FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W237299306> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W237299306 abstract "A writing instructor whose assignment was to put into place a writing across the curriculum (WAC) project at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee's engineering college quickly found that this would be a difficult task, the prompting of a student-centered writing intensive pedagogy. The undertaking was broken into two steps: the first component involved bringing the engineering faculty together to create discipline-specific writing standards which shared basic notions about the qualities of competent writing, while the second component focused on less concrete goals--real change needed an intensive WAC program which could get at the discipline from the inside out. A team teaching experience was a success for reasons: there wAq t . in professional rank on the team; t-le _...uiLy member the instructor was collaborating with was really focused on the same issues; and that faculty member perceived writing as an add-on, as an actual part of the course. The root of the failure was the clash between the subtle disciplinary hierarchies unconsciously adopted, which leads to a approach to WAC programs. Successful WAC programs strive instead for interdisciplinarity, established by close collaboration between which produces a high level of content integration and mutual integration of organizing concepts and methodologies. (CR) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN RANTED BY Marsha Watson, Center for Instructional and Professional Development University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee March 1996 TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Off ice of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 13; ifs document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. Teaching to Learn: WAC, Composition, and Engineering Classrooms Cross-disciplinary: James R. Davis argues that this term refers to efforts to view one discipline from the perspective of another, often subordinating the phenomena from one discipline to the (4). Davis notes that there is usually little effort to integrate and no intent to generate a new subject or paradigm in cross-disciplinary work (4). Multidisciplinary: For Davis, multidisciplinary is a term which signifies several disciplinary specialists working side by side in an additive way (4). Crucially, Davis points out that this aggregate of specialists (or team) would most likely not spend much effort or feel the necessity to integrate their 'disciplinary' perspectives (4). Transdisciplinary: The term transdisciplinary, according to Davis, suggests themes or issues that transcend or cross over disciplines (4). Such themes or issues, in Davis's view, go beyond the domains of particular and their methods (4),Interdisciplinary: Of all of these various terms, Davis argues that indicates the most significant integration and collaboration between disciplines. For instance, Davis uses the term to refer to the work that scholars do together in two or more disciplines, subdisciplines, or professions, by bringing together and to some extent synthesizing their perspectives (5). Davis argues that interdisciplinary courses involve efforts, at least to some degree, to bring about mutual integration or organizing concepts and methodologies (5). I'm going to start out by telling you about the paper I was going to present today, and then I'll talk about why I decided to do something different.' The first paper I wrote for this conference was a case study which analyzed what I went through last year, when, like three other members of this panel, I was part of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee's Writing Across the Curriculum project. As the consultant to the College of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS), my job, as I understood it, was to train CEAS faculty in writing to learn strategies, to provide guidance and advice to CEAS faculty who wanted to make their existing syllabi more writing intensive, and to somehow prompt as much student-centered, writing intensive pedagogy in CEAS as possible. I quickly found out that this last goal would be a difficult task, because for many reasons--including things like on-going conflicts over general education writing requirements, as well as the threat of forced change in the traditional pedagogies a lot of the faculty were comfortable with -the faculty of CEAS were in general rather hostile to any imposition of writing to learn pedagogy.' It seemed logical then to break up this huge 2 EST COPY AVAILABLE 2 undertaking into two basic steps: the first component involved bringing CEAS faculty together to create discipline-specific writing standards (or rubrics) for the college which shared basic notions about the qualities of competent writing with the minimum General Education writing requirements at UWM, so that we could establish some common ground from which to discuss and develop writing to learn pedagogy in the discipline. This was really the easy part, and I was able to meet my goal here by surveying CEAS faculty about the writing requirements in their courses, and then working with CEAS to condense, synthesize, and articulate the responses. The second part of my approach focused on my other goals which, while more important to long-term results, were perhaps less concrete. Again, I wanted to generate some kind of a dynamic conversation among CEAS faculty about writing-intensive, student-centered pedagogya conversation which up to that point simply had never taken place. I understood from the outset that this goal could be addressed in part by faculty workshops, but I also came to realize that the effect of faculty workshops might be remarkably short lived at CEAS. As I said, there was a great deal of resistance to WAC in CEAS, resistance which, according to Ellen Strenski, is at all unusual in a research institution. Strenski argues that while faculty resistance is common at all colleges and universities, it is especially acute at a research university where the problem of available time is compounded by an epistemology ... that values the accumulation and broadcasting of 'facts' (35). I suspect this problem may be even more severe in the sciences, than" @default.
• W237299306 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W237299306 creator A5071536495 @default.
• W237299306 date "1996-03-01" @default.
• W237299306 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W237299306 title "Teaching To Learn: WAC, Composition, and Engineering Classrooms." @default.
• W237299306 hasPublicationYear "1996" @default.
• W237299306 type Work @default.
• W237299306 sameAs 237299306 @default.
• W237299306 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W237299306 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W237299306 hasAuthorship W237299306A5071536495 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C40231798 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W237299306 hasConcept C55587333 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C127413603 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C138885662 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C144024400 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C145420912 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C15744967 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C19417346 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C40231798 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C41008148 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C41895202 @default.
• W237299306 hasConceptScore W237299306C55587333 @default.
• W237299306 hasLocation W2372993061 @default.
• W237299306 hasOpenAccess W237299306 @default.
• W237299306 hasPrimaryLocation W2372993061 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W1481654787 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W1515244137 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W1551067269 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W195550877 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2046019270 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2077102323 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2095633505 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2110441350 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2116455586 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2135717192 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2151339993 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2200384390 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2370035384 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W241464772 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W257140906 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W2744449127 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W278120940 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W3010323291 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W648440974 @default.
• W237299306 hasRelatedWork W68353546 @default.
• W237299306 isParatext "false" @default.
• W237299306 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W237299306 magId "237299306" @default.
• W237299306 workType "article" @default.