Back to Newsletter Home Page

WAC Newsletter
Number 19
Wright State University
May 2000

 

INSIDE:
Writing in Engineering Courses

Efficient Grading and Research

Call for Proposals

Fall Faculty Workshop

WAC Survey Information

 


Writing in Engineering Courses:
How (and why) Aaron Krawitz created his WI class
May 2000

Instructors of courses in technical and scientific majors often seem to feel that they are at a disadvantage when it comes to applying principles of WAC and WID (Writing in the Disciplines). After all, what could students possibly gain from writing about equations?

Aaron Krawitz, who teaches Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering at the University of Missouri, Columbia, offers a response. (He was, in fact, part of a panel at the Third National WAC conference, giving a presentation titled, “Dealing with Resistance in the Natural and Applied Sciences.”) Some of the writing-to-learn techniques he uses in his MAE 344 course, Composite Materials, were featured in the April 1997 issue of The Writery, published by the University of Missouri’s Campus Writing Program. He explains how writing to learn helps his students to understand the material: “Engineering students tend to think that if the calculation was done correctly, the process that led to the calculation was also correct. This isn’t necessarily so. Just because the calculation is correct doesn’t mean that the assumptions or the values used in the equation are correct.”

Krawitz indicates that writing in his course assists students in addressing calculations in real-life contexts: “There are no answer books in the real world; it is not necessarily clear what approach to take to a problem, what assumptions and values to use, or how to evaluate the result. I try to use writing to deal with this situation, as well as to teach fundamental concepts and develop problem-solving skills.”

By using writing assignments to promote critical thinking in students, Krawitz believes that he is helping to move engineering, in its four-year degree form, away from being merely “vocational.” He uses writing “to encourage a level of thought beyond learning ‘formulae.’ I am convinced that a well-posed, more open-ended, question requiring a written answer is a more effective active learning method than true-false, short-answer, fill-in-the-blank, or multiple-choice questions, or even computational problems.”

Krawitz also uses students’ written work to improve his teaching: “I can tell more about where students are in their thinking from a writing assignment and can therefore see what difficulties I need to address as a teacher. I can also teach use of terminology, choice of appropriate units, and proper presentation of data through this process.” Asking students to solve problems and to explain their reasoning provides insight to instructors that other methods of assessment do not.

Yet another advantage to Krawitz’s approach is one that students can always appreciate—they are learning what they will need to know in a work setting. Krawitz outlines his approach by explaining, “Writing to learn course content is parallel to what we actually do in a research or industrial setting.” Often, students will respond more positively to pedagogies that are transferable to real-world contexts.

Additionally, those are often the skills that employers want in prospective employees. Krawitz explains, “Engineering employer surveys consistently report a lack of communication and critical-thinking skills among engineering graduates. I think, therefore, that employers would strongly support the development of these skills in prospective employees if they understood the possibilities.” Krawitz’s remark emphasizes the potential for professional development through WI courses.

When asked about whether writing intensive courses are “a hard sell” to faculty in Engineering, Krawitz affirms that they are. He notes that many instructors assume that writing in the field is technical writing and that it is not their job to teach writing. Krawitz feels, “The notion of writing to learn or writing as a means of delivering course content is simply not understood.... Because some faculty don’t understand the potential uses of writing in teaching content, they have the attitude that writing assignments are nothing more than add-ons to the traditional lecture format. They are concerned about fitting such assignments into an already crowded syllabus. The notion of altering the way course content is delivered is a difficult one to address; the traditional pattern is deeply ingrained.”

Krawitz suggests using field-specific seminars, presentations, workshops, even faculty study groups to help make implementing WI courses a more tenable option for instructors. He also suggests “provid[ing] examples of how conventional assignments can be ‘converted’ into WI assignments. I am talking now not just of good examples of WI assignments—these exist in engineering and elsewhere on campus—but of how even garden-variety problems might be made into interesting WI assignments.” Krawitz indicates that seeing these examples prompted him to change not only his assignments but also his teaching style. While he admits that the transition can be tough, he also understands the benefits that his students, and ultimately the engineering field, will reap from such innovative change.

The May 1998 issue of The Writery featured an example of the sort of assignment conversion Krawitz has used in his courses. Below are the featured assignments from “Alchemy: Converting an Engineering Assignment into Gold.”

Conventional Assignment

Consider a cylinder of tungsten (W) surrounded by aluminum (Al). Let the total force on the cross-section F=2x104N. Use the following: EW=400GPa, EAl=70 GPa; total cross-sectional area A=1 cm2, and AAl=5AW.

Determine: The forces FW and FAl, the stresses sW and sAl and the strain e on the system.

Writing Intensive Version: The Nature of Reinforcement in Composites

The nature of reinforcement in composites can be explored using the following model. Consider a cylinder of tungsten (W) surrounded by aluminum (Al). Let the total force on the cross-section F=2x104N. Use the following: EW=400GPa, EAl=70 GPa; total cross-sectional area A=1 cm2, and AAl=5AW. Explore the mechanical situation by determining:

• The forces FW and FAl
• The stresses sW and s Al
• The strain e on the system

Discuss the significance of your results. Consider the following: How does the notion of reinforcement enter the situation, i.e., what is the role and effect of the W with respect to the Al? Explore this further. If there were no reinforcement so that the total cross-section was all Al alloy, how would the stress and strain compare? What about pure W? What are the implications for the interface between the Al and W? What roles do the stress-strain curves of the individual materials play? What would the stress-strain curves of Al and W look like? So what?

Write no less than one nor more than two pages, double spaced, 12-point font. All aspects of your paper should be prepared on a word processor, i.e., text, equations, figures, tables. Proofread what you write for accuracy, organization, and clarity of expression.

Excerpts from the April 1997 and May 1998 issues of The Writery are used with permission.

-Cynthia K. Marshall

Top


Efficient Grading and Research Assignments
Wrap-up of WAC Workshops I & II
May 2000

This quarter’s WAC workshops have been designed in response to suggestions made by WI faculty on the annual WAC survey. The following summarizes the presentations and discussions from this quarter’s first two workshops.

WAC I: Responding to Student Writing

The first WAC workshop of the spring quarter focused on how instructors can improve student performance on writing assignments and reduce their grading work load. Participants discussed not only their own methods, but also some of the more theoretical approaches advocated by their fields.

The conversation yielded several lists of tips that instructors can use to accomplish the linked goals of better student writing and increased instructor productivity.

Participants initially shared some tips to give students for improving their writing:

• Put the paper away for a day
• Proofread (provide in-class opportunities)
• Seek feedback and assistance from the instructor, the Writing Center, and study groups

Then, participants mentioned some timesaving grading strategies that they employ:

• Mark mechanical errors on only the first page or two of the assignment to illustrate patterns of error
• Use check marks in the margins to indicate a problem in the line
• Comment on positive aspects of students’ writing—not only does this strategy help boost student confidence, but it also lets students know what they are doing well so that they can keep doing it.
• Clarify which comments are requirements as opposed to those that are merely suggestions

The conversation about timesaving strategies sparked discussion about helping students improve their writing, since better writing tends to require less grading time. Participants suggested some ways to improve the content of students’ writing:

• Explicitly address the goals of the assignment
• Discuss creating a clear thesis statement
• Talk about what kinds of sources constitute appropriate supporting evidence
• Discuss how to provide context for quotes
• Address judicious use of direct quotes (One participant suggested telling students, “Think of paying $5 per word” for directly quoted material.)
• Indicate the preferred documentation style for the field (APA, Chicago Manual, MLA, etc.)
• Share and discuss models
• Generate models as a class
• Have students trade papers with other students to identify traits of good writing
• Allow students to turn in drafts for feedback prior to the final paper

The suggestions about improved content led to discussion about how students’ efforts could help reduce grading time. Some of the strategies mentioned were

• Asking students to highlight sections of a draft to be revised
• Having students highlight revised passages when turning in subsequent drafts
• Examining highlighted sections to create a revision plan
• Conferencing with students, one-on-one or in groups, to provide oral rather than written comments
• Providing self-assessment questions for students to complete with their drafts

As the discussion wrapped up, Joe Law provided some resources to faculty, including an article by Raymond Smith, Director of Indiana University’s Campus Writing Program, “A Quick Guide to Lite Marking.” The guide is available on-line at <http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/cwp/quickguide.html>. Thanks to all present who provided these suggestions and shared their experiences with students’ writing and the subsequent work load issues that arise.

WAC II: Libraries, Research, and the Writing intensive Course:

The second WAC workshop of the quarter focused on library-based research and was conducted by Charlotte Droll, Humanities Librarian for Dunbar Library; Mary Lou Baker Jones, Physical Sciences Librarian for Dunbar Library; and Bette Sydelko, Health Sciences Librarian for Fordham Library. Calling on their experiences assisting students with research projects, they provided and solicited from workshop attendants many suggestions to facilitate students’ efforts to complete research assignments.

They began with some general guidelines for creating assignments that require library use:

• Provide and explain the objectives of the assignment to students
• Be certain that the scope and difficulty of the assignment are appropriate to the level of the course
• Demonstrate a real need for the information
• Complete the assignment yourself to anticipate any pitfalls
• Update recommended resources, bibliographies, and other source-specific information periodically
• Solicit feedback on the assignment from students

The speakers then suggested a variety of ways instructors can strengthen research-based assignments. Workshop participants also added their own suggestions to the list:

• Provide students with clear research questions
• Create assignments that require critical thinking
• Give a real-world context for the work
• Ask students to find the problem and/or create a research question
• Identify and define the assignment’s intended audience

After listing and discussing how assignments might be strengthened, the speakers and participants also discussed traits that tend to weaken research-based assignments:

• Listing resources that are outdated or unavailable
• Giving overly ambitious assignments
• Allowing students to select topics that are too broad or too narrow
• Portraying research as one step rather than an ongoing process
• Not illustrating for students how they are acquiring competencies in their disciplines

Given Wright State’s population of students with disabilities, instructors need to be aware of the research issues specific to many of those students. Judy Roberts from the Office of Disability Services shared some reminders about students with disabilities and research:

• Make research materials available via the Internet or other on-line sources
• Provide instructions for accessing information on the Web or in print
• Remind students that the circulation desk will pull books from the shelves for students within 24 hours of their request
• Realize that photocopying and using the microfiche can present accessibility problems
• Remember that time crunches can result from unavailability of student assistants, the time it takes to have books read onto tape, etc.

The suggestions and discussion generated by presenters and participants during these sessions was made possible by attendees’ collective interest in student success and their diversity of experience across the disciplines.

Top


Call for Proposals
Fifth National Writing Across the Curriculum Conference:
Writing, Teaching, and Learning in New Contexts
May 2000

Date: May 31 - June 2, 2001

Location: Bloomington, Indiana

The conference theme, “Writing, Teaching, and Learning in New Contexts,” is intended to focus attention upon the changes in institutions and learning environments that WAC and WID (Writing in the Disciplines) programs and teachers find themselves shaping and accommodating.

Proposals will be accepted for individual talks (15 minutes), panels (50 minutes), poster sessions, and preconference workshops.

Printable proposal forms are available at <http://www.indiana.edu/~wac2001/prop.html>. On-line submission information via email or on-line form is available at that site as well.

Keynote speakers:

• Gail A. Hawisher, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
• Barbara E. Walvoord, University of Notre Dame
• Kathleen Blake Yancey, Clemson University

Submission deadline: Friday, October 13, 2000

Notification of acceptance: Monday, January 15, 2001

For additional information about the conference, visit the official website at <http://www.indiana.edu/~wac2001/>.

Wright State’s WAC program will be able to pay conference expenses for a limited number of people to make presentations at this conference. Anyone interested in discussing this possibility should contact Joe Law at x2155 before October 1.

Top


Fall Faculty Workshop
Join WAC scholar Martha Twonsend on September 8
May 2000

Wright State’s Writing Across the Curriculum program is pleased to announce our fall workshop for faculty featuring nationally known WAC scholar Martha Townsend, Director of the Campus Writing Program at the University of Missouri, Columbia.

On Friday, September 8, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Kettering Center (with lunch at the Engineers’ Club), WSU faculty will have the opportunity to attend a workshop with Professor Townsend. MU’s Campus Writing Program offers 200 writing intensive (WI) courses in 60 departments in nine colleges, tutoring in writing to students enrolled in WI courses, resources for WI instructors, and professional development workshops for faculty and teaching assistants. The program has been featured in the Chronicle of Higher Education and other national publications.

In a 1993 evaluation of the program, Lynn Z. Bloom and Edward White called the program “extraordinarily successful,” writing that “The Campus Writing Program at the University of Missouri, Columbia has taken the most promising elements of writing-across-the-curriculum and implemented them in a uniquely successful model for a flagship state university.... We are impressed by the breadth and depth of faculty support, by the consistency of administrative support, and by the energy and sensitivity of the program direction. We are convinced that the university is on its way to becoming a national model of excellence.”

This level of achievement has made Townsend a sought-after national and international lecturer and consultant. She has authored nine articles or book chapters, including “Dealing with Resistance to WAC in the Natural and Applied Sciences” with Aaron Krawitz and others. She has facilitated many workshops and seminars and has worked as an external reviewer for various colleges and universities.

Registration details will be forthcoming. Please make plans now to begin the academic year with this professional development opportunity featuring one of the most sought-after experts in the field.

Top


Attention 1999-2000 Writing Intensive Faculty
May 2000

As part of our ongoing assessment of the WAC program, we have distributed our annual survey of faculty who have taught WI courses during the 1999-2000 academic year.

You should receive a copy of the survey during the first week of May; please take a few moments to complete it. Your responses will help guide the continuing development of the WAC program.

Return completed surveys to Neal Stark, Budget Planning and Resource Analysis, 224 University Hall, by Friday, May 12, 2000. Thank you for your assistance!

Top