urbana, IL: NCTE. Lancaster, Z. (2011). Interpersonal stance in L1 and L2 students' argumentative writing in economics. Across the Disciplines, 8(4). Retrieved from http:// wac.colostate.edu/atd/ell/lancaster.cfm Leki, I. (2003). A challenge to second language writing professionals: Is writing overrated? In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 315-332). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Leki, I., & Carson, J. G. (1994). Students' perceptions of EAP writing instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 81-101. Lindsey, P., & Crusan, D. (2011). How faculty attitudes and expectations toward student nationality affect writing assessment. Across the Disciplines, 8(4). Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/ell/lindsey-crusan.cfm Matsuda, P. K., & Jablonksi, J. (2000). Beyond the L2 metaphor: Towards a mutually transformative model of ESL/WAC collaboration. Academic.Writing, 1. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/aw/articles/matsuda_jablon-ski2000.htm LINGUISTICALLY AND CULTURALLY INCLUSIVE WRITING PROGRAMS, COURSES, ASSIGNMENTS, ACTIVITIES, AND ASSESSMENTSRelated to the second bullet point in our list of expanded WAC/L2 principles, we turn now to another strand of research in SLW that has focused on the writing experiences of L2 students as they write in courses and contexts across the curriculum. Michelle Cox's (2011) review of this longitudinal research revealed that second language writers often struggle due to writing assignments that "assume deep cultural and historical knowledge of the US" (para. 9), the lack of scaffolding of assignments, the lack of time for completing the heavy reading and writing required by a project, and evaluation methods that focus too heavily on standard written English. There's also an abundance of SLW literature on developing linguistically and culturally inclusive assignments and writing curricula, noting especially the contributions made by Dana Ferris on teaching L2 writing (2004, 2009) and, in WAC contexts, Leki's pedagogical recommendations in her extensive body of work on L2 writers across disciplines. Also related to WAC contexts, Joy Reid and Barbara analyze eleven assignment descriptions from across the curriculum for accessibility and equity to L2 students, and then make recommendations for creating assignments that are more conducive for L2 student success. In their scholarship, SLW practitioners also address other faculty who work with L2 students, including composition instructors (such examples include work already cited, particularly

Chapter 5. Making Connections Between Theory and Practice: Pre-Service Educator Disciplinary Literacy Courses as Secondary WAC Initiation

“…Cognizant of an increasingly linguistically diverse student population in U.S. higher education institutions, the globalization of education, and the internationalization of English Hall, 2009;Johns, 2001;Matsuda, 2012), WAC/WID research on multilingual and second language (L2) writing has worked to develop more linguistically and culturally inclusive WAC/WID programs and practices (Cox & Zawacki, 2011;. Studies have focused on learning with and from L2 students (Harklau & Siegal, 2009;Zamel & Spack, 2004), exploring faculty concerns and expectations of L2 writers (Fishman & McCarthy, 2001;Ives et al, 2014), and more recently, calling faculty to change their attitudes toward multilingual writers by adapting their pedagogies to serve these students' needs (Fredericksen & Mangelsdorf, 2014;Jordan & Kedrowicz, 2011;Siczek & Shapiro, 2014). Despite the serious progress in WAC/WID scholarship in multilingual writing, we are still in the relatively early stages of developing WAC-based language-oriented pedagogical approaches that address the needs of students with a wide variety of linguistic backgrounds, including monolingual ones (Hall, 2014a).…”

Exploring Global Englishes content and language variation in an academic writing course

“…Despite the positive feedback on this course, we understand that it may be challenging to implement in some institutional contexts. Unlike previous examples of WE‐ or GELT‐informed writing courses (e.g., Chamcharatsri, 2013; Siczek & Shapiro, 2014; Wetzl, 2013), ours is taught program‐wide, so teachers come with varied experience and backgrounds. The approach relies on teachers who bring some expertise in EAL writing and TESOL, though more specific knowledge of sociolinguistics, world Englishes, CBI, and language awareness may need to be developed in some cases.…”

“…Wetzl (2013) describes an approach similar to Kubota and Ward's (2000), with a discrete unit on WE integrated into a larger university composition course, though the instruction was limited to 2 weeks and was designed for native English speakers. Siczek and Shapiro's (2014) content courses at two U.S. universities took a sustained content focus on the globalization of English and included English first language and EAL users; however, these were not writing courses per se but rather fulfilled university requirements for writing-intensive courses. Finally, Chamcharatsri (2013) shares a 7-week unit on WE in a first-year course for EAL writers, in which students research a related topic and produce a source-based paper; the focus is on developing content knowledge of WE.…”

Developing intercultural competence through a linked course model curriculum: Mainstream and L2‐specific first‐year writing

“…Linking sections is an innovative, inexpensive, and practical intervention at institutions that offer separate sections of mainstream and L2‐specific FYW. This primary innovation in our model also reduces the domestic–international divide that independent sections of FYW can maintain during students’ first years of college (e.g., Siczek & Shapiro, 2014). The linked‐section model also addresses the administrative, logistical, and infrastructural hurdles that Matsuda and Silva (1999) encountered at Purdue when teaching a cross‐cultural composition course adopting an integrated model.…”