Reading in the content area · reading in their respective courses. There are several strategies that can help you help your students become better readers. First is the SQ3R method

A Keiser Collegiate System Publication The Center for Teaching and Learning Office of Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment Volume 5 Number 6 November 2005

1

Reading Across the Curriculum Reading in the content area is a very important process which promotes student success. Textbook-based reading can be difficult for many students. This type of reading is technical and laden with specific vocabulary that may be new to the student, which could discourage students from reading. They may also adapt ineffective methods to cope with reading, such as copying or relying too much on the one student who “gets it.” These students may also develop a poor attitude toward reading and think of it as a chore. As a result, students may turn to other forms of entertainment which might be considered passive such as TV, movies, videos, and computer games. In addition, it is possible that the adult students in your classes many have limits on their reading capacity because of family or work obligations.

As products of the Information Age, students have been reinforced with immediate self-gratification contingencies (think about how you feel when your Internet connection is slow or the person in the 10 or less line has 12 items). How can reading compete with these other forms of media? Why would students want to read a book when they could listen or watch passively? Do effective reading strategies help with writing? How can instructors help improve student-based reading? As instructors, we cannot assume that students know how to effectively read a textbook or novel. This process should be taught like any other subject; therefore, reading in the content area is vital to student success. The reading and writing focus cannot be limited to English 1101. Instructors should be responsible for reinforcing student-based reading in their respective courses. There are several strategies that can help you help your students become better readers. First is the SQ3R method. This method sounds like SPQR, which means the Senate and People of Rome, which I read in a textbook. This mnemonic devise helps me remember the SQ3R, which stands for Survey, Question, and Read, Recite, and Review. I have also seen SQ4R which incorporates a fourth R as Relate. I will now explain each one.

Page IN THIS ISSUE 1 Reading Across the

Curriculum by Dr. Chris Stabile

3 Helping Students Write Better in All Courses by Barbara Gross Davis

11 Using Linked Courses in the General Education Curriculum by Steven Luebke


2

Survey means to have your students examine the material before they read it. They can look at the main heading, the bold terms, objectives, sub-headings, and the illustrations and captions. Then have your students find the main points and ask questions. The questions could come from turning the main heading or sub-headings into questions. For example, the following is a heading in Psychology:

Operant Conditioning

Students can develop Questions with simple phrases such as who, what, when, where, how, and why? A student could develop the following questions: What is operant conditioning? How does operant conditioning work? What are the main points of operant conditioning? Who developed operant conditioning? To find the answer to these questions, students must now Read through the chapter. These questions become the basis of their reading, which now has a purpose. Recite allows the student to write the answers to the questions in their own words and they can develop a one-sentence or a half-page Review of the material. The Relate component of the SQ4R allows the students to identify the relevance of the concepts to their own life or a social condition. The SQ3(4)R activity promotes active critical reading which should foster a positive attitude toward reading. Employing this method could promote early successes in reading, which is a major factor in enhancing student motivation. A second method is called the KWL, which stands for Know, Want to know, and what have you Learned. This is good for engaging students in active

participation in the classroom. The instructor can survey the class for their current knowledge of operant conditioning. The instructor can post the levels of student knowledge on the board and have them copy the material in their course notes. Then the instructor can ask the students what they want to know about the topic that was not mentioned. This information could be gathered from the students though question development. After the students read the section, they can answer the questions individually or actively participate in a collaborative exercise. The last part of the KWL is great for a review. The instructor can write down some of the students’ one-sentence summaries on the board. Thus, the SQ3R and the KWL are complementary methods. These methods can be used together or separately. They should be used especially if you notice that students are having difficulty in identifying the main ideas of the course. These methods do not have to be used during every class, but should be used when introducing new material. Also, teach your students how to conduct their own SQ3R or have them develop their own questions. Remember, you must teach them how to develop questions. In addition, a small-group approach can allow students to discuss, share, and write down how they actively read the textbook. Teaching reading methods allows for the students and the instructor to model active reading methods. Other active reading methods that you can teach your students could include adjusting learning styles, so that students can read standing up, on the floor, outside, or in the hallway. They can write down key vocabulary in their


3

notebook, color-code the vocabulary, or use a tape recorder. They could pretend to be the author and make notes in the margins and actively underlining the main ideas. Furthermore, show them how to create an outline of the main points. Employ graphic organizers, for example:

Also, students can develop a short sentence for each vocabulary word, or they draw a picture to represent the word. Finally, tell them that they should break about every 35-40 minutes in order to avoid eye strain or become fixated on one topic. In short, these strategies are needed because as instructors, we cannot assume that students possess effective reading methods. Active reading can help students enjoy reading because it promotes early success which can help increase motivation. If the students observe the relevance of the reading, then it makes what they are reading worthwhile. Therefore, they are more likely to actively engage in the course material. The technical nature of vocabulary in every discipline has shifted the burden of teaching reading away from English instructors and toward the faculty as a whole.

When students become better readers, it is possible that they can become better writers. However, other related strategies exist for improving writing. Barbara Gross Davis has some methods to help promote better writing.

Helping Students Write Better in All Courses A chapter in Tools of Teaching by Barbara Gross Davis. (Reprinted with written permission from the author August 8, 2005). Davis, B. G. (1993). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Few faculty would deny the importance of writing in their academic discipline or the role writing plays in mastering material, shaping ideas, and developing critical thinking skills. Writing helps students learn the subject matter: they understand and retain course material much better when they write about it.

You don't have to be a writing specialist - or even an accomplished writer - to improve your students' writing skills, and you don't have to sacrifice hours of class time or grading time. The ideas that follow are designed to make writing more integral to your courses and less onerous to you and your students.

Main Point

Point 2

Point 4 Point 3

Point 1


4

General Strategies

View the improvement of students' writing as your responsibility. Many faculty erroneously believe that teaching writing is the job of the English department or composition program alone. Not true! Writing is an essential tool for learning a discipline. Helping students improve their writing skills is therefore the responsibility of all faculty.

Let students know that you value good writing. Stress the importance of clear, thoughtful writing. As Elbow (1987) has noted, you can require competent writing without knowing how to teach composition. In general, faculty who tell students that good writing will be rewarded and poor writing will be penalized receive better essays than instructors who don't make such demands. In the syllabus, on the first day of class, and throughout the term, remind students that they must make their best efforts in expressing themselves on paper. Back up your statements with comments on early assignments that show you really mean it, and students will respond. (Source: Elbow, 1987)

Regularly assign brief writing exercises in your classes. Writing is a complex set of skills that requires continuous practice. You need not assign weekly papers to give students experience in writing. To vary the pace of a lecture course, ask students to

write for a few minutes during class. Some mixture of in-class writing, outside writing assignments, and exams with open-ended questions will give students the practice they need to improve their skills. (Source: Tollefson, 1988)

Provide guidance throughout the writing process. After you have made an assignment, discuss the value of outlines and notes, explain how to select and narrow a topic, and critique first drafts. Define plagiarism as well; see "Preventing Academic Dishonesty." (Source: Tollefson, 1988)

Don't feel as though you have to read and grade every piece of your students' writing. Since students are writing primarily to learn a subject, it is better to have them write than not write, even if you cannot evaluate each piece of writing. Ask students to analyze each other's work during class, or ask them to critique their work in small groups. Or simply have students write for their own purposes, without any feedback. Students will learn that they are writing in order to think more clearly, not to obtain a grade. Keep in mind, too, that you can collect students' papers and skim their work. (Source: Watkins, 1990)

Find other faculty members who are trying to use writing more effectively in their courses. Share the writing assignments you have developed and discuss how students did on the assignments. Pool ideas about ways in which writing can help


5

students learn more about the subject matter. See if there is sufficient interest to warrant drawing up writing guidelines for your discipline. Students welcome handouts that give them specific instructions on how to write papers for a particular course or in a particular subject area.

Teaching Writing When You Are Not an English Teacher

Remind students that writing is a process that helps us clarify ideas. Tell them that writing is a way of learning, not an end in itself. Let students know that none of us knows exactly what we think about a topic or issue until we put our views on paper. Also let students know that writing is a complicated, messy, nonlinear process filled with false starts. Help them identify the writer's key activities:

• Developing ideas • Finding a focus and a thesis • Composing a draft • Getting feedback and

comments from others • Revising the draft by

expanding ideas, clarifying meaning, reorganizing

• Editing • Presenting the finished work

to readers

Explain that writing is hard work. Share with your class your own struggles in grappling with difficult topics. If they know that writing takes effort, they won't be discouraged by their pace or

progress. One faculty member shares with students a notebook that contains the chronology of one of his published articles: first ideas, successive drafts, submitted manuscript, reviewers' suggested changes, revised version, galley proofs, and published article (Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, 1989).

Give students opportunities to talk about their writing. Students need to talk about papers in progress so that they can formulate their thoughts, generate ideas, and focus their topics. It is also important for students to hear what their peers have written. Take five or ten minutes of class time for students to read their writing to each other in small groups or pairs or to talk about what they plan to write.

Encourage students to revise their work. Provide formal steps for revision. For example, ask students to submit first drafts of papers for your review or for peer critique. Or give students the option of revising and rewriting one assignment during the term for a higher grade. Faculty who extend this invitation to their students report that 10 to 40 percent of the students take advantage of it. (Source: Lowman, 1984)

Explain thesis statements. A thesis statement makes an assertion about some issue: "The savings and loan crisis resulted from the relaxation of government regulations." A common student problem is to write papers that


6

have a diffuse thesis statement ("The savings and loan crisis has caused major problems") or papers that present overviews of facts with no thesis statement.

Stress clarity and specificity. Let students know that the more abstract and difficult the topic, the more concrete their language should be (Tollefson, 1988). Tell students that inflated language and academic jargon camouflage rather than clarify their point.

Explain the importance of grammar and sentence structure, as well as content. Don't let students fall back on the rationalization that only English teachers should be judges of grammar and style. Tell students you will be looking at both the quality of their writing and the content.

Distribute bibliographies and tip sheets on good writing practices. Check with your English department, composition program, or writing center to identify materials that can easily be distributed to students. Consider giving students a bibliography of writing guides, for example:

Crews, F. C. Random House Handbook. (6th ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992. A classic comprehensive textbook for college students. Well written and well worth reading.

Lanham, R. A. Revising Prose. (3rd ed.) New York: Scribner's, 1991. Techniques for eliminating

bureaucratese and restoring energy to tired prose.

Tollefson, S. K. Grammar Grams and Grammar Grams II. New York: HarperCollins, 1989, 1992. Two short, witty guides that answer common questions about grammar, style, and usage. Both are fun to read.

Discipline-specific guides may also be useful. Petersen (1982) has a dated but good bibliography on writing in particular content areas. Other publications follow.

Science and Engineering

Barrass, R. Scientists Must Write. New York: Chapman and Hall, 1978.

Biddle, A. W., and Bean, D. J. Writer's Guide: Life Sciences. Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1987.

Connolly, P., and Vilvardi, T. (eds.). Writing to Learn Mathematics and Science. New York: Teachers College Press, 1989.

Day, R. A. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper. (3rd ed.) Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1988.

Maimon, E. P., and others. Writing in the Arts and Sciences. Boston: Little, Brown, 1981.

Michaelson, R. How to Write and Publish Engineering Papers and Reports. Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1990.


7

Arts and Humanities

Barnet, S. A Sbort Guide to Writing About Art. Boston: Little, Brown, 1989. Biddle, A. W., Steffens, H. J., Dickerson, M. J., and Fulwiler, T. Writer's Guide: History. Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1987.

Goldman, B. Reading and Writing in the Arts. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1978.

Social Sciences

Biddle, A. W., Fulwiler, 1, and Holland, K. M. Writer's Guide: Psychology. Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1987.

Biddle, A. W., Holland, K. M., and Fulwiler, T. Writer's Guide: Political Science. Lexington, Mass.: Heath, 1987.

Lanham, R. A. Revising Business Prose. (3rd ed.) New York: Scribner's, 1991.

McCloskey, D. N. The Writing of Economics. New York: Macmillan, 1987. Steward, J. S., and Smelstor, M. Writing in the Social Sciences. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman, 1984.

Tallent, N. Psychological Report Writing. (4th ed.) Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1992.

Ask a composition instructor to give a presentation to your students. Invite a guest speaker to talk to your class about effective writing and common writing problems. Faculty who have invited experts from composition

departments or student learning centers report that such presentations reinforce the values of the importance of writing.

Let students know about available tutoring services. Most campuses offer individual or group tutoring in writing. Distribute brochures or ask someone from the tutoring center to give a demonstration in your class.

Use computers to help students write better. Faculty are beginning to use commercially available and locally developed software to help students plan, write, and revise their written work. Some software lets instructors monitor students' work in progress and lets students collaborate with their classmates. Holdstein and Selfe (1990) and Hawisher and Selfe (1989) discuss computers and composition.

Assigning In-Class Writing Activities

Ask students to write what they know about a topic before you discuss it. Before discussing a topic or lecturing on it, ask students to write a brief account of what they already know about the subject or what opinions they hold. You need not collect these; the purpose is to focus students' attention. (Source: Tollefson, 1988)

Ask students to respond in writing to questions you pose during class. For example, at the


8

beginning of a class, list two or three short-answer questions on the board and ask students to write their responses. The questions might call for a review of material previously covered or test student's recall of the assigned readings. Asking students to write down their responses also helps generate more lively discussion because students will have a chance to think about the material. (Source: Tollefson, 1988)

Ask students to write from a pro or con position. When an argument has been presented in class, stop for a few minutes and ask students to write down all the reasons and evidence they can think of that supports one side or the other. Use these statements as the basis for discussion. (Source: Walvoord, 1986)

During class, pause for a three-minute write. Periodically ask students to write for three minutes on a specific question or topic. Tell students to write freely, whatever pops into their minds without worrying about grammar, spelling, phrasing, or organization. Writing experts believe that this kind of free writing helps students synthesize diverse ideas and identify points they don't understand. You need not collect these exercises. (Source: Tollefson, 1988)

Have students write a brief summary at the end of class. Give students two or three minutes to jot down the key themes, major points, or general principles of the day's discussion. If you give

students index cards to write on, you can easily collect and review them to see whether your class understood the discussion.

Have one student keep minutes to be read at the next class meeting. Taking minutes gives students a chance to develop their listening, synthesizing, and writing skills. Boris (1983) suggests the following procedure:

• Prepare your students by having everyone in class take careful notes for a period, rework them at home as minutes, and hand them in for comments. Leave it to students' discretion whether the minutes are in outline or narrative form.

• Select one or two good models to read or distribute to the class.

• At the start of each of the following classes, assign one student to take the minutes for the day.

• Give the person who takes the minutes a piece of carbon paper so that you can have a carbon copy of the rough minutes. This person then takes home the original and revises it in time to read it aloud at the next class meeting.

• After the student has read the minutes, ask the class to comment on their accuracy and quality. The student then revises the minutes, if necessary, and turns in two copies, one for grading and one for your files.


9

Structure small group discussion around a writing task. For example, ask each student to pick three words of major importance to the day's session. Then ask the class to write freely for two or three minutes on one of the words. Next, give the students five to ten minutes to meet in groups of three, sharing what they have written and generating questions to ask in class.

Use peer response groups. Divide the class into groups of three or four students, no larger. Tell your students to bring to class enough copies of a rough draft of a paper for each member of their group. Give students guidelines for critiquing the drafts. The most important step in any response task is for the reader to note the part of the paper that is the strongest and describe to the writer why it worked well. Readers can also be given the following instructions (adapted from Walvoord, 1986, p. 113):

• State the main point of the paper in a single sentence.

• List the major subtopics. • Identify confusing sections

of the paper. • Decide whether each section

of the paper has enough detail, evidence, and information.

• Indicate whether the paper's points follow one another in sequence.

• Judge the appropriateness of the opening and concluding paragraphs.

• Identify the strengths of the paper.

The critiques may be done during class time, but written critiques done as homework are likely to be more thoughtful. Use class time for the groups to discuss each paper and critique. Students then revise their drafts for submission.

Use read-around groups. Read-around groups allow everyone to read everyone else's paper. The technique works best for short assignments (two to four pages). Divide the class into groups of four students, no larger, and divide the papers (coded for anonymity) into as many sets as there are groups. Give each group a set and ask students to read each paper silently and select the best paper in the set. Each group discusses their choices and comes to consensus on the best paper. The paper's code number is recorded by the group, and the process is repeated with a new set of papers. After all the sets have been read by all the groups, someone from each group writes on the board the code number of the best paper in each set. Recurring numbers are circled. Typically, one to three papers stand out. (Source: Pytlik, 1989)

Ask students to identify the characteristics of effective writing. After students have completed the read-around activity, ask them to reconsider those papers voted as excellent by the entire class and to jot down features that made each paper outstanding. Record their comments on the board, asking for


10

elaboration and probing vague generalities (for example, "The paper was interesting." "What made the paper interesting?"). In pairs, students discuss the comments on the board and try to place them in categories such as organization, awareness of audience, thoroughness of detail, and so on. You may need to help the students arrange the characteristics into meaningful categories. (Source: Pytlik, 1989)

References

Boris, E. Z. "Classroom Minutes: A Valuable Teaching Device." Improving College and University Teaching, 1983, 31(2), 70-73.

Elbow, P. "Using Writing to Teach Something Else." Unpublished paper, 1987.

Hawisher, G. E., and Selfe, C. L. (eds.). Critical Perspectives on Computers and Composition Instruction. New York: Teachers College Press, 1989.

Holdstein, D. H., and Selfe, C. L. (eds.). Computers and Writing: Theory, Research, Practice. New York: Modern Language Association, 1990.

Lowman, J. Mastering the Techniques of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1984.

Petersen, B. T. "Additional Resources in the Practice of Writing Across the Disciplines." In C. W. Griffin (ed.), Teaching Writing in All

Disciplines. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, no. 12. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.

Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education. Bright Idea Network, 1989. (For information contact David Graf, Iowa State University, Ames.)

Pytlik, B. P. "Teaching Teachers of Writing: Workshops on Writing as a Collaborative Process." College Teaching, 1989, 37(l), 12-14.

Tollefson, S. K. Encouraging Student Writing. Berkeley: Office of Educational Development, University of California, 1988.

Walvoord, B. F. Helping Students Write Well: A Guide for Teachers in All Disciplines. (2nd ed.) New York: Modern Language Association, 1986.

Watkins, B. T. "More and More Professors in Many Academic Disciplines Routinely Require Students to Do Extensive Writing." Chronicle of Higher Education, 1990, 36(44), pp. A13-14, A16.


11

More interesting ideas for WAC

Using Linked Courses in the General Education Curriculum

by Steven R. Luebke University of Wisconsin - River Falls (Reprinted with permission from the author November 8, 2005)

Recent interest in learning communities indicates appreciation for the value of interdisciplinary study. Learning communities are "supportive settings which require students to share the experience of learning with others" (Tinto, 1998). Research suggests that learning communities are useful for several reasons. They result in more intellectual interaction among students and between students and faculty members. They increase student involvement and create a sense of community. The programs show impressive results in terms of student academic achievement, student intellectual development, retention, and student motivation. Learning communities increase curricular coherence and provide ample opportunities for the integration and reinforcement of ideas. They promote an understanding of complex issues that cross disciplinary boundaries (Smith, 1991). One type of learning community is that created through linked courses.

What Are Linked Courses?

Kellogg (1999) states that linked courses put together a cohort of students with two common courses. One course is typically content-based (science, math) and the other is an application course (writing, speech). The faculty of each course may teach independently or together and coordinate syllabi and assignments so that the classes compliment each other. The Linked Courses Model provides a shared experience for students that focuses on a content-based course that is actively supported by a skills course.

Links have been formed between many kinds of academic disciplines: ESL and Speech courses (Mackler and Savard, 1997); Basic Writing and Photography ("Syllabus," 2001); Chemistry and Composition (Dunn, 1993); Anthropology, Rhetoric and Writing, and Speech (Thompson, 1998); Math and Composition (Szydlik and Hill, 1998), and others. Zawacki and Williams (2001) mention that at George Mason University, which has used a linked courses approach since 1992, first-year composition courses have been linked with introductory courses in psychology, sociology, anthropology, philosophy, engineering, government, history, and others. Of course, links need not necessarily follow the "content-based"-"application course" dichotomy above; a link might also consist of "content-based" courses.


12

In the fall of 1999 we initiated a pilot project using linked courses in the general education program at the University of Wisconsin-River Falls, a comprehensive state university. The program covered one semester, and it involved two English Department faculty members linking their Freshman English courses with introductory science courses. The rest of this essay explains the project, considers some challenges one faces in developing linked courses, and makes observations regarding assessment of the experience.

The Courses We Linked

We linked introductory courses from the general education curriculum. One pair of faculty linked Freshman English and Biology. I and another colleague linked Freshman English and Introduction to Environmental Studies. We linked these general education classes because we believe that students sometimes do not perceive a connection between the large number of courses (in many disciplines) they are required to take. We wanted to create a bridge between two areas of study--humanities and social science, in my case--that may be considered separate and unrelated.

Faculty who are considering developing their own linked general education courses should keep in mind that their enrollment will depend on the courses they link together. This may seem like an obvious point, but it is worth mentioning. For instance, because not all students are required to

take Introduction to Environmental Studies, I ended up with an entire class of students majoring in Agriculture, in one aspect or another. My colleagues who linked Freshman English and Biology, courses required for a greater number of students, had an enrollment much more representative of the student body in general. Either type of link will work, but faculty who want a broad cross-section of students may want to link classes that will offer that type of audience.

Goals of Linked Courses

The practice of linking courses together is a way to practice writing across the curriculum. It is consistent with the notion of a liberal education, which I once heard described as the practice of "reducing our uncritical dependence on authority figures." Dunn (1993), too, states that one of the goals of linked courses is to "disrupt student patterns of unquestioning acceptance of the authority of the published text and believing everything they see on the printed page." Along the same lines, McLeod and Miraglia (2001) argue that when learning communities are used, "in many cases . . . the teacher moves from being the sage on the stage to the guide on the side, as students learn together and from each other."

Our project had a number of goals. In addition to creating connections across disciplines, we wanted our students to strengthen the skills developed in both classes: we


13

wanted them to become better readers and writers, and (in my case) we wanted them to increase their awareness of environmental issues and their impact. We also wanted to improve the retention rate of Freshmen, which has been a particular goal of our university for the last few years. At UW-River Falls, a significant number of students are the first in their families to have attended college, so we wanted to try to increase the odds that they would succeed. We hoped that giving students an increased sense of community, both socially and academically, would make them want to remain throughout their college education. Zawacki and Williams (2001) state that the desire "to increase first-year student retention by creating a comfortable, less isolating learning environment" is one of the main reasons the Arts and Sciences Dean at George Mason University funded their linked courses program. Finally, like any faculty, we wanted to have a lively, engaged class who, because they felt comfortable with each other, would be active and enjoyable to work with. The goals described above are consistent with the principles of an effective general education program, according to the Association of American Colleges (1994): "strong general education programs continuously strive for educational coherence" and "require and foster academic community."

The students' self-reported motives for enrolling in the linked courses varied. When asked at the beginning of the semester what

she hoped to gain, one student wrote that science and English were her two favorite subjects, so she thought it would be interesting and enjoyable to connect them. A more typical response was that they hoped to improve their reading and writing skills by concentrating on an area in which they were already interested. As one student put it, "I enrolled in these linked courses because I thought it would bring something I like [science] into something I dislike [writing]." Students also mentioned the social aspect, remarking that they hoped to find new friends through the experience.

Preparing the Classes

Teaching linked classes successfully requires significant preparation. In our case, the four of us involved in the links met together several times before the classes began to discuss many issues including pedagogy, goals for student learning, and possible obstacles, as well as more practical concerns like how our syllabi would work together. My colleague and I linked our syllabi so that students covered similar material simultaneously (or nearly so) in each class. Generally, we tried to arrange it so the material was introduced first in the environmental studies class, and subsequently covered in English class. We believed that would be preferable so that a grasp on the content of the material would precede consideration of the challenges involved in writing about that material. In practice,


14

the courses did not always work out this way. For example, the faculty member I paired up with adjusted his syllabus at one point, so that the two classes were not always synchronized as well as they might have been. Instructors considering linking their courses should discuss their teaching styles previous to teaching. Some instructors doggedly stick to schedules they have set up, while others like to be free to adjust to allow for more time on a given topic.

How the Links Worked

Students enrolled in the linked course met for Freshman English twice a week (75 minutes for each class) and for Introduction to Environmental Studies once a week (about 2 hours for each class). In English class, they used Melissa Walker's Reading the Environment, their environmental studies text, and additional handouts, reading essays about various issues. For example, students wrote a position paper on overpopulation based on a discussion question in their environmental studies text: should a population control policy (similar to the one used in China) be adopted? That is, should the government allow each family one child only? Since our discussion occurred during the semester in which the world population topped 6 billion, we were also able to bring in newspaper articles. Students read and discussed arguments on the issue. In one session of the environmental studies class I attended, they watched a video in which various scientists (including

one they had read about in English class) presented their views on the issue. The professor in the environmental sciences class helped students understand the assumptions and the perspectives from which the scientists argued. The topic itself allowed students to consider the issue from a scientific as well as humanistic and cultural point of view, since they had to acknowledge fundamental differences between U.S. and Chinese notions of government and individual freedom. In another essay, students compared and contrasted two authors' views about problems related to endangered species, a topic also discussed in their environmental studies class. Finally, they wrote a research paper focusing on a particular endangered species.

In the Environmental Studies course, one of the assignments asked students to write an environmental advocacy letter and send it to a newspaper, politician, business etc. Writing such a letter involves many of the same techniques or strategies one would use in writing a position paper, such as using facts and information to support an argument, being aware of one's audience, maintaining a fair-minded tone, and responding to the opposing view. In this sense the two courses could be considered complementary; activities, assignments, or lessons in each course reinforced those in the other one.

In addition to the three linked writing topics, students wrote two


15

other essays not related to environmental studies. Thus, the courses were not linked for the entire semester, but only at certain points. We did this for two reasons: first, Freshman English requires us to teach many different aspects of writing, and we wanted to make sure we covered all of the necessary material; second, but no less important, we did not want the students to "burn out" by having to spend too much time on one topic. This proved to be a sound approach. In their evaluations of the linked courses, some students remarked that even though the courses were linked only part of the time, they sometimes felt a little overwhelmed by spending so much time on the topic of the environment. Linking together all of the classes would likely have been a little too repetitive. Hill and Szydlik ("Integrating Mathematics and Writing Instruction," 1998) make a similar observation in their report about linking and English and Math classes. The students, not math majors, "felt that two courses consisting almost purely of mathematical content was too much."

Challenges In Developing Linked Courses

Time Commitment

The time commitment necessary to teaching linked courses effectively may be one of the reasons so few faculty become involved. Teaching linked courses is stimulating but also challenging. They require more effort from faculty than do standard classes, because each

faculty member must learn about a different subject and find ways to incorporate that subject within his/her own course. Moreover, it takes time to coordinate syllabi and writing assignments. Indeed, in a study of linked courses in seven community colleges, Perin (2000) writes that increased faculty workload was "by far the most often mentioned drawback." Some faculty also grade or respond to writing collaboratively (Hill and Szydlik, 1998), which could, considering the logistics involved, require even more time. Finally, visiting each other's classes requires additional commitment. It is important to schedule courses so that faculty can visit each other's classes. There are practical reasons for these visits, of course, such as learning the material in the other class, but they also strengthen the sense of community. Moreover, discussions between faculty members may help identify students who are struggling and then give faculty an opportunity to intervene. Students also like to see faculty appearing in both classes. In our pilot project, scheduling prevented us from doing this very often, and many students commented that having faculty sit in on each other's classes would have improved the experience. For the faculty members, too, it can be enlightening. One learns something about the pedagogical style of another instructor, which can help one understand the behavior of one's own students in class. In my case, the colleague I linked up with created a rather relaxed class atmosphere, similar to the one I try to create, so in that respect our


16

classroom styles meshed well. In any case, faculty would likely find it enlightening to observe each others' classes: following their probationary period, in which they may be observed a number of times, many instructors know about only their own teaching, unless they are involved in evaluating junior or adjunct faculty. To observe another professor, especially when s/he is teaching one's own students, can be very enlightening. One learns, not only about how another person teaches, but sees how one's own students behave in the classroom.

Institutional Obstacles

We were fortunate to have received a grant from our university to pay for course materials and to allow each participant a stipend. We also got scheduling help from the Registrar's Office and our individual departments. Instructors who plan to link courses should work with their registrars to make the process of enrolling a smooth one. We closed a specific section of Freshman English and a section of Introduction to Environmental Studies. We handed out add cards to keep track of enrollment. My partner and I both signed 25 cards, then distributed them to advisors before they met their incoming freshmen. (It is important to explain to the advisors themselves what you are doing and why you are doing it, so they can inform their advisees. I learned that many of the students who enrolled in the classes learned about them from their advisors.) We then collected

the unused cards from the advisors after each registration period.

We did encounter a couple of obstacles in putting the courses into action. For instance, the size of the classes should be considered when deciding which courses to link. In our university, each Freshman English class has 25 students. However, each Introduction to Environmental Studies class has about 75 students. We considered various ways of managing the disparity. One way was to have 25 linked and 50 non-linked students in Environmental Studies. We decided against this, since we thought it would be contrary to the sense of community we were trying to achieve.

An additional problem here was that there seemed to be no one to appeal to about this "differing numbers" situation. My partner's department needed to have all its courses staffed and thus could not simply offer to release his responsibility to teach a 75-student class. If they had the time and resources, they perhaps could have hired an adjunct faculty member to teach the 50 students. However, over-dependence on adjunct faculty is already a problem in many universities. For example, during the fall of 2001 in our department, 44% of the Freshman English classes were taught by adjunct faculty. An additional consequence of this overdependence on adjuncts is that faculty are then required to sit on more committees, making them, in all likelihood, less interested in


17

assuming the additional burdens involved in teaching. We didn't want to increase the number of adjuncts, particularly for introductory courses. Consequently, in order to teach a linked class, my colleague had to divide his 75-student class into a 50-student and a 25-student class. This meant he had to teach an extra class, a tall order at our university, where each full-time faculty member already teaches four courses each semester. If institutions want to encourage faculty to teach linked classes, they should be prepared to adjust class sizes, teaching schedules, and perhaps course loads and/or offer additional compensation to departments or to participating faculty who are required to teach the course as an overload.

Territoriality

A final obstacle in developing courses that span academic disciplines is the tendency to protect one's own territory: that is, everyone considers his/her area of study important, and may therefore be concerned about diluting the content of a course or not being able to "cover" all of the material considered necessary. This problem can only be solved by helping faculty become more aware of the advantages in linking their courses. It is not clear that linked courses necessarily result in less material being covered. If that were true, faculty would do well to consider whether there may not be value in the trade-off: slightly less material covered, but more interest, engagement, and

enthusiasm (and perhaps more learning) on the part of the students. Indeed, in The Courage to Teach, Parker Palmer (1998) advocates teaching based on what he calls the "community of truth," a practice potentially enhanced by linked courses. Palmer argues that "to teach is to create a space in which the community of truth is practiced": "I need to spend less time filling the space with data and my own thoughts and more time opening a space where students can have a conversation with the subject and with each other . . ." Of course, says Palmer, we all feel a responsibility to cover our own material, and although "this sense of responsibility cannot be faulted . . . the conclusion we draw from it--that we must sacrifice space in order to cover the field--is based on the false premise that space and stuff are mutually exclusive." A characteristic of the linked course is a greater amount of "space" allotted to covering "stuff" because material is "covered" in two different classrooms.

Another part of the challenge here, of course, is that writing sometimes tends to become "ghettoized" in the English Department. Faculty in other disciplines, sometimes assuming that writing should be taught by "experts," do not make writing part of their own curriculum. To paraphrase a former Dean at our university, faculty in other departments grade writing; English faculty teach writing. Here, we might also recall Kellogg's definition of linked courses (a "content-based" course and an


18

"applications" course) to further illustrate the problem. Even though one could argue that a course like composition has its own unique content, some consider a writing course to be merely "application" rather than "content." Thus English instructors may fear becoming servants to faculty from other disciplines.

In my own case, it was certainly easier to see how I could help the students learn about environmental science than to see how the instructor in environmental science could help students learn about writing. However, the professor who taught environmental science was interested in helping his students become better writers, too. To help students with the environmental advocacy letter assignment, for example, he put on reserve in the library a file of previous student efforts, so the students could see how other students approached the assignment. If I were to teach the linked course again, I would ask my colleague to spend time in class discussing some of those examples, focusing on how the content and style in one example was more effective than in another. In addition, when it comes to issues like global warming, overpopulation, or endangered species, professors in the sciences can help students attempt to synthesize opposing arguments, an essential component of any writing class that involves taking a position on an issue. They can also help students with APA documentation. In whatever discipline they happen to teach in, instructors can respond

to brief, perhaps ungraded, writing, both to help students understand the material and to show them that writing is valued. These short assignments could be done in class (10 minutes is usually sufficient) or out of class.

Assessment

When we applied for our grant to develop these courses, we needed to think of ways to assess the outcome of the project. We considered qualitative criteria, such as faculty observations about students' classroom behavior (their degree of interest and participation) as well as student observations about the effectiveness of the curricula and the instruction and about their own involvement and learning. We also considered quantitative criteria such as comparison of final grades and retention rates for students in linked and non-linked classes. Some of these criteria and additional assessment techniques are discussed in essays by Mackay (1996), Tinto and Goodsell (1993), Brunner and Daley (1983), Perin (2000), Thompson (1998), and Zawacki and Williams (2001).

It is difficult to assess a pilot project such as ours, though overall it appears to have been a success. Students responded favorably in writing to questions about the experience. The grades were slightly, but not significantly, higher in the linked section of Freshman English than in a non-linked section. Comparing retention rates is problematic. On the evaluation form they filled out at


19

the end of the semester, students were asked, "Has this course in any way influenced your decision to remain at or leave UWRF before graduation?" Most students, in both the linked and non-linked Freshman English class said that while their Freshman English experience was generally positive, it did not influence their decision to leave or stay. A few did say that their Freshman English class had convinced them to remain at our university. However, several (again, in both linked and non-linked classes) commented either that they had already planned to transfer before the semester even began, or said that they would be influenced more by the totality of their college experience (relationships with others, experiences in other classes) than by this single experience. Thus it seems unlikely that retention rates will be an effective way of assessing the courses at this point. It might be useful to hear from the students later in their college careers in order to get a sense of how they believe the classes affected them.

Students' Perceptions of the Linked Course

I asked students in both my linked and non-linked classes to respond to questions about three areas: course learning, writing experience, and experience with faculty. Overall, the responses were similar, except in a few areas. Students in the linked class more often reported that they had worked on a project or assignment with other students outside of

class. In addition, they were more likely to have applied material learned in class to other areas of life, whether these were other classes or discussions with family or friends. They were more likely to have tried to explain material from the course to someone else. Finally, students in the linked course were much more likely to have met with the instructor outside of class. Out of 21 respondents, seven reported they had "often" visited their instructor during office hours. In the non-linked class, only one student said s/he had "almost always" visited the instructor and only one said s/he had "often" done so.

Students in the linked class overwhelmingly found the experience positive in two aspects. First, they said that reading and writing about environmental issues in English class was helpful. Many students used the word "interesting." Additional comments follow: "it was like learning two things in one class"; "it made English more understandable"; "it helped me better understand the information I was learning in Environmental Studies"; "Writing about environmental issues made it easier to write papers, because we could relate to what we were writing about"; "It makes writing a whole lot easier and more fun."

Second, students appreciated the social aspect; they enjoyed getting to know a particular group of people because it made them feel more comfortable in and out of class. Feeling comfortable may translate into increased


20

engagement and participation. One student said: "You become a little 'family.' Everyone is concerned about the others if they are not in class." Indeed, the attendance in the linked class was very good throughout the semester. When asked, "Would you take another set of linked classes?" students overwhelmingly said they would. Some said it would depend on which courses were linked. Only one student said no.

Students' perceptions about their own effort also differed somewhat between the linked and non-linked courses. I asked them whether they had worked harder as a result of feedback from the instructor. In the non-linked class, one student said "almost always" and 12 students said "often." In the linked class, four students said they had "almost always" worked harder while seven reported they had "often" done so. In one way, these results are quite similar: approximately a dozen students in each class reported working harder from the instructor's feedback. It seems worth noting, however, that in the linked class, more students reported working harder "almost always." It may be that the linked class helped some students be more interested, more enthusiastic about learning.

Conclusion

The advantages of linked courses appear to be a greater sense of community among the students and additional contact between students and instructor outside of class. It is not clear from the data

whether or not students in the linked course actually learned more about writing or became better writers, but increased interaction among both the students themselves and with the faculty member offers the opportunity for increased learning. The benefits of these courses for faculty, too, should be considered. The interdisciplinary experience offers faculty the opportunity to increase their knowledge of a discipline outside their own and perhaps broaden their pedagogical strategies as well. Zawacki and Williams (2001) acknowledge that while many composition instructors tend to be non-tenure line people and therefore may be "further subordinated when they teach in linked arrangements," the opposite seems to be true; "more often these instructors say they feel they have a more visible--and valued--role in learning communities than they do when they teach in isolation." Finally, faculty in different disciplines seem to have few opportunities to interact. It seems likely that interdisciplinary efforts like linked courses may have the additional effect of helping to improve the campus climate.

On our campus, the English-Biology link will continue next year. Because of the class-size problem described above and other commitments by the Environmental Sciences faculty member with whom I worked, the original English-Introduction to Environmental Studies link has not continued. I do intend to attempt to reestablish the linked course,


21

however, perhaps with a different faculty member.

References

Association of American Colleges. (1994). Strong foundations: Twelve principles of effective general education programs. Washington D.C.

Brunner, S., and Daley, M. (1983, October 1). The link course programme: Proposals for policy development. Discussion paper. Retrieved April 22, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 237696) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Dunn, Patricia. English 101 and chemistry 101: Examining texts through different lenses. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication (44th, San Diego, CA, March 31 April 3, 1993). Retrieved April 17 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 357354) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Hill and Szydlik. (1998). Integrating mathematics and writing instruction: Building community and coherence into the general education curriculum. (Unpublished).

----. (1998). Linked courses: An exciting way to provide students with interdisciplinary experiences. (Unpublished).

Kellogg, Karen. (1999). Learning communities. [Article]. ERIC. Retrieved April 17, 2002 from

EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 430512) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Mackay, Janniel, et al. (1996, January 1). Establishing a learning community for community college students: STAR students and teachers achieving results. Retrieved April 22, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 393514) on the Word Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Mackler, Tobi, and Savard, Theresa. (1997). Cross-cultural communication through course linkage: Utilizing experiential learning in speech 110 (Introduction to Speech/Communication) and ESL 009 (Oral Skills). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Communication Association (Baltimore, MD, April 10 13, 1997). Retrieved April 18, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 416528) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

McLeod, Susan H., and Miraglia, Eric. (2001). Writing across the curriculum in a time of change. In Susan H. McLeod, Eric Miraglia, Margot Soven, and Christopher Thaiss (Eds.), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing-across the curriculum programs (pp.1-27). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Palmer, Parker. (1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.


22

Perin Dolores. (2000, March 1). Curriculum and pedagogy to integrate occupational and academic instruction in the community college: Implications for faculty development. CCRC Brief Number 8. Retrieved April 22, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 448817) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Smith, Barbara Leigh. (1991). Taking structure seriously: The learning community model. Liberal Education 77, 42-48.

Syllabus [Article]. (2001). Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved April 17, 2002 from EBSCOhost (Academic Search Elite, ISSN 0009-5982) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Thompson, Carol Lynn. (1998, November 1). Assessing the learning community: Good news for speech communication. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association (New York NY, November 21-24, 1998). Retrieved April 22, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 426435) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Tinto, Vincent. (1998). Student success and the construction of shared learning environments. Undergraduate Teaching Improvement Council Conference, "Teaching for Learning: To the Best of Our Knowledge," University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Tinto, Vincent, and Goodsell, Anne. (1993). Freshmen interest groups and the first-year experience: Constructing student communities in a large university. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the College Reading and Learning Association (Kansas City, MO, April 1993). Retrieved April 22, 2002 from EBSCOhost (ERIC Item 358778) on the World Wide Web: http://ehostvgw7.epnet.com

Zawacki, Terry Myers, and Williams, Ashley Taliaferro. (2001). Is it still WAC? Writing within interdisciplinary learning communities. In Susan H. McLeod, Eric Miraglia, Margot Soven, and Christopher Thaiss (Eds.), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing-across the curriculum programs (pp.109-140). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Documents

Reading in the content area · reading in their respective courses. There are several strategies that can help you help your students become better readers. First is the SQ3R method