In the drive toward institutionalization, Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs have had a... more In the drive toward institutionalization, Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs have had a tendency to standardize WAC practices, making them less flexible than they were first intended to be. As a result, when faculty, particularly those new to WAC, express hesitation or skepticism, their concerns are often dismissed as resistance. Interviews with Writing Intensive (WI) course instructors, year-long partnerships with WI faculty across disciplines, and a recent semester-long faculty development workshop revealed instances of faculty “resistance,” which lead us not only to re-evaluate “resistance,” but also to consider what guidelines facilitate broader and deeper engagement with WAC. Based on our unique experience as doctoral Writing Fellows in the WAC program at the Borough of Manhattan Community College of the City University of New York, we argue that so-called “resistances” are often justified criticisms and concerns in regard to implementing WAC under given institutional, disciplinary, departmental, and personal constraints. If we listen and respond to these criticisms and concerns, they become means to facilitate faculty engagement with WAC. Based on our findings, we re-assert the premise that WAC practices and programs must be flexible (a) to accommodate the conditions under which faculty teach and (b) to encourage ownership of WAC, which together promote deep-rooted pedagogical change, which is the ultimate goal of most WAC programs.
In the drive toward institutionalization, Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs have had a... more In the drive toward institutionalization, Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) programs have had a tendency to standardize WAC practices, making them less flexible than they were first intended to be. As a result, when faculty, particularly those new to WAC, express hesitation or skepticism, their concerns are often dismissed as resistance. Interviews with Writing Intensive (WI) course instructors, year-long partnerships with WI faculty across disciplines, and a recent semester-long faculty development workshop revealed instances of faculty “resistance,” which lead us not only to re-evaluate “resistance,” but also to consider what guidelines facilitate broader and deeper engagement with WAC. Based on our unique experience as doctoral Writing Fellows in the WAC program at the Borough of Manhattan Community College of the City University of New York, we argue that so-called “resistances” are often justified criticisms and concerns in regard to implementing WAC under given institutional, disciplinary, departmental, and personal constraints. If we listen and respond to these criticisms and concerns, they become means to facilitate faculty engagement with WAC. Based on our findings, we re-assert the premise that WAC practices and programs must be flexible (a) to accommodate the conditions under which faculty teach and (b) to encourage ownership of WAC, which together promote deep-rooted pedagogical change, which is the ultimate goal of most WAC programs.
Uploads
Papers by Denise Geraci