No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Writing-across-the-Curriculum Textbooks: A Bibliographic Essay
Despite the widespread acceptance of many kinds of nonliterary texts for first-year writing courses, primary scientific communication (PSC) remains largely absent. Objections to including PSC, especially that it is not rhetorically appropriate or sufficiently rich, do not hold. We argue for including PSC and give some practical suggestions for developing courses and designing assignments using PSC.
The literature on writing across the curriculum is discussed and compared with the concept of communication across the curriculum. An existing program of communication across the curriculum is outlined, and computer software and one communication module created for this program are discussed.
This essay situates the phenomenon of writing and learning in historical, pedagogical, and theoretical frameworks to isolate write-to-learn methods derived from the “British model” of language and learning. Writing as a mode of learning has maintained its status partly because of the rise of rhetoric and composition as a specialized field and because cross-curricular writing instruction has been offered as one answer to alleged “crises” of literate standards and competence in public and higher education. Generally, the author claims that typical accounts of writing as a unique tool for promoting learning ignore the complexities of cultures, classrooms, assignments, and other media that might equally facilitate learning. The author's reading of 35 studies of writing and learning is that they do not provide the long-sought empirical validation of writing as a mode of learning. He argues that this research is grounded in the same assumptions about language and learning as are common in the lore and practice of “writing across the curriculum” (WAC) and writing process approaches, and as a result, the issue of writing and learning has been framed wrongly. The confounds within this body of research are many of the cognitive and situational variables that would support a model of writing and learning that is compatible with the diverse discourses and experiences within and across institutions.
This study examines topic sentences in the academic article context—specifically in articles by professors in biochemistry, civil engineering, history, literature, physics, psychology, and sociology. By using propositional analysis and adapting procedures originally devised by Braddock, the investigation centers on (1) percentage of minor topic sentences, (2) combined percentage of minor and major topic sentences, and (3) percentage of topic sentence “influence.” These three indices show how heavily writers in the corpus rely on topic sentences, although there are variations across disciplines. These variations may be attributed to paragraph length, whole-text structure, or even conventional preferences. However, even when they do not use topic sentences, writers in some disciplines use topic sentence-like features (headings) for the same purposes. Conjecture is that special content and coherence demands make topic sentences a standard feature in academic articles.
