Writing Centres as the Driving Force of Programme Development: From Add-on Writing Courses to Content and Literacy Integrated Teaching

Abstract

Academic writing courses and subject-matter courses have been taught independently to a large extent at many European universities following a 'study skills model ' (Lea and Street 1998). An integrated approach, however, both in students' L1 (or their language of instruction) and in English (if this is not their L1), in accordance with Lea and Street's 'academic literacies model' has a number of advantages. Introducing an academic literacies model, however, is difficult to implement since it requires the joint effort of both subject-domain teachers and language teachers and involves deviating from familiar teaching methods. To implement the changes required, a three-level approach has been developed at Justus Liebig University (JLU), Giessen/Germany, as one of several measures in a university-wide project. In this approach, the university's writing centre and teaching centre take over the role of 'motors' of literacy development in all disciplines. The macro-level of this three-level approach encompasses central services provided by these centres as well as university-wide literacy development policies. The meso-level addresses programme development, and the microlevel, curriculum and syllabus adaptations for individual courses. The article provides insight into the measures to be taken at each of these levels based on a review of prior research on Integrating Content and Language in Higher Education (ICLHE) (Gustafsson 2011, Gustafsson and Jacobs 2013 and the central role that writing centres and teaching centres can play in this process.

Supporting English Language Learners’ Academic Writing Development Through a Systematized Assistance Model

“…Participants' age ranges between 18 and 25 years old, their first language is Spanish, and their English level oscillates between A2 and B1 according to both the Common European Framework of References for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001) and an internal assessment check point administered in fifth semester of the program. They also show a limited background in academic writing and weak literacy skills in their native language, as it is the case of many undergraduate students in Colombia (Gómez, 2011).…”

Integrating Formative Assessment with Foreign Language (English) Process Writing Instruction: Lessons from Two College Writing and Reading Classes in Germany

“…Given the emphasis these courses put on writing as a tool for learning and research, the natural drive would be to embed such writing courses into discipline-specific courses. Rather than offering them within the writing across the curriculum (WAC) paradigm, or as an add-on course (Göpferich, 2016), one could consider adapting them for the writing within the discipline (WID) approach. Although all these are meaningful recommendations, the current situation with teaching writing at German universities puts considerable restrictions on how one can teach writing.…”

Out of the Writing Centre and into the Classroom: Academic Literacies in Action

“…While faculty often bear the burden of facilitating student writing development, an area often outside of their specialization, these teaching faculty may also reject the task of supporting student writing, believing it to be primarily a language issue outside of their scope of practice (Benzie et al, 2017;Murray & Nallaya, 2016;Wingate, 2018). Teaching faculty may also fear that time given to academic literacies work may detract from content delivery (Göpferich, 2016), and may have difficulties securing time to prepare lessons to support this work (Murray & Nallaya, 2016). While faculty may struggle to find a path ahead in supporting student writing, Lampi and Reynolds (2018) emphasize the need for instructors to take on the task of making disciplinary conventions explicit to students.…”

“…An immediate unintended benefit of the workshop is that the faculty present began to see the process of academic literacies development as it occurs (or fails to occur) throughout their programs (Göpferich, 2016). This created an opening for ongoing faculty conversations around how the process of academic literacy development builds year over year, ensuring that students meet program outcomes.…”

“…Moreover, students themselves may become frustrated in attempts to apply their generic skills to multiple disciplines, receiving vastly different feedback on the quality of their work in different courses (Lampi & Reynolds, 2018). In addition, study skills programs offered outside of class may, paradoxically, attract stronger students rather than those who struggle (Durkin & Main, 2002), and students may not recognize them as relevant to their courses or learning needs (Durkin & Main, 2002;Göpferich, 2016;Wingate, 2006). This paradox may occur because of strong students' motivation to engage in activities that they perceive will lead to higher grades.…”