Writing Across the Curriculum

According to M.D. Roblyer, in her book Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching, "The "language arts" are those language-based processes by which we think, learn, and communicate." In the lower elementary grades this means focusing on the basic fundamentals of learning and communication such as reading, writing, and oral communication. While in the upper grades, this typically means that the curriculum focuses more heavily on literature and composition. However, as students advance further in their academic careers they begin to encounter discipline specific differences in written and oral communication (Roblyer, 2006). This is especially true in the sciences where students are expected to not only be able to communicate in both written and oral English, but to also be able to synthesize complex scientific concepts and integrate them into their communication. In "The science of scientific writing" (1990), Gopen and Swan describe the nuances of science writing by stating:

The substance of science [writing] comprises more than the discovery and recording of data; it extends crucially to include the act of interpretation. It may seem obvious that a scientific document is incomplete without the interpretation of the writer; it may not be so obvious that the document cannot "exist" without the interpretation of each reader. In other words, writers cannot "merely" record data, even if they try. In any recording or articulation, no matter how haphazard or confused, each word resides in one or more distinct structural locations. The resulting structure, even more than the meanings of individual words, significantly influences the reader during the act of interpretation.

So how are our students to learn these subtleties of science writing? How can they move past "merely recording data" and move on to communicating scientific thought clearly?

The pedagogical strategies of Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) and Writing in the Content Areas both seek to address these very questions. These pedagogies "offer a way of teaching subject-area knowledge at the same time it facilitates the development of thinking and writing skills" (Klein and Aller, 1998). While some educators feel that teaching WAC is a waste of subject specific time, this is contrary to the literature which suggests that WAC aids students in mastering subject specific content. WAC challenges students to not only learn to organize there thoughts in a different format, but they are also challenged to think differently about the subject matter area; when they write students are writing to learn. Written compositions in the sciences ask students to synthesize their knowledge and integrate it into a format that is intelligible by the reader (Klein and Aller, 1998). This helps us to achiever Higher Order Thinking skills in our classrooms.

There are many basic things we can do in the sciences for WAC that address both traditional literacy (reading and writing) and newer digital literacy (recording and publishing) skills. The lab report for example is a great place to begin addressing literacy skills for your students in the sciences, as lab reports are nearly ubiquitous in the sciences. One way to address digital literacy skills through the lab report would be to substitute one report each quarter with a video or audio lab report. Oral presentation is very important in the sciences and recording a digital lab report would give students both practice with an important skill (presenting) as well as aid them in developing 21st century literacy skills. However, there are other simpler way to achieve WAC goals in your classrooms such as discussing with students the importance of images and figures (e.g. what makes a good scientific graphic?), or asking them to create process and concept maps before writing (Roblyer, 2006).

There are many digital tools which can aid you in integrating such WAC projects into your curriculum. For example, for the audio visual lab reports free tools such as Jing (http://www.jingproject.com), Windows Movie Maker, or iMovie can be of great use. For the other projects there are also great free tools on the Internet that could help you realize your pedagogical goals. In a class where you are discussing images in scientific writing a Wiki where you as the instructor post an image and ask students to collaboratively construct a caption could be very telling. In a bad graphic there will be a great deal of dissent on the meaning of the graphic, whereas in a well designed graphic there will be a greater degree of consensus. This can aid your students in critically evaluating their own graphics. While the tools you use are going to be dependent on your specific topic, it is important to note that technology supported WAC is a powerful tool for aiding your students not only in learning how to communicate more effectively but also in learning specific subject matter. This is a benefit no matter how you look at it!

References:

Gopen, G. D. and Swan, J. A. (1990). The science of scientific writing. American Scientist, 78:550-558. Retrieved from http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/num2/the-science-of-scientific-writing/1 March 21, 2010.

Klein, Bill, and Betsy M. Aller (1998). "Writing Across the Curriculum in College Chemistry: A Practical Bibliography." Language and Learning Across the Disciplines 2.3: 25-35.

Roblyer, M. D. (2006). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (4th Edition). Prentice Hall.