EDO-CS-91-05 June 1991
Encouraging Writing Achievement: Writing across the
Curriculum
Prepared by: Sharon Sorenson
ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading, English, and Communication
Digest #62
Proponents of writing across the curriculum are quick to clarify that
writing to learn is not the same as learning to write; but as flip
sides of a single coin, the two support one another. Anne Walker
(1988) calls the two parts the "virtuous circle." When content area
teachers incorporate writing in all areas of the curriculum--social
studies, math, science, vocational education, business, foreign
language, music, art, physical education, and language arts--students
benefit in three ways: they have a resource for better understanding
content; they practice a technique which aids retention; and they
begin to write better. (Walker, 1988; Kurfiss, 1985)
HOW DOES WRITING ACROSS THE CURRICULUM HELP
STUDENTS?
Across-the-curriculum writing finds its merit in removing students
from their passivity. Active learners are active thinkers, and one
cannot write without thinking. (Steffens, 1988; Walker, 1988) Thus,
incorporating writing-across-the-curriculum techniques tends to change
the complexion of the classroom. Teacher-centered classrooms become
student centered. Rather than the teacher being the Great Dispenser of
Knowledge, filling students' empty heads, the teacher becomes a
facilitator, aiding students' understanding. (Self, 1989;
Hamilton-Wieler, 1989) Assuming that students gain new knowledge by
making associations with prior knowledge, the writing activities
commonly used across the curriculum give students the opportunity to
make those connections. (Walker, 1988; Self, 1989; Barr and Healy,
1988; Kurfiss, 1985; Steffens, 1988) With the hectic pace of
back-to-back 50-minute classes all day, students need the chance to
assimilate information, make connections, and face whatever may still
confuse them. Hamilton-Wieler (1988) calls this kind of writing "a way
into or means of learning, a way into understanding through
articulating."
WHAT KINDS OF WRITING MAKE SENSE ACROSS THE
CURRICULUM?
Many writing-across-the-curriculum assignments tend to differ from
typical English-class writing assignments (unless the English teacher
also incorporates writing-to-learn techniques). Generally,
cross-curricular writing activities fall into two groups:
- Expressive writing appears in learning logs, journals, exit
summaries, problem analyses, or peer dialogues, and allows the student
to write in his/her own vocabulary without fear of being "corrected."
- Product writing appears in more formal products--essays, test
question responses, library papers, and lab reports--most like what
students have been taught to create in English class.
Given the difficulty of product writing and given the usual initial
discomfort of content area teachers in giving and evaluating product
writing assignments, models prove useful. Models that illustrate how
to tailor a topic to a specific curricular area help students learn
how to address purpose in terms of audience. Models that illustrate
discipline-specific language help students learn how to prepare a more
focused, deeper response. (Sorenson, 1989; Winchester, 1987;
Hamilton-Wieler, 1988)
HOW CAN TEACHERS FIND TIME FOR WRITING?
The biggest stumbling block for teachers is their concern for precious
class time and how they can cover the book or meet curriculum
requirements if they add yet another component to classroom
instruction. Generally, proponents agree that when teachers
incorporate writing in their content areas, the need for review and
the need for reteaching after testing is sufficiently reduced to more
than make up the difference. And since expressive writing should never
be graded--especially not for grammar or mechanics--teachers do not
suffer from increased paper load. (Worsley and Mayer, 1989; Hightshue,
1988; Self, 1989)
DOES WRITING ACROSS THE CURRICULUM IMPROVE STUDENT
PERFORMANCE?
While hard statistical evidence is scarce, a few studies show positive
results. In one study, low-achieving math students using
writing-to-learn techniques improved their state competency test
results to a greater percentage than did average math students in a
traditional classroom. (Gladstone, 1987) A physics teacher saw a
steady 3-year improvement in overall grades when writing-to-learn
techniques were incorporated. (Self, 1989) Other studies, admitting a
lack of hard evidence, nevertheless found attitudinal shifts among
students. (Winchester, 1987) Most students experienced less
apprehension about writing and felt they were better writers--writing
more varied, more complex, and more mature pieces--after only a year
in a school-wide writing-across-the-curriculum project.
Most importantly, however, research supports that writing to learn
improves higher-order reasoning skills. (Gere, 1985) As Barr and Healy
(1988) summarize the research, a "study of writing achievement across
the curriculum attests to the fact that writing improves higher-order
reasoning abilities. WAC programs are ideally suited to achieve these
ends for they provide the theoretical base for teachers and the
instructional strategies that enable students to reformulate ideas
from text."
WHAT KIND OF STAFF DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN
SUCCESSFUL?
Some school administrators say they have a
writing-across-the-curriculum program "housed in the writing lab."
Others say the program is evident in their school newspaper or
literary magazine. Still others suggest that writing across the
curriculum happens when the English teacher asks students to write a
paper about art or the art teachers refer to literature. These
examples lack the ingredients of writing across the curriculum.
(Walker, 1988; Self, 1989)
When teachers from all content areas incorporate writing activities on
a nearly daily basis in all classes, then
writing-across-the-curriculum techniques are in place. In order for
that to happen, however, teachers need a great deal of preparation.
Most teachers outside the university feel uncomfortable as writers,
even writing about their own curricular areas. They feel even less
comfortable 'evaluating' writing. And some resentment almost always
arises over "doing the English teacher's job." (Walker, 1988)
To overcome these problems and address the issues--in short, to make
teachers comfortable--most school districts have found a year-long
plan for inservice and group dialogue necessary for a successful
program. In many cases, participation has been voluntary (Winchester,
1987; Self, 1989), but the rewards have come when participants,
observing the enthusiasm and classroom success, have asked for
information. In other cases, participation has been mandatory (Self,
1989), but there is some question about a teacher's success if he/she
is an unwilling participant.
Barr and Healy (1988) argue that "Schools succeed when the emphasis,
by both teachers and students, is on writing and thinking about
relevant and significant ideas within the subject areas." Writing
across the curriculum accepts writing, the need to develop it, and its
role in learning as a human function essential to thinking and
communicating.
REFERENCES
Barr, Mary A. and Mary K. Healy. "School and University Articulation:
Different Contexts for Writing across the Curriculum." New Directions
for Teaching and Learning (36) Winter 1988, 43-53. EJ 382 431
Gere, Anne Ruggles, Ed. Roots in the Sawdust: Writing To Learn Across
the Discipline. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English,
1985. ED 262 419
Gladstone, Carol. "Thinking, Reading, and Writing across the
Curriculum." Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National
Council of Teachers of English, Los Angeles, CA, 1987, 8p. ED 291
089
Hamilton-Wieler, Sharon. "Awkward Compromises and Eloquent
Achievements." English Education 21(3) October 1989, 152- 69. EJ 397
676
Hamilton-Wieler, Sharon. "Writing as a Thought Process: Site of a
Struggle." Journal of Teaching Writing 7(2) Fall-Winter 1988, 167-79.
EJ 391 833
Hightshue, Deborah, et al. "Writing in Junior and Senior High
Schools." Phi Delta Kappan 69(10) June 1988, 725-28. EJ 379 988
Kurfiss, Joanne. "Do Students Really Learn from Writing?" Writing
Across the Curriculum 3(1) December 1985, 3-4. ED 293 123
Self, Judy, Ed. Plain Talk about Learning and Writing Across the
Curriculum. Richmond, VA: Virginia Department of Education, 1987.
Sorenson, Sharon. Webster's New World High School Writer's Handbook: A
Complete Guide for Writing Across the Curriculum. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989.
Steffens, Henry. "The Value and Difficulties of Teaching the History
of Science and Technology in Secondary Schools." Paper presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association, Cincinnati,
OH, 1988, 17p. ED 306 182
Walker, Anne. "Writing-across-the-Curriculum: The Second Decade."
English Quarterly 21(2) 1988, 93-103. EJ 378 669
Winchester School District, MA. Winchester High School Excellence in
Education Grant: Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum Final
Report. Washington: Office of Educational Research and Improvement,
1987. ED 305 589
Worsley, Dale and Bernadette Mayer. The Art of Science Writing. New
York: Teachers and Writers Collaborative, 1989. ED 304 702
Digest#62 is EDO-CS-91-05 and was published in June 1991 by the ERIC
Clearinghouse on Reading, English, and Communication, 2805 E 10th Street, Bloomington, IN
47408-2698, Telephone (812) 855-5847 or (800) 759-4723. ERIC Digests are in the public
domain and may be freely reproduced. Additional copies may be ordered by contacting the ERIC
Document Reproduction Service at (800) 443-3742.
This project has been funded at least in part with Federal funds from the U.S. Department of
Education under contract number RI88062001. The content of this publication does not
necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Education nor does mention of
trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.
