LIBRARY
Mlchlgan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to man this chock” hon your record.
TO AVOID FINES mum on or bdoro dd. duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

#— —

=|

 

 

 

 

 

H

.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

i119
j fi;::J

MSU I. An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Inflation
W

 

 

 

 

 

 

ulna-9.1

A STUDY OF THE ARTICULATION
OF WRITING PROGRAMS BETWEEN
HIGH SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES

By
Jill Rae VanAntwerp

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of English

1994

 

ABSTRACT

A STUDY OF THE ARTICULATION
OF WRITING PROGRAMS BETWEEN
HIGH SCHOOIS AND COLLEGES
By

Jill Rae VanAntwerp

This study seeks to understand the factors which affect students'
success with writing as they move from high school to college. With
the aim to ascertain what factors help students successfully make the
transition and continue to improve as writers, a study of high school
writing programs and college freshman English programs was
undertaken. The aim of this study was to determine specific practices
and processes which could be incorporated at one or both levels to
improve articulation between high school and college writing
programs.

A review of the history of composition education at both levels
was presented, focusing on the factors which led to current practices.
The review was followed by a study of twenty-nine students who
graduated from twelve West Central Michigan high schools and
attended four Michigan universities nearby. The experiences of
these students as they studied writing at both levels provided an
indication of what practices in their writing classrooms helped them
improve as writers. These results were compared with information
gathered about the curricula in these schools and colleges and the

methods used in the various classrooms in which the students were
taught.

The experiences of these students suggest that students are most
effectively taught writing in a student-centered classroom in which
the writing process is encouraged. Multiple drafts of papers should
be part of the required process rather than an option. The use of
peer groups helps students develop a sense of audience and become
self-monitoring writers. Allowing students choice in both topic and
mode of writing promotes an interest and knowledge base which
improves the writing process.

Articulation can be further enhanced by unified faculties working
toward common goals. At either educational level, a faculty should
work cooperatively to develop curriculum and practices. An
understanding of mutual goals allows a faculty to promote a
consistency which allows the student writers to focus on the product
as they work with a familiar process. Involvement with programs
such as the National Writing Program and the Advanced Placement
Program as well as with professional organizations can help faculties
of different educational levels develop a mutual respect and
understanding which will enhance the articulation of their writing

programs.

 

Copyright by
JILL RAE VANANTWERP

1 994

To Chris, Chad, Mom and Dad
for their continual support,
encouragement, and belief.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Iwish to thank Dr. Marilyn Wilson, my dissertation director,
for her careful responses to my work and for always being
there when I needed guidance, direction, and encouragement;
Dr. Stephen Tchudi for his early guidance of my committee, for
his encouragement to begin this process, and for his help in
choosing a focus of study; the members of my committee, Dr.
Kitty Geissler, Dr. Jay Ludwig, and Dr. Victor Paananen, for
sharing their expertise and for providing helpful suggestions
and feedback; Dr. William Johnsen for his assistance in the
comprehensive area of British Literature; the teachers and
students who filled out questionnaires and took part in
interviews for sharing their experiences with me so willingly;
my fellow graduate students for their continual sharing of
knowledge, experience, and the fun of learning; and my friends

and family for supporting me always.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Chapter

I. A BRIEF HISTORY OF WRITING IN THE SCHOOLS AND

II.

COLLEGE AND THE ARTICULATION BETWEEN THE TWO
LEVELS

The Establishment of Colonial Schools

The 18th Century

The 19th Century

The First Interest in Articulation

Schools in the Wentieth Century

Freshman Composition in the Twentieth Century

Controversy Surrounding Freshman English

Influences On the Freshman Writing Program

The Progress of Articulation

Barriers to Articulation and Partnerships

Implications for this Study Suggested by the History
of Writing Instruction

REEARCH AND METHODOLOGY

Selection of Participants

Selecting the Schools and the Students

High School Teacher Questionnaires

The Teachers' Selection of the Students

The First Student Questionnaire

The Twelve Schools

Twenty-nine Students

Interviews

Questionnaires to College Teachers and Interviews
with Department Chairs

College Teachers

vii

Page

44

4s
47
43
48
49
so
51

53
53

III.

' Freshman Writing Programs at the Four Colleges

The Second Student Questionnaire
My Purpose for This Study

THE REULTS OF THE QUETIONNAIRE

Nelve High School English Departments
English Department Curricula
Writing Instruction
Methods of Writing
The Effect of Differences Among Schools
Conclusions from the Teacher Questionnaires
Twenty-nine High School Students
The Students' Evaluation of Their Preparation
Students Who Ranked Their Preparation
As "Excellent"
Students Who Ranked Their Preparation
As "Very Good"
Students Who Ranked Their Preparation As "Fair"
The Students' Writing Assignments
The Students' Writing Processes
Students' Impressions of Themselves As Writers
The Four Colleges
University A
University A Faculty Responses
University B
University B Faculty Responses
University C
University C Faculty Responses
University D
University D Faculty Responses
General Observations on the College Faculties
Differences Between the 'IVvo Levels Which
Affect Articulation
The Second Student Questionnaire
The Students' Re-Evaluation of Their Preparation
for College Writing
The Students' Evaluation of Their College
Writing Courses
The Students' Perceptions of Themselves As
College Writers
implications for Articulation of Students'
College Experiences ’

viii

S4
S4
56

58

S8
59
60
64
66
68
7O
7O

71

72
73
75
77
82
84
85
87
88
9O
91
92
92
95
96

100
103

103
107
108
115

IV.

INTERVIEWS

University A
Joe
Janet
Bill
Conclusions From University A Interviews
The Teachers
Student Preparation and Attitude
University A's Classes
Articulation
University B
Laurie
Mary
Joan
Conclusions from University B Interviews
The Teachers
Student Preparation and Attitude
University B's Classes
Articulation
University C
Carol
J udy
Denise
Conclusions from University C Interviews
The Teachers
Student Preparation and Attitude
University C's Classes
Articulation
University D
Paula
Sue
Jane
Kate
Conclusions from University D Interviews
The Teachers
Student Preparation and Attitude
University D's Classes
Articulation
Final Comments on the Interviews

119

120
120
125
131
140
140
141
143
144
145
145
149
155
159
159
159
161
163
165
166
171
173
179
179
180
182
183
184
184
187
193
198
201
201
202
204
205
206

V. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

An Evaluation of High School Course Offerings
An Evaluation of High School Teaching Methods
Recommendations for High School English Departments
An Evaluation of Freshman Writing Programs
at the Colleges
An Evaluation of Teaching Methods in Freshman
Writing Courses
Recommendations for Freshman Writing Programs
The Impact On Transition of A Student's
Personality and Background
The Personality of the Teacher
Faculty At Both Levels Can Improve Articulation
Programs Which Can Promote Articulation
The Advanced Placement Program
Project Advance
The National Writing Project
Pre—College Placement Tests and
Evaluations of Freshmen
Professional Organizations
Writing Across the Curriculum
Questions For Future Research

APPENDIX A: QUETIONNAIRE AND COVER LETTERS

APPENDIX B: A SAMPLE OF TYPICAL STUDENT INTERVIEW
QUETIONS

APPENDIX C: A SAMPLE STUDENT INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

APPENDIX D: A SAMPLE OF TYPICAL FREHMAN WRITING
DIRECTOR INTERVIEW QUETIONS

APPENDIX E: APPROVAL FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH
LIST OF REFERENCE
GENERAL REFERENCE

208
210
212
219
224

229
232

237
242
243
245
245
247
248
249
251
252
253

256

274

276

288
290
291
296

INTRODUCTION

Entering freshmen rarely arrive on college campuses totally
ignorant of what will be required of them, and a task which often
causes fear and apprehension is writing. Sometimes the reason for
this dread is that it has been instilled in these students throughout
their high school years. Secondary teachers of English feel
responsible for preparing their college-bound students to meet the
expectations of college writing instructors. But often unsure of
exactly what those expectations are, high school teachers instill fear
as a way of convincing their students to work hard, write and
rewrite prolifically, and, in some cases, blame themselves instead of
the high school teacher if their freshman writing experience is not
satisfactory. Other times the fear comes from stories carried back
by students who have gone to college before them and have
encountered writing instructors who tell students that they can
forget what they learned in high school about writing because it is
all wrong. As I realized that this atmosphere of distrust and fear
was having an effect on the transition of students between high
school and college writing courses, I took an interest in what was
being done or could be done to promote the articulation of writing
programs between the two levels.

lam a high school English teacher. I teach a course entitled
"College English" to approximately one-third of the seniors in the

1

2

high school in which I am employed. I realized early in the
existence of this course that instilling fear in my students was no
way to prepare them for college. I made it my goal to become
familiar with the writing programs in the colleges most often
attended by my students. - What I found was a group of programs
which were so diverse that I felt I might find their only common
characteristic to be that they are designed for entering freshmen.
Eventually their similarities emerged among their differences.

My increasing knowledge about the freshman writing courses in
the colleges my students most often attend helped me to develop a
course
of study for " College English" which prepares my students well for
their varied experiences in college. My awareness, however, left me
wondering what other teachers in other high schools are doing to
help their students make the transition from high school writing
programs to college writing programs.

I define articulation of writing programs between high schools
and colleges as an interrelating of the experiences a student has in
the courses at the two levels. At its best, articulation would mean
that the writing instruction students receive in their freshman year
in college would be a building on the writing instruction they
received in high school. This would come about because the
teachers at both levels are aware of both programs and are
concerned to ease the students transition and to build on his
previous skills. At the least, articulation would mean that students
are able to move from one level to the other without fear because

3

the teachers at both levels proceed with a respect born of
familiarity with one another's programs.

To understand how this articulation could be accomplished, I
needed to know how students make the adjustment, how they felt
about their preparation for the movement from school to college
writing, and how what they did in high school English classes
affected what they did in college writing courses. I wanted to
understand how colleges have impacted high school writing
programs in the past and what influence is being exerted now. I
. wanted to know what kinds of collaboration exist between schools
and colleges or between the faculties at each level and how they
have helped student writers. I sought descriptions of programs in
which high school and college teachers work together to make the
transition smoother for their students. I also continued my
examination of the programs in the high schools and colleges in the
west/central area of Michigan.

A review of dissertation abstracts and other research in the
fields of school articulation, composition, and writing produced few
studies which directly focus on this transition between writing
courses. Some related areas of research included studies which
looked at the writing programs in one or the other level. Studies of
cooperative ventures provided some input although most of these
studies were focused on total school/ college articulation. An
example would be a study of the partnership known as the Boston
Secondary Schools Project. One very narrowed study focused on the
writing apprehension of community college students. Several
studies looked at the impact of in-service training for school

4

teachers and how it affects school writing. A study of the Wisconsin
Writing Project is an example. Another study looked at the impact
of English Association workshOps on the teaching of process writing.
These studies show that writing programs can be impacted
positively when teachers at the various levels come together for in—
service and workshOps. Other studies showed the results of some
changes that the college milieu could make in a student's writing
ability. An increased use of word processing is an example of a
change at the college level which has had a significant impact on
college level writing. Another study showed that the accelerating
rate of maturity of the basic writer in college advances his or her
ability to think and use the language, improving writing as welL
These studies touch on aspects of the subject of articulation between
school and college writing; however, none specifically makes a
comparison between the instruction or instructors at the two levels
nor uses student interviews for the specific purpose of finding what
their feelings and experiences were as they made the transition.

The most thorough study of articulation has been done by Julius
Menacker. In 1969, as Associate Director of Admissions and records
at the University of Illinois in Chicago, Menacker published an
article in The Clearing House entitled "Subject Articulation between
High School and College." He discussed academic problems between
the two levels and discussed programs which might smooth the
transition, notably the Advanced Placement Program. His conclusion
states, "Although much is being done to improve student transition
along subject lines, much more remains to be done" (223). In 1975
Menacker completed a more ambitious study with the publication of

5

From School to College: Articulation and Transfer. He did a more
complete analysis of programs like Advanced Placement, discussed
the problems and solutions of articulation and transfer, conducted a
case study, and made suggestions for the improvement of general
articulation. He discussed curricular integration in general.

Many articles and books relate details of collaborative programs
between schools and colleges. Three that stand out are The National
Directory of School-College Partnerships: Curren t Models and
Pracn'ces by Franklin P. Wilbur, Leo M. Lambert, and M. Jean Young
(1987); Partners In Education: How Colleges Can Work with Schools
to Improve Teaching and Learning by Theodore 1. Gross (1988); and
an issue of FOCUS, the journal of The Southeastern Ohio Council of
Teachers of English entitled Collaboration Between College English
Departments and Secondary Schools. (1988).

The articulation of writing programs between schools and
colleges can never be an exact science, only an ongoing process,
since every school and every college differs in both its students and
its mission; nonetheless, a continuing focus on smoothing the
transition of student writers between school and college can serve to
increase the student's ability to achieve success in the total college
program. It is important to know, therefore, what is being done and
how the process can be improved for the benefit of the students.

Chapter I of this study will look at the history of writing in the
schools and colleges of this nation from its colonial period. Chapter
I will also trace the history of articulation between the two levels
and discuss the effects each level had on the programs and teaching
of the other. In Chapter II, I will describe the participants in this

6

study and will explain the methodology 1 used to gather data,
opinions, and accounts of experiences. In Chapter III, I will
summarize and analyze the information which I gathered on
questionnaires. In Chapter IV, I will summarize and analyze
interviews with thirteen of. the student participants in the study.
Chapter V will discuss the conclusions and implications of this study
for those who teach writing at either the high school or college

freshman leveL

CHAPTER I
A BRIEF HISTORY OF WRITING IN THE
SCHOOLS AND COLLEGE AND
THE ARTICULATION BETWEEN THE TWO LEVELS

The gtablishmgnt of Colonial Schools
As schools and colleges were established during the colonial

period of the United States, the purpose for each level of education
was essentially the same—to prepare young men for the professions,
primarily theology, medicine, and law. College education was for the
elite, not the masses. The school education followed suit, designed to
develop a readiness for college. In 1662 John Brinsley, a Puritan
schoolmaster, published A Consolation for Our Grammar Schools in
which he described a plan that, although never implemented, had an
impact on the schools and colleges of the time. In his plan he
included the writing of themes. He described their purpose:

To write Theames full of good matter, in pure Latin and
with judgement, and how to invent matter of themselves.

To translate forth English or Latin into Greeke. Also to
write theames or verses in Greeke. (Halloran 152)

The emphasis, as can be seen in Brinsley's descriptions, was on
the classical languages. It was important to learn to speak and write
English in order to work on translations of the classics. In Colonial
schooling, written work was primarily used to script oral

7

8

presentations, appropriate training for law and theology (Halloran
153).

During the colonial period, primers for grammar school children
were written in English, first imported from Britain, then, by the end
of the 17th century, printed in the colonies. These books established
a catechism and taught what the colonists considered to be important
moral lessons. A major purpose for learning to read was so that one
might be able to read the Bible.

The 18th Centufl
As a new country emerged in the 1 8th century, religious training

gave way as a reason for educating the young to the need for
developing unity among the former colonies. Even spellers, such as
Noah Webster's publication in 1 783, promoted a common culture.
Webster's book served many purposes other then teaching spelling,
including reading and grammar studies. His book provided common
spellings and grammar and hastened the move towards
secularization of school material. Oral and written work was often
used to promote patriotism, and reading selections were chosen with
the aim of providing fitting pieces for oratory (Applebee 4). The
famous McGuffey's readers continued this emphasis on oral work
with patriotic themes. Thus, a student who had completed grammar
school was ready for a secondary school which emphasized the
classics and oratory.

During the 18th century, writing formal English gradually
became important. The first step in this transition can be seen in the
practice of rhetoric at Princeton during the presidency of John

9
Witherspoon (Halloran 156). Orations in English became the norm.

The culmination of reading and writing study, these orations were
often political in content and delivered to audiences of the entire
student body.

In the schools, English studies first became common in the
finishing schools where students did not expect to go on to college.
Eventually English studies found their way into schools which were
developed in apposition to those emphasizing classical studies.
Applebee reports, "Blair's Rhetoric, for example was included in the
first course of study ( 1821) at Boston English High School; it was
never used at Boston Latin School at all" (13). Girls' schools, usually
finishing schools, used English studies. In all cases, however, those
students who were being taught in schools using English studies were

considered second-rate academically (13).

T e 19 entu

Until the second half of the 19th century, the tradition of oratory
continued to be dominant. Writing became important in the colleges
when Harvard led the way with a new emphasis on writing for
undergraduates. President Charles Eliot ( 1869-1909) made writing a
central component of a new curriculum which he would introduce
(Berlin, Rhetoric and Reality 20). Freshman English was mandated
by 1874 and by 1897 was the only required two-course sequence
(20).

An interest in writing in the schools arose toward the middle of
the century. Two ideas which emerged at this time were that the
mastery of English, including written English, was important for all

10

students, and that English was to be learned through actual practice.
Stephen Judy reports, "The 'sensational and utilitarian philosophy" of
John Locke was rapidly displacing faculty psychology as a foundation
for instruction. Thus, while English instruction in the first half of the
century had emphasized memorization and recitation, mid century
teachers like Quakenbos and Greene were calling for actual practice"
(35). Nonetheless, Judy reports, the methodologies were not
consistent. In some schools writing was still a means to provide
material for oratory, while in other schools writing was important
and done as an end in itself. '

The texts of Lindley Murray dominated the grammar textbook
sales in the schools by the beginning of the 19th century. Murray
emphasized both the art of speaking and the art of writing English.
The method was prescriptive, however, and despite all of their
practice with the language, most students using Murray's grammar
did little actual composing (Judy 35).

The colleges took little note of the high school work as long as the
students who came to them were good scholars. Until the mid-
nineteenth century, the students who attended American colleges
and universities were the best students from such preparatory
schools as Boston Iatin School. Soon, however, as the public school
expanded, greater numbers of public school students sought college
educations, including those who had attended finishing schools. Then
the work of these schools became a concern of college faculty.

11

The First Interest in Articulation
The first far-reaching attempts at articulation between American

schools and colleges happened in the mid-18005. By the 18th century
American colleges had begun to switch from classical rhetoric to
English works. The Yale administration adOpted Blair's Lectures on
Rhetoric as a textbook (Guthrie 61). Harvard soon followed with the
same adoption, and Blair became the dominant text in American
colleges for almost a century. During the eighteenth century the
emphasis of rhetoric shifted to the written language (Horner 102).
Endowed chairs more often were called Rhetoric and Oratory, treating
the two separately. later pairings, however, combined Rhetoric and
Composition and, more often, Rhetoric and Belles Lettres. Eventually
elocution would become a separate study from rhetoric and those
increasingly interested in belles Iettres would also shun rhetoric,
leaving for the title " Rhetoric" the study of composition. Gradually, the
use of the title "Composition" to designate the area of study led to the
decline of rhetoric as a department or an area of study in colleges and
schools. Composition became a required area of study for first and
second year students at the college level. This development
eventually turned the attention of the colleges to the schools which
sent them their students, and an interest in articulation was born.

Up until this time, the schools and colleges had existed in
harmonious if disinterested unity. Both the colleges and the Latin
schools had taken little interest in the work of finishing schools,
considering them not worth attention and their students not worth
consideration as scholars. As classical studies declined at both the
college and school level, however, the finishing schools and the

12

preparatory schools found they had much in common. Eventually
many more schools were sending their students on to college.

These two trends brought the critical eye of the colleges onto the
schools: more students were asking for college entrance than ever
before, many from schools not previously considered to be preparing
students for college; and as writing became more important at both
levels, the colleges became more concerned and critical about the
teaching of writing in the schools.

Harvard was perhaps the first college to make specific demands on
schools in general. In 1876 Adams Sherman Hill became the fifth
chairman of the Department of Rhetoric at Harvard just as the
department became less prestigious, floundering in the wake of Eliot's
newly created English Department. Hill's assessment of the situation
pinpointed the teaching of composition as the demeaning task which
lowered the status of the entire department.

In the meantime, a committee had been designated to study the
state of composition teaching at Harvard. This "Committee of the
Board of Overseers found that Harvard College faculty was engaged in
correcting some 38,000 compositions per year in its English 'A,‘ 'B,‘ and
'0 courses" (Judy 37). The overseers were appalled at the time spent
on these compositions as well as at the lack of polish of the writing.
Ronald Reid describes their reaction:

After examining a mass of student themes, it pronounced
them intolerable and, taking note of the tremendous
amount of faculty time being expended on correcting
simple grammatical errors, recommended that the dismal
business of teaching fundamentals of composition be
relegated to the high schools. (257)

13

In 1871, shortly before Hill took over the Department of Rhetoric,
Harvard instituted an entrance examination. Hill had been
instrumental in its design. Its purpose was to verify that entering
students could meet certain requirements for entrance into Harvard.
Other colleges followed Harvard's lead. Subsequent problems with
differences in entrance requirements forced the eastern colleges to
gather together and come to a consensus. The power exerted by
Harvard is evident from the results of this conference. Harvard's
standards for entrance in English were accepted by all. Eventually
book lists for preparation would be published, and a set of very strict
guidelines for judging essays on the entrance exams was prepared.

Following the inception of the entrance exam, annual reports
summarized the skills of each entering class. As a result, Professor Hill
and other Harvard faculty developed a very low opinion of the work
of secondary schools. Because of the difficulty of judging content
consistently, the evaluations had become a very superficial judging of
content and a rigorous critique of surface correctness—grammar,
spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, and such secondary
characteristics of good writing. The students were not showing
strength in these skills. If they were indeed good writers when they
expressed opinions relevant to their own lives and interests, Hill and
the other evaluators would never discover that fact as they read the
assigned entrance examination essays critiquing books from the
writing lists (Judy 36-37).

As the Department of Rhetoric came under fire from many sources,
and feeling the sting of the overseers' criticism, Professor Hill
strengthened his stand that the test expectations were a fair

14

assessment of the skills necessary to enter Harvard. His department
rid themselves of the responsibility of teaching beginning composition,
relegating that task to secondary schools if they wished their
graduates to attend Harvard. This chain of events had the horrifying
effect of dictating the content of the school curriculum, a content
narrowed to the skills necessary to succeed on a very superficial
entrance exam. Secondary teachers who taught responsibly to prepare
students for this test forced the students to spend their senior year
reviewing the books on the list and doggedly practicing grammar,
spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure. Composition took the
form of formula writing based on the pOpular modes, usually on
literary topics far removed from the students' experience and ability
to discuss. Eventually the composition courses offered in the colleges
which accepted these students reflected the same pedantic,
grammatically correct writing that the students had come prepared to
execute. This experience in articulation was a failure in that it not
only stifled the teaching in the schools but had a resultant negative
effect on the teaching at the colleges they entered (Judy 37). The
Conference on English appointed by The Committee of Ten in 1 892 to
examine the secondary English curriculum recommended the Harvard
system of rhetoric for all secondary schools (Berlin, "Writing
Instruction . . . " 188).

Another approach to articulation was being taken in the Midwest
under the leadership of Fred Newton Scott at the University of
Michigan. Scott called the Harvard entrance exams and the system of
education they dictated the "Feudal" concept. While gaining his
education and working his way to full professorship at Michigan, he

15
had developed a philosophy which he called the "organic" concept. He

was able to exert his influence in four arenas: the classroom; his
textbooks; organizations in which he had considerable influence
including the Modern language Association, the National Council of
Teachers of English, the North Central Association of Colleges and
Secondary Schools, and the American Association of Journalism; and as
a writer of pedagogical articles.

In these articles, his attacks on the eastern college entrance exams
make his own concept clear. Scott felt that the entrance exams
dehumanized the entering student. Rather than being accepted based
on the fact that he had spent four years in a high school program
which gave him a good broad background in language, literature, and
composition, earning excellent grades, and had come with glowing
recommendations from a faculty which had worked with him for four
years, a student might find himself rejected based on an entrance
examination on which he might have been asked to write eloquently
on a book or t0pic with which he had little or no familiarity.

Scott promoted far different relationships in the Midwest. He
decried anything which promoted a subservient position for secondary
schools, even the word " preparatory" to describe the education they
offered. He felt that the use of the term perpetuated what he saw as a
fallacy-{hat the secondary schools existed to prepare students for
higher education.

Scott supported the system of accreditation used today in most
schools in the Midwest. This method of accrediting schools allowed
students from approved secondary schools to enter the universities
and colleges based on their four-year records and the

16

recommendations of their teachers. Scott felt this system to be
superior because it promoted a better attitude towards being
educated. It implied a very necessary trust in the work of secondary
school faculties, and it allowed for cordial, respectful relationships
among teachers at all levels. The eastern system, according to Scott,
tended "to debase the teacher's standard of values" ("What the West
Wants..." 1 1).

Scott also felt that the writing students did must evolve from their
own experiences or research into topics which interested them. While
he felt that literature study should go hand in hand with composition,
he felt that the topics which the literature inspired should come from

the reader's response. He wrote:

That any great gain comes to the student either in literary
appreciation or in the command of his mother tongue from
the incessant writing of outlines of plots, critical estimates
which ape maturity, or characterless sketches of character,
has not, I believe, been demonstrated. (14)

He stated further“.

The main purpose of training in composition is free speech,
direct and sincere communion with our fellows, that swift
and untrammeled exchange of opinion, feeling, and
experience which is the working instrument of the social
instinct and the motive power of civilizations. (19)

The role of the college in this process was as trainer, the site of
pre-service and in-service education. In his model the university
would train the teachers to develop courses of study, would be able to
inspect the work and make suggestions, and, finally, would be able to

17

continue the process of education once the student arrived at the
university. Such a working together in mutual respect, Scott felt, was
the model most appropriate to education, like a pyramid, with the
elementary education at the base and the peak rising as high as a
student could achieve with this working together for his benefit.
Scott's influence on school education was not only his system of
accreditation and his department's influence on teacher training. He
also wrote many school textbooks, some in c00peration with former
students. With Joseph Villiers Denney, of Ohio State University, Scott
co—authored two texts, Elementary English Composition and ’
Composition-Rhetoric Design for use in Secondary Schools. In these
texts the authors promote the yoking of oratory and writing with a
purpose for communicating which comes from within the student:
"They [students] will learn the mechanical and grammatical details of
writing, will be careful of their oral expression, and will acquire,
through willing practice, one by one the necessary principles of
discourse just as rapidly as they come to appreciate the value of these
things to themselves as members of society" ( Elementary . . . ii). The

Scott-Denney textbooks were very popular throughout the Midwest.

WW

Both the Harvard system and the Michigan system continued to
influence the articulation of student writers throughout the twentieth
century. The growth of secondary schools, the mandatory education
act, and the increasing number of students choosing to enter college
have had an effect on both models, however. While the university is
still the center of pre-service training, the content and quality of these

18

programs vary widely. In-service education has not kept pace with
the increase of teachers at the secondary level. It is no longer easy for
one university to be the center of education in a state nor to maintain
contact with all teachers of English. In addition, while entrance exams
continue to be widely used, there has been constant argument
regarding the use of such tests and many changes in format. Multiple
choice tests replaced the essay for convenience in dealing with a mass
of students and proved even more unsatisfactory as a test of a
student's actual high school experience. Harvey Daniels claims that the
introduction of the SAT and other objective admissions tests '
"discourage[d] teachers from working on writing with their students"
(Famous Last Words 223). While there is now a trend towards
increased use of the essay, there is also a trend towards less emphasis
overall on entrance exams, with a number of educators increasingly
becoming interested in student portfolios that bear evidence of high
school achievement as the most effective new method of evaluation.
As the century progressed, schools went through a change in focus.
According to a report by the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education,
Continuity and Discontinuity (1973), during the period from 1910 to
1940, in response to an industrial America, preparation for college
became a task aimed at a minority of the students. During this period,
secondary school enrollment rose from 15% of American youth to 75%
(17). These new students were not preparing for college for the most
part. This shift in priorities affected curricula. The report suggests
that "schools prepared students more for life, less for college" (1).
Progressive education was a movement that became widespread

with John Dewey serving as a major proponent and theorist (Carnegie

19

Commission 18). An education system that had been based on faculty
psychology gave way to life-adjustment education. Translating and
studying the classics for oratory and literary analysis were not
considered valuable practices. Real-world writing and speech-making
became dominant in the schools. The academic writing considered
appropriate by the colleges was not taught to the majority of youth in
the secondary schools. Describing the constant change experienced by
the composition program in secondary schools, James Berlin asserts
that "writing instruction has been a .. . scene of struggle over
competing claims about the purpose of education, more specifically
about the society the school and college should advocate and the kind
of individuals they should encourage" ("Writing Instruction . . ." 184).

When the percentage of the student body which aspired for higher
education rose in post-WWII America, the school curricula was slow to
respond. While colleges enrolled 15% of the college-age group in 1940,
by 1970 they were enrolling 48% (Carnegie Commission 2). The
colleges were grappling with the dynamics of growth and had not yet
begun to focus on the skills these entering students should have.
Writing instruction had declined and was not increased for college-
bound students until well into the 70s.

Eventually the schools once again put an emphasis on college
preparatory classes; however, while English is required by virtually
every high school, the content of English courses across the nation is
extremely inconsistent. The textbooks available for English 9 through
English 12 or more specifically for American Literature or English
literature are indicators of the focus of the classroom. In the first half
of this century, most English classes used two texts, a literature book

20

and a grammar book. Neither contained specific instruction for
writing. The grammar text usually promoted writing as a progression
which began with sentences and proceeded through paragraphs to
short compositions. The emphasis, however, was on the parts, not on
the whole. literature and grammar dominated the daily work of the
English classroom. Writing might have consisted of a research paper
or creative writing. Grammar was taught with drills and worksheets
and was usually divorced from any writing that was done. Literature
texts of this period might have contained writing suggestions but had
no writing lessons. Usually no writing was done in conjunction with
the literature except at high schools with a college preparatory focus.
In these schools, more writing was assigned. Usually the type of
writing assigned, however, was literary analysis, promoted and
valued by the colleges (Berlin, "Writing Instruction . . ." 203).

The changes which led to a difference in school writing in the
second half of the century are varied. The Dartmouth Conference of
1966 endorsed the expressive model of writing. Researchers like
Janet Emig (1971), James Britton (1975), and James Moffett (1968)
promoted teaching writing as a cognitive process. The protest
movement of the 605 and 70s, which had its most intensive expression
on college campuses, reinforced the value of personal expression. A
new mandate for teaching writing in the schools rose from corporate
America. College teachers endorsed this need and urged the schools to
increase their writing instruction. The kind of writing being promoted
most often during this new wave of interest was expository: writing
which could make a point, develop a thesis, persuade or argue.
Ironically, however, none of the teachers in the schools were prepared

21

to teach this writing and the experts in the colleges weren't prepared
to teach the teachers how (Berlin, "Writing Instruction . . 213).
The situation drew national attention with a Newsweek cover story

in 1975 (214). There was much pressure on teachers to " teach Johnny
to write" and much confusion as to how to teach and what to teach and
how to begin the process of finding out. Teachers themselves
ultimately stepped in to provide remedies, the most significant being
The National Writing Project (NWP) organized in 1974 as the Bay Area
Writing Project. This program and its many off-shoots, as well as a
plethora of programs based on the NWP, are responsible for most of
the in-service training which provided the badly needed instruction in
teaching writing for teachers of English already in service in the 705
(215).

Responding to the new emphasis on writing, textbook companies
became a partner in promoting more writing in the classroom. It is
obvious from a look at the latest textbooks that writing is a staple of
English classrooms, even when the focus is literature. For instance,
the 1994 edition of Prentice Hall's Literature: The British Tradition
contains a composition assignment at the end of each selection. The
editors explain, "This assignment, which may be creative or analytical,
is process-oriented, suggesting steps for pre-writing, drafting, and
revising" (T7). Unit sections called "One Writer's Process" give
students insight into processes used by some of the writers of
selections in the text. At the end of each unit there is a complete
writing lesson: "Each lesson focuses on a form of writing and guides
students through the writing process" (T7). Finally, at the end of the
book there are three Handbooks. It might be assumed that a

22

literature book would contain the "Handbook of Literary Terms and
Techniques." This book also contains the "Handbook of Grammar and
Revising Strategies" and the "Handbook of the Writing Process" (T7). A
textbook like this is in stark contrast to literature texts of previous
decades which might contain writing suggestions but had no directions
nor a handbook. By the 805, grammar texts also began to include
major sections of writing instruction. These textbooks are a result of a
new interest in writing in English classrooms and a new focus on the
integration of literature and writing. Many teachers who were
trained in the old tradition of teaching literature separately from
writing are finding themselves urged by their textbooks to promote
more integrated learning. The writing being suggested, moreover, is
not the traditional literary analysis. Instead, reader responses to
themes and situations are being promoted.

In The National Study of High School English Programs done in the
early 60$, Applebee and Squires found little attention being given to
writing or any aspect of the English curriculum other than literature
(Applebee 21 1 ). In their report Writing: Trends Across the Decade
1974-1 984, Applebee, Langer, and Mullis ( 1984) report that in the
705 there seemed to be more writing instruction occurring and more
activities like pre-writing and rewriting; however, they did not feel
that the increase in writing meant that writing had improved in
general during that time. They did see a trend upward in data from
1979 to 1984. They concluded, "America's schools and teachers tend
to be responsive. The current interest in excellence generally, and in
writing particularly, is generating positive reaction. If the momentum

23

evidenced in these data during the last five years of the decade can be
continued, we may be on the way to solid improvement" (3).

In Famous Last Words (1983), Harvey Daniels, reporting on his own
observations and a study done by Muriel Harris of Purdue in 1979,
concluded that much of the response to Newsweek 's 1975 "call to
arms" was a spate of rule-giving that served only to make student
writing less prolific (they were too busy studying rules) and less
communicative:

Students who carry around such a set of rules in their
heads-whatever the individual rules may be--are
unlikely to have learned to view writing as a process of
communication in which the requirements of form and

style shift with the nature of the subject audience, and the
purposes of the task at band. (226)

Daniels concludes that the fault was not entirely the teachers', the
vast number of whom, he contends, were underprepared and had no
time to study the process of writing (227). As stated above, many
teachers in the classroom today are the products of college education
programs which stressed literary criticism as the only writing style to
be used for the college prep English classroom. College students
studying to become English teachers during the mid-19005 were
immersed in a series of literature classes and could earn a secondary
teaching certification in English without having taken a class which
provided methods of instruction in writing. Since most of the writing
done by these future teachers was literary analysis or research
papers, it is not surprising that these two types of writing became the
dominant writing assignments in high schools. Few of these teachers

24

have gone on for further education since the time when writing
instruction began to improve in teacher preparation classes.

As new teachers who had received better training in writing
entered the work force and older teachers became better prepared to
teach writing through in-service opportunities, other barriers rose.
When funds for education become harder to get and pOpulations
increase, class sizes become unwieldy for the writing teacher.
Additionally, the English teacher is called upon to teach an increasing
number and variety of skills in the one hour English is offered: media
awareness, word processing, group interaction, critical thinking,
creative problem solving, and cultural literacy are examples of skills
which English teachers have been asked to add to the traditional
reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language studies.

Some classrooms are changing. English teachers are becoming more
aware of classroom methods for teaching writing which make the
classroom more productive and take some of the burden from the
teacher's shoulders. Writing Projects are helping many. When federal
funding for the NWP was awarded in 1991, director James R. Gray
said, " 'The National Writing Project is now the law of the land' "
("National Writing Project Wins" 1). In 1992 there were 154 sites
offering professional development through the NWP (1 ).

The National Council of Teachers of English and its many affiliates
are promoting teaching techniques through conferences and
workshops. An increase in the use of portfolios as a final evaluation
of a term's work, ungraded journal writing, peer group editing and
evaluation, and process writing have helped increase the amount of
writing done in America's English classrooms without increasing the

25

teacher's workload. In addition, integrated studies have helped
teachers present more than one language arts skill simultaneously.
Skills are no longer taught in isolation. A single project, often on
which students collaborate, may provide practice in reading, writing,
speaking, and listening as well as critical and creative thinking. As
these changes affect classrooms across the country, better writing
instruction is the result. Nonetheless, these remedies are far from
universal. Implementing new methods and designing new classroom
styles takes knowledge, time, money, support, and cooperation-
attributes many schools lack.

man m ition In the Twentieth Centu

The progress of writing instruction in the colleges during this
century also shows periods of change and shifts in emphasis. In the
early 20th century, the work of Scott, Villiers, and others who shared
their vision ushered in an approach to composition which emphasized
the importance of students writing from their own experiences or
research into topics which interested them. This approach
complemented the life-adjustment curriculum and provided a
challenge to the expressionist movement, which had gained impetus at
the time. The expressionist movement centered on a study of
literature rather than a practical approach to writing. Courses in
literature would provide the students models for self-expression.
James Berlin suggests that the expressionist movement was an
outgrowth of the beliefs held by some colleges (notably Yale and
Princeton) that only a few students should be given writing
instruction, those students who showed a talent for writing (Rhetoric

26

and Reality 35). Eventually the methods of teaching these "geniuses"
began to be used for all students, and a literature-based writing
instruction became a dominant trend in the colleges. An outcome of
the expressionist movement was the growth of creative writing classes
in both schools and colleges.

Berlin reports that by the 505, college English professors, who were
usually literature scholars, began to contend that the best way to teach
composition was through reading literature and writing about it. If
they were responsible for teaching freshmen to write, literature would
be their tool. And increasingly, literature professors were responsible

for teaching freshman composition ("Writing Instruction . . 203).

ggntmvggy Surrounding Freshman English

Since lts inception, freshman composition has become one of the
most debated and varied courses in the university curriculum. As
Albert Kitzhaber reported in 1963, "Only a few English departments,
nearly always at small colleges with highly selective admission
policies, have declined to accept responsibility for the course"
("Teaching English . . . "3). Kitzhaber points out that the course "has
been a staple of freshman studies for three quarters of a century and
is by far the most populous in the American college curriculum" (3).

Some college English departments see the course as the reason they
are able to continue operating, while in other colleges the course is
divorced from the English Department altogether. Some echo the
Opinion of a Central Michigan University professor who stated that
"[g]iven the lack of acceptable results from freshman writing . . . it
seems to me that the continuation of such courses at the college level

27

is an essentially spurious activity and could be classified as a racket"
(Iawton B11). Richard Larson of Herbert H. Lehman College, CUNY, has
done a study of freshman writing programs. The Council Chronicle of
the National Council of Teachers of English reported on his findings in
April 1992:

After analyzing syllabi, policy statements, assignments,
and other data from two- and four-year schools, public and
private, large and small, he suspects that on many
campuses, "first-year composition has become simply
randomized exposure of students to a writing teacher who
may not know a great deal about writing, reading, or
teaching." ("Freshman Composition" 9)

larson feels that "[s]ome of these problems could be overcome through
attention to writing in the academic disciplines, plus a new focus on
the mission of freshman writing programs, staff development, and
coordination among staff" (9). .

Richard Marius of Harvard agrees that there is need for assessment
and change: "Everyone agrees that American college students should
learn to write well. Nearly everyone agrees that they do not. But who
is to teach them? And how are they to be taught? And what is to be
expected of them?" ( 16). Marius discusses the practice of assigning
graduate students and young faculty members to the freshman
writing classes. This often results in a bad experience for both
students and teacher because of the low status of the job, the lack of
experience and training of the teacher, and in some cases an overload
of students for the task. This happens, according to Marius because a
well-run writing program with low class sizes and well-trained faculty
would be expensive. The low status and lack of funds to improve the

course is often a result of its position as a freshman requirement.

28

One solution which Marius suggests is to make the writing program
a department separate from the English Department. A department
with its separate faculty would then have a hierarchy of skills and
experience, would have a coordinated faculty who could help one
another, and would design a curriculum which was most helpful to
students. He also presents some of the problems inherent in this model
such as loss of status or political clout. "For writing programs striving
for dignity within the university," he writes, " the dilemma of
autonomy versus lodging in an English department seems to offer little
comfort on either side" (19). Nonetheless, he sees progress in this
area and the growth of energetic writing programs with
administrations who see the need and value and are willing to invest
in them.

Some colleges, as one in this study does, hire part-time faculty to
teach many of the sections of Freshman English. In a recent article,
Wanda Martin, an assistant professor of English at the University of
New Mexico and a teacher of freshman English, gives her viewpoint of
the treatment of part-time faculty: "The part-time faculty is not a
holding tank for those not yet ready for the job market, nor a refuge
for the incompetent. By and large, these people are professional
teachers of writing, writers and scholars themselves, often qualified to
teach a far larger range of courses than is available to them. But they
are in general disregarded by their 'regular faculty' colleagues, who as
a group are unaware of their numbers, their credentials, and their
contributions" (1 23).

Some researchers have questioned whether the use of part-time

faculty has had an effect on the teaching of the course. Harvey Daniels

29

reports that "negative attitudes towards students are surprisingly
common among teachers of freshman composition" (233). The
teachers, he found, were often junior faculty members or graduate
students pursuing literary studies. Few had had writing courses
themselves much less a course to prepare them to teach writing (233).
In a tongue-in-cheek diatribe in CCC, Lynn Z. Bloom, past president
of the Council of Writing Program Administrators, gave an all-too-real

profile of a writing director and her staff:

"I want a Writing Director who will keep the writing
program out of my hair. I want a Writing Director who
will hire a cadre of part-time comp teachers to teach all
the freshpersons. I want the Writing Director to be a
woman and to hire primarily women because women are
more nurturing, they are usually available on the campus
where their husbands or other Significant Others teach,
and besides, they will work for a lot lower salary than men
and get along without benefits”

"I want the Writing Director to have the part-timers
teach the freshpersons to write decent paragraphs and
spell correctly so that I won't have to bother with such
trivia when, as upperclasspersons, they take my advanced
courses. . . . Furthermore, the Writing Director should
insist that the part-timers have their students write
multiple drafts, and respond in detail to each version, on
their papers and in conferences, no matter how much time
it takes; a stitch in time will save nine of mine." (176-177)

Needless to say, Bloom's account is exaggerated for effect; nonetheless,
as my study will show, there is much truth in it as well. The status of
the freshman composition teacher and his or her position among the

faculty is one of the problems of the program.

30

Influences on the Freshman Writing Program
Writing at the college level, as at the high school level, has also

been shaped by its integration with the study of literature. In all of
the four colleges I studied, although in one more than the other three,
literature has been used in combination with the work in composition.
There has been an evolution in the use of the literature, however,
since the literature professors no longer teach the course. Literary
analysis papers are not assigned to freshmen as frequently as they
once were. Often the literature is a model for the students' writing,
other times the literature becomes a springboard for writing topics.

In Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in American Colleges,
1 900-1 985, James Berlin traces the many changes that freshman
composition has endured. He points out that on a regular basis there
were calls for the abolishment of the course. Despite economic
pressure, increasing instruction at the high school level, pressure from
the literature purists in English Departments, and other reasons to
abolish Freshman Composition, Berlin feels the course will continue to
exist and needs to exist because "[a]s beginning students encounter an
overwhelming array of new ideas and new ways of thinking, the
rhetorical training they bring with them inevitably proves--regardless
of their intelligence or training-unequal to the task of dealing with
their new intellectual experience" (3).

Whereas in the past the instruction in the schools was heavily
impacted by the mandates of the colleges, currently college writing
programs are being continually adjusted based on changes in writing
instruction in the schools. Freshman composition was slowly redefined
as high school teachers and college teachers changed teaching methods

31

in response to new research and the implementation of the resultant
methods promoted by groups such as the National Writing Project.
The freshmen arriving on college campuses today are more
experienced writers than their counterparts only decades ago. The
change in the character of the freshman composition faculty also
allowed a change in its curriculum, away from literary analysis
towards more personal and expressive writing. Increasingly,
secondary writing classes and freshman composition courses have
been shaped by the same factors. The courses at the two levels, being
taught by better trained, more aware faculty who are focused on the
needs of their particular students, have taken on a similarity which
could provide the best situation for articulation that has ever existed.
The obvious difference in the two levels has become, suddenly, the
student himself or herself.

Berlin's defense for Freshman Composition provides one of the best
reasons for teachers at the two levels to work together to make sure
that the students have a course in college which is familiar but which
does not duplicate their high school courses, which provides an on-
going skill acquisition, and which recognizes the students' need for
writing skills which will help them form a new-found awareness of

the written word.

Pr ul on
Articulation between schools and colleges has taken many forms in
the 20th century. Increasingly institutions of higher education find
ways to impact the transfer of their entering students from high

schools.

32

Advanced Placement programs were begun in 1955 by the College
Entrance Examination Board. Julius Menacker (1975) reports that AP
testing, with its resultant training of high school teachers, promoted
better understanding between secondary and college level teachers.
The AP program is still vital and is a major catalyst for articulation.
One ironic drawback of the program is that AP c1a$ses taught in the
high schools are often so advanced that students who do not take the
test and, therefore, must take the required freshman composition
courses in college fail to find them useful or challenging.

Dr. Franklin Wilbur, Director of Project Advance (PA) at Syracuse
University, is a major proponent of school-college partnerships. In
1983 be edited the National Directory of School—College Partnerships
with Leo lambert and M. Jean Young. In the directory, 150 projects
are given brief descriptions. The editors describe their own program,
PA, as "the largest program in the United States offering accredited
college courses taught in high schools by high school faculty" (29). The
directory describes nineteen programs similar to PA which exist across
the country. Other types of programs described in the directory are
ones which offer incentives and special help to minority,
disadvantaged, and "at risk" students; promote articulation in
vocational-technical schools; and conduct writing projects.

The directory describes the National Writing Project (NWP), which
was started in Berkeley, California in 1974 as the Bay Area Writing
Project. The success of this program has created a demand. Over 140
writing projects operated in 44 states and abroad at the time of the
compilation of the directory in 1983 (87). The NWP brings
elementary, high school, and college teachers of writing together for a

33

Summer Institute. These teachers are trained to work together and
also trained as consultants who provide staff-deveIOpment workshops
at their own schools and colleges. In a report on the Bay Area Writing
Project, Daniels and Zemelman (1985) described one result of a survey
of participants: "A majority of teachers (more than 75 percent) saw
the BAWP experience as having increased their students' enjoyment
and valuing of writing, and as having increased their students'
confidence and overall skill in writing ability" (215).

One underwriter of the NWP is the Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Ernest Boyer, in the Carnegie report on secondary education,
High School (1983), praised the NWP and Syracuse's PA, as well as
programs designed by the University of Michigan and Yale which '
reach out to high school teachers to help them better their students'
writing.

Throughout the nation, examples can be found of cooperative
ventures which foster better writing in the schools. Donald A.
McAndrew describes a co-teaching project at Indiana University of
Pennsylvania. Teachers of high school English visited the introductory
writing classes at IUP. The university faculty visited the high schools.
The writing workshops being used by the IUP faculty were then I
modeled in the high school classrooms. The high school teachers were
trained to ln-service their colleagues with the IUP teachers as
consultants. The project was successful, according to McAndrew,
because it had a focus and equal involvement of the participants at the
two levels. He also felt it helped to close the "ivory tower" gap (3).

Eileen Oliver describes a program of c00peration between high
school and college writing programs based at St. Cloud State University

34

in Minnesota. Oliver stresses the need and the validity of equality
between the two levels before the project can succeed. College
instructors and high school teachers, according to Oliver, each have
something to offer the other (5).

The Ohio Early English Assessment Program is one program that
was started as a result of concern about remediation costs at the
college level. The plan was to improve the quality of writing of
entering high school students by providing writing instruction for
their teachers. The project, according to participant Thomas Flynn,
was a collaboration, not simply a handing down of ideas. Teachers
from both levels worked together to define need, to agree on what
constituted good writing, and to develop the plan. Like many writing
projects, this program called for summer seminars during which
teachers at both levels worked together to create model writing
techniques which the secondary teachers would present to their
colleagues at workshops. The number of collaborations in the Ohio
program grew to twenty between its inception in 1980 and Flynn's
report in 1986 (27). Flynn could not report on results of the
programs, however, since no formal study had been done.

Franklin Wilbur described several partnerships between schools
and colleges in a 1985 article for The Journal of College Admissions.
Brief summaries of programs in Milwaukee, New York City, St. Louis,
New Haven, Maryland, and Pennsylvania give evidence of a desire by
personnel in schools and colleges to work together to help assure their
students successful passage through both levels. While these
programs weren't Specifically aimed at writing, the chance for teachers
at the two levels in all subjects to work together should foster

35
improvement in all skills. Wilbur concludes, "We do expect a lot from
our schools, but with more than 3,000 institutions of higher education
looking for ways to become involved, many of our expectations should
be realized and the effects far-reaching" (28).

Many of these partnerships seek to have an impact on the writing
students do at the high school level and, in addition, encourage the
college level writing teachers to be more aware of the work the high
schools are doing. Ernest Boyer suggests that many of the programs
were the result of "the shock treatment of remediation" (252), when
many colleges were having to offer courses in basic skills which it was
assumed the students would have gained at the high school level.
Gene 1. Maeroff delineated the problem in his 1983 study, School and
College: Partnerships in Education. Maeroff indicates that the colleges,
while being concerned that many entering students were not
adequately prepared for college, were partially to blame for the
problem because of their vague and shifting standards and admission
requirements (9).

Boyer agrees with Maeroff on this point. He cites a 1982 survey by
the National Association of Secondary School Principals which shows
that the necessity of remediation had an effect on college standards.
The study found college admission standards being changed or
reviewed in twenty-seven states (253). Most colleges established four
years of English as a criteria for admission.

Gordon Ambach, Commissioner of Education for New York State in
1982, as well as president of the State University of New York, feels
that remediation is a necessary aspect of total articulation.
Nonetheless, he shares the view that a prepared student is a better

36

student. Ambach, like others who have been mentioned, stresses the
need for strong teacher preparation. Too often, he contends, the
education department of a university and the subject area
departments will not work in cooperation to train prospective
teachers. When the students come to college less prepared than
expected to work in the subject areas, the two departments blame one
another (24).

John Goodlad advocates a teacher training institution different from .
most operating currently. He is quoted in a 1986 article: " 'We need .
. . a collaborative research and training institution that serves as a
half-way house between the university and the schools' " (De Bevoise
9). Goodlad feels this kind of institution is necessary because of the
"disaffection and sometimes outright hostility" (9) which he feels
teachers in the schools aim at those in teacher education institutions.

Barriers to A_rti_'eulation and Paflnerships

As Goodlad indicates, the relationships between teachers at various
levels have often been fraught with conflict. Donald McQuade in a
1976 English Journal article described the situation as he saw it:

The responses of the English profession to the financial,
social, and pedagogical disarray which now characterize a
good deal of American education have consisted primarily
of internal bickering, trading insults which reinforce the
prejudices embedded in the hierarchical structure of our
system of learning, and, as is the case in the armed
services, the abuse magnifies as it is passed down through
the ranks. Graduate professors snipe at embittered senior
colleagues who carp at disillusioned junior faculty who
castigate exhausted allies in the high school. (8)

37

Twelve years later, in an article for CCC, Schultz, Laine, and Savage
(1988) examined school-college partnerships. They examined many of
the projects described in this chapter. The catalyst for these
undertakings was often the complaint that freshmen were not
adequately prepared for Freshman English, this criticism being based
solely on the writing of the students. But just as McQuade had found,
these authors suggest that all of the reported c00peration may be
misleading: "much of this work has been marked by acrimony, and the
projects have often been less than successful" (141 ). In many caSes
the faculties were not cooperative, the programs merely being forums
for college professors to tell high school school teachers what to teach.

The authors related some of the history of articulation to make the
point that it was often undertaken by groups which were dominated

by college practitioners:

All of the speakers, for instance, on the first NCTE
College Section panel on the correlation of high school and
college composition were college teachers; that was in
1919. Members of the celebrated Conference on Basic
Issues in the Teaching of English, a group that listed
articulation as the first of its three major concerns and
argued for "closer communication and cooperation among
the teachers at the various levels," consisted, as Tovatt and
Jewett point out, of 19 college professors of English, one
professor of elementary education, three college deans, two
secondary school teachers--both from wealthy New York
suburban districts—a superintendent of schools, a
representative of a federal agency, and the editor of a
scholarly journal (541); that was in 1958. While schools
and colleges are, in general, more equally represented
today on committees doing c00perative work, a committee
coordinating the "Conference on Joint Responsibility of High
Schools and Colleges toward English for the 705 and 805"

M

b “‘4

38
had two college co-chairs and 14 consultants, only four of

whom were from the schools; that was as recently as 1971.
(143)

One program, a 1940 University of Michigan-Michigan Public

Schools project, prided itself on the cooperative effort being made. Yet

Schultz et a1. print a description of the project which suggests

otherwise:

"A revision of Preparation for College English is now being
carried forward under the supervision of Professor C. D.
Thorpe, who has been, from the first, the chief guiding
spirit of the enterprise. Professor Wells of Michigan,
Euwema of Michigan State, Hanawait of Wayne, Lirnpus of
State Teachers College, and McClinchey of Central State
Teachers College have been appointed to serve as a central
committee and representatives of more than two-thirds of
the thirty institutions of collegiate rank in the state have
agreed to participate. High-school teachers will also be
asked to aid, and it is expected that the pamphlet will be
ready for publication by next summer." (144)

The problem is often a lack of understanding between the two

faculties. In the November 1988 College English, two high school

teachers expressed their dissatisfaction with CE, prompted by an

article on composition theory by Robert Brooke: "In this letter we

argue that no useful connection exists between composition theory as

expressed in CE and the needs and practices of classroom teachers "
(Hiller, Osburg 820). They added: "It provides an image of CE that is
profoundly elitist for it prompts those of us at the secondary level to

believe in traditional education class divisions between secondary and

higher education and accept as inferior our quaint pragmatism, the

tenuous orders we occasionally give to students to promote clear
communication" (820).

39

In a response to this letter, Brooke lists some of the factors that
naturally divide the two levels of education: " the existence of different
discourse communities within the profession; an institutional-political
split between college teachers and K-12 teachers; the existence of a
plurality of goals and methods in writing instruction" (821 ). Brooke
also cites an article by Joy Ritchie:

"The division between college and secondary teachers is
further accentuated because university professors
historically have been one group attempting to use their
power and status to influence the work of teachers and
schools... The relationship has always contained the seeds
of resistance and mutual suspicion, with teachers from
time to time attempting to maintain some autonomy in the
face of attempts by government, universities, and other
groups to influence and control their work." (821)

In Continuity and Discon tin uity ( 1973) the Carnegie Commission on
Higher Education looked into the "continuing tension between school
and college" (101). As have many who have described this tension,
the Carnegie Commission described the " two worlds of school and
college" (101). The high school teachers "distrust the academic elitism
of the colleges" ( 101) and the colleges are "disdainful of anti-
intellectualism in the schools" (101 ).

Theodore l. Gross in his book Farmers In Education (1988) also
cites what he describes as two different cultures:

The college faculty is split between loyalty to their college,
where teaching and service are central, and their
discipline, where professional prestige offers the
possibility for growth and career mobility. In contrast,
teachers are locked into a school, and their status depends
on their performance in the classroom unless they leave-
as too many of the best teachers do-for administration.
College faculty enjoy sabbaticals and leaves of absence that

4o

allow time for research. Although some teachers do take
study leaves, they have little time to read or do research in
their disciplines. Faculty have the academic and financial
Opportunity for free-lance work in their fields--writing
books and essays, developing scholarly projects, consulting
with industry and business, serving on state and national
committees--whereas teachers too often must find
evening, weekend, and summer work outside the
educational field simply to make their total salary
respectable. Faculty control the curriculum and often the
very direction of their college; teachers are bound by
bureaucratic rules and regulations. Faculty almost always

’ associate with colleagues in the same discipline, whereas

teachers work in densely populated settings but are
frequently lonely. There are two different cultures, and
their differences must be recognized if they are to be
reconciled. (46)

Joy Ritchie recently studied these same dichotomies between

college teachers and high school teachers. In an article discussing her

study, however, she chooses to focus not on what divides the two

levels but on what divides both levels from their desire to teach their

students:

In both our worlds, the school and the university, we
experience renewed pressure to divorce ourselves from
pedagogy as a form of inquiry and, consequently, to accept
definitions of our role as teachers that force a wider gulf
between us. In the trenches, English teachers face more
students, more demands to standardize their teaching, and
more barriers to their function as intellectuals. But in the
ivory tower we face similar, if sometimes more subtle
pressures to divert us from concerns with teaching,
learning, and students. Professors in my department have
been criticized for their overuse of informal journal writing
in literature classes; other faculty members, who have
devoted themselves to improving undergraduate education
or to programs involving teachers and schools instead of to
research, are not promoted. (104-105)

41

Ritchie ends her article by urging teachers of writing in high
schools and colleges to begin to focus on what they know should be
done in the classroom to promote good writing. She urges them to
support powerful models of teaching like The National Writing Project
and to resist the forces that would make them compromise.

In Coming On Center ( 1988), James Moffett had the same message.
He states, "Generally, the larger society places certain constraints and
demands on schools that conflict with the learning activities advocated
by most thoughtful educators" (200). He describes having seen
teachers transformed by the NWP who go back to their classrooms and
return to stupefying educational practices which are expected of them
or which are easier to justify to others if not to themselves.

Implicatiens for this Study Suggested By the
Histegy of Writing Instruction

While the ability of high school students and college students to
write well has been of concern over the decades, improvement overall
has never been dramatically displayed. The concern expressed by
society in general, as is reflected in newspaper and magazine
headlines, has been no less intense than concern by the educators
themselves. Disagreement over what constitutes good writing will
probably always be a factor in the assessment of student writing;
nonetheless, most people have an idea of what good writing is when
they see it. Teachers of writing must be concerned with not only
what good writing is, but how a student can be taught good writing.
The trends over the years and competing models in any era show that
there is no more agreement about the methods than there is the

results.

42

With writing as a basis for much college work, it is understandable
that writing ability would be seen as a basic skill to have mastered for
a student who wishes admission into an institute of higher education.
Knowing this, as well as knowing that writing is a basic life skill, it
should go without saying that making sure each student achieves
writing skill should be the main focus of high school teachers.

When the mandate is so obvious, then it is apparent that there are
problems that need attention when the general consensus is that
students who graduate from high schools today or at any time in the
past are not good writers on the whole. That college-bound students
are also not considered to write well enough for college standards is
also a great concern. Given the severity of the situation, the evident
lack of cooperation between many faculty at the two levels is
unfortunate. Nonetheless, the successful programs, and there are
many, should serve as models for all faculty who are concerned for
their own students.

If the students in this study existed in an ideal situation, this brief
history of the progress of writing instruction and articulation suggests
that they would have been found working in high school English
classes which used a workshop format and assigned writing to be done
using the writing process, and they would have moved on to colleges
in which the freshman writing courses also used the workshop format
and process writing. At both levels, the students would write
prolifically and would experience a variety of evaluative measures
including peer critiques and portfolio grading. The freshman
composition teachers these students encountered would be very
familiar with what each student did in his or her high school English

43

classes while the high school teachers would know that their students
were going to continue honing their writing skills at the college level
in a format similar to the one they were using. As can be seen by the
barriers which exist in achieving such an ideal, few students will ever
be a part of this picture. Certainly the above does not describe the
reality of high school English and college freshman composition in
Michigan.

While many observers contend that writing instruction in the
schools is deficient, and that students are entering colleges ill-
prepared for writing at that level, I did not find research which
focused on a group of individual students from a diverse group of high
schools to see exactly what problems they encountered and how those
problems were the result of their high school training.

I will examine the experiences of twenty-nine Michigan high
school graduates as they take writing courses during their freshman
year of college. I will also look at the programs offered in their high
schools and colleges. My purpose in this study is to see if the
experiences of these students suggest changes which could or should
be made at either level to facilitate the articulation of their writing
experiences between high school and college. Another question
which I will seek to answer is whether or not the kind of writing
program offered in the high school or the college makes a significant

difference to the success of a motivated student.

CHAPTER II
RESEARCH AND METHODOLOGY

Seleeg’en ef Partieipants

The transition of students from high school to college is a process
subject to many variables of which the most significant is the student
himself or herself. Other variables include the high school which the
student attended, the college he or she chooses, and the teachers at
both levels. I was interested in how a student's perception of
himself or herself as a writer is affected by the change from high
school to college, and I wanted to know if specific practices by
teachers of high school or college can make the transition between
the two levels easier for the students. I decided that a general
study of articulation could not portray the transition from high
school to college as well as a study of specific students and their
experiences. By selecting specific students, I could gain an overview
of a variety of experiences from the personal perspectives of the
students.

The study I designed gathered four kinds of data: 1) a study of
the experiences of a group of students over a two-year period during
which they were seniors in high school and freshmen in college,
gathered by written responses on two questionnaires, one when they
finished high school and one when they finished the freshman year
of college; 2) questionnaires for teachers of these students at both

44

45

levels; 3) interviews with selected students from the larger group;
and 4) interviews with the directors of freshman writing at the four
universities.

I selected a group of students to answer questionnaires at the end
of their senior year in high school and at the end of their freshman
year in college. I then chose a smaller group from those who had
answered the high school questionnaire to visit on campus to discuss
their experiences in further detaiL I visited these students one or
two times during their freshman year in college. Until I met the
students I interviewed, I had not met any of the students in the '
study face to face. I talked to many of them by telephone in the
process of gathering the questionnaires, but did not use the

telephone conversations for the gathering of data.

WWW

Initially I sent letters and forms on which to indicate the names of
volunteers (See Appendix A) to English Department Chairs in 27 high
schools in Kent County, lonia County, Ottawa County, Barry County,
Eaton County, and Montcalm County, asking each Department Chair to
recruit one English teacher and three seniors (the class of 1991) who
would be beginning their freshman year of college in the fall of 1991.
I asked that these be students who would be attending one of four
universities which I had selected because they are nearby state
universities often attended by students from these counties. I limited
my study to four-year state universities rather than community
colleges or private colleges. I selected schools from the west central
part of Michigan because that is the area in which I teach. The initial

46

mailing went to high schools ranging from urban to rural, affluent to
financially limited, and small to large. My goal was to make a final
choice of twelve high schools, thus having a group of thirty-six
students with which to work.

Ironically, exactly twelve high schools responded to my inquiry.
Since I had decided to include twelve high schools in my study, I had
to decide whether or not to encourage additional response before I
selected the twelve participants. I decided to use the twelve initial
respondents for two reasons: 1) they were teachers who had agreed
without additional persuasion from me which suggested a higher
level of cooperation than if I had resorted to persuade others to join
the study, and 2) the twelve schools represented the range in size,
financial backing, and locale that I had determined was necessary for
the study. I sent the twelve English teachers questionnaires (all
questionnaires used in this study are contained in Appendix A), and
I sent questionnaires to the 36 students, three from each school,
which the twelve teachers had recruited . The twelve schools
represent each of the counties named above except Ionia. (More
detailed descriptions of the schools appear later in this chapter.)

Since the study which I intended to do would compare the
programs in the schools and relate some of the answers to teacher
questionnaires, I informed the teachers and students that if they
chose to participate, they would not be named, and their schools
would not be identified by name at any time in the study. I know
that teachers are reluctant to be compared to other teachers or to
have their schools compared to other schools. This reluctance has
many sources, but a main factor is the vast difference in funding

47

among Michigan school districts which generates an inability for
poorer school districts to have the facilities, equipment, and
materials which might be available in more affluent school districts.
In addition, the size of a school often has an effect on curricular
offerings. The location of the school can also have an impact on the
preparation and motivation of the students. Too often, test results
and other means of evaluation have drawn comparisons between
schools without taking these factors into consideration and have left
teachers feeling unfairly criticized. Because of this reluctance to be
compared and because I wanted teachers and students to answer

questionnaires candidly, anonymity was necessary.

i h T h uestionnair

Although I sent my initial query to department chairs, I did not
specify that the department chair was to be the teacher who would
answer the survey. Six of the twelve were department chairs. I did
not know any of the teachers in the study before I recruited them
and their students. I did not meet any of them personally in the
course of gathering material although I have met several since they
filled out the questionnaires. I talked to several of them by
telephone to discuss their sending me the questionnaires. . I did not
use the telephone conversations to gather data. In two cases,
however, the teachers did not know all of the statistics about their
schools' sizes or college-bound percentiles, and rather than find this
data themselves, they asked me to call their schools' administrative
offices for these numbers. I did call these two schools for these

figures.

48
WW

It is important to note that the students in this study were
selected by their teachers without limitations imposed by me as to
their abilities in the English classroom or their overall grade point
averages. The only stipulation was that the students planned to
attend one of the four colleges I had chosen. This study, therefore,
can draw conclusions based only upon students who do well in their
high school writing programs because the students who were
selected were, with few exceptions, three of the better students in
their high schools. While a study might be done on why some
students do not succeed in high school writing programs, I feel it is
valid in this study to focus on motivated students because their
abilities at their time of graduation provide a fair basis for
judgement of what can be achieved in their high schools' writing
programs. Since the students were all graduates of the Class of 1991,
they were all very close in age, their birth dates ranging from
September of 1972 to November of 1973. The twenty-nine students
who answered the first questionnaire included seven males and
twenty-two females. The preponderance of females chosen by their
teachers for this study could raise the issue of gender bias on the
part of teachers or verify the stereotype that females do better in
English classes than males; however, neither issue was investigated
during this study.

WW1:
Over a period of three months after their high school

graduations, I worked to gather questionnaires from the thirty-six

49

students named by the twelve teachers. Eventually I had twenty—
nine questionnaires. The remaining seven students had opted out of
the study after seeing the questionnaire or had changed college
plans. I was able to talk on the telephone to all seven of these
students about their reasons for choosing not to participate. The
seven non-respondents attended seven different schools, leaving two
or three students from each of the twelve high schools I had selected
to take part in the study. Because I had at least two students from
each high school, I decided not to attempt to add students at that
point in the study.

W

The high school teacher questionnaires provided information
about the schools. I did not ask each teacher specific information
about his or her individual practices but sought general information
about the entire English Department. This information described
enrollments and practices during the 1990-1991 school year.

Of the twelve high schools involved in the study, only one could
be described as urban. It is one of five high schools of a large city
school district. The school has an enrollment of around 1350 students
of which approximately 50% go on to attend a two—year or four-year
college.

Six of the schools are in the suburban area of this city. The
largest has an enrollment of approximately 1 900; the others have
between 650 and 1350 students. TWO of the schools make up a two-
high school district and send approximately 65% on to college, while
the largest of the twelve is the only high school in its district and

50

sends approximately 70% on to college. The most affluent of the
suburban districts sends over 80% of its students on to a two-year or
four-year college. The other two suburban schools send 60 to 70% on
to college. ‘

The remaining five schools are rural schools, three of them
serving small cities, two consolidating several small towns. Their
enrollments range from 600 to 1 170. Fifty to 65% of the students in
these high schools go on to acquire some college education.

The teachers who answered the questionnaires described the
curricula of their English Departments. I asked the teachers to
estimate how much writing a college-bound student might do during
four years at their high schools and to evaluate how well these
students were prepared for college writing. The teachers wrote

about practices, successes, and problems in their English
Departments.

Twen -n dents

The twenty-nine students who answered the first questionnaire
were not equally divided among the four colleges. Ten entered the
largest of the universities, while the other three colleges enrolled
seven, five, and three students respectively. After the initial contact,
the remaining four students selected universities other than the four
I had chosen for the study; however, I still used their questionnaires
for general comments about their preparation and experiences in
high school. In the questionnaire which the students filled out after
their senior year, I asked the students to describe the classes they
had taken in high school and to indicate the grades they had

51

received. The students were told that they could choose not to
answer any question asked on the questionnaire. Most students
filled out the entire questionnaire although a few chose not to enter
grades received in classes. I asked them to evaluate their high
school writing programs. They were asked to tell how much and
what forms of writing they did. I asked each respondent to describe
experiences in writing classes and discuss important aspects of the
classes in his or her development of writing skill. I asked the
students to describe the processes they used for writing and to give
an opinion on their preparation for college writing. Finally, I asked
them to write a page on which they described themselves as writers.

Interyiewsz
After I had divided the students into groups according to the

college each planned to attend, I selected twelve students to
interview, one student from each high school. I was able to select
three students who would be attending each of the four colleges.
later, when one student transferred between two of the colleges, I
added a thirteenth student to those to be interviewed, one who
attended the college which the transfer student had left.

I interviewed the first two students on November 23, 1991. All
other interviews took place between February 1992 and April 1992.
(A sample of typical questions asked during the student interviews is
contained in Appendix B. A transcript of my interview with Mary on
April 9, 1992 Is contained in Appendix C). I interviewed seven of
the students twice and the remaining six students once. Most of the
interviews were done on the campuses the students attended, but

52

two interviews took place in the students' hometowns during their
spring breaks. I called the students to set up the interviews. I used
the campus library as the location for most of the interviews.

Several were conducted in the students' dormitories, however, either
in their private room or in a lounge. I drove to the campus for the
interview and met the student at the designated time and place.

I recorded the conversations with the thirteen students chosen to
be interviewed. During our discussions, I asked students to
describe specific college writing assignments and their degree of
difficulty. I asked students to discuss and compare the writing
instruction in their high schools and colleges and to describe
practices of teachers which they considered successful or
unsuccessful at either leveL At my request, they characterized
themselves as writers and identified sources they considered
responsible for their skill or lack of skill in any aspect of writing.
They described the class processes which they had encountered in
college and described their own participation in the process as well
as telling how they felt about taking part and how they related to
their fellow students. I also asked them, if possible, to compare their
preparation to that of other students in their classes. They
responded to my request to describe their feelings about themselves
as writers as they experienced college courses and teachers. They
explained problems they had encountered and solutions they had
applied. Finally, I asked if anything could have been done
differently in their high schools to better prepare them for college
writing.

53

Qgestiennaires to College Teachers and
Intefliews with Department Chairs

As I interviewed the thirteen students, I asked for the names of
professors who had taught their freshman writing courses. I sent
questionnaires to sixteen of these teachers, but, despite follow-up
phone calls and letters, I was able to procure questionnaires from
only ten of those correspondents. At least one from each of the four
colleges responded, however. Because I felt these ten responses did
not give an overview of the freshman writing program at each
university, I made appointments with the head of the freshman
writing program at each university and asked to tape an interview
with each. These interviews took place between April 5 and April 8,
1993. I drove to three of the campuses (Universities A, B, and C)
and met with the director in his or her office. Since the director of
the program at University D lived at a location halfway between my
home and University D, we agreed to meet at a local restaurant
convenient to both of us. The conversations provided an overview
for comparison between the four programs. As with the high school
questionnaires, I promised anonymity to the four college program
I directors and to college teachers responding to questionnaires. (A
sample of typical questions asked during the interviews with the
freshman writing directors is contained in Appendix D.)

Whats
The college instructors were asked in questionnaires to describe

the writing required in the specific courses in which the students

whom I interviewed were enrolled. The specific students I was

54

working with were not identified in my request for information. The
college teachers were asked to give opinions as to strengths and
weaknesses of the writing skills of all of the students who enrolled in
their courses. These college writing teachers were invited to say
which skills high schools most needed to teach based on the
perceived weaknesses of their students. I asked them to compare
themselves to colleagues who taught other sections of the same

COUI’SGS.

Freshmen Writing Pregrams at the Four Colleges

During the interview with the four freshman writing directors, I
asked for details as to requirements of the program of each college,
the preparation of those who teach these classes, and the method of
placement of students into various classes. I asked for a description
of the opportunities available to the students to opt out of required
writing courses. I asked for a profile of the faculty which teaches
freshman writing courses on each campus and fOr an indication of
the control or lack of control exerted by the Department over the
content of the courses. I also sought to gain an idea of the
consistency in methods and requirements from section to section of

each course.

Welling

At the end of the students' first year of college (spring 1992), I
sent the twenty-nine students a second questionnaire. I was able to
retrieve twenty-seven of these questionnaires. The other two
students dropped out of the colleges they were attending after my

55
last contact with them, and their families moved from the homes in
which they lived during these students' high school years, so I was
not able to contact them by mail or phone. It would have been
valuable to have discussed their experiences with these two students
because their reasons for leaving their colleges and their future plans
might have added valuable information to this study. Unfortunately,
I was not able to locate either student.

During the course of their freshman year in college, two of the
students who had entered the largest university in the study
transferred to two of the other universities, leaving the numbers of
students at the four selected schools seven, seven, five, and four by
the end of the 1991-1992 school year. I also received follow-up
questionnaires from the four students at other universities.

In the second questionnaire I asked the students to compare
their college writing classes to their high school experiences. A list of
English courses taken and grades received was requested. They
were asked to describe the methods used in college courses to teach
writing and to rate the effectiveness of those methods. I requested

an evaluation of how they had improved as writers and what
I strengths and weaknesses they perceived after a year at college.
After asking whether they were satisfied or dissatisfied with college
writing grades, I asked the students to identify, if possible, the
factors which contributed to their strengths or weaknesses in
writing. I reminded them of the ratings they had given their high
schools on the 1991 questionnaire. These ratings were to indicate
how well each student felt he or she had been prepared for college
writing. I asked if they would give the same rating after they had

56
been in college for a year and invited them to tell how their schools

could have better prepared them. Finally, I asked for an indication

of how they had changed as writers.

My PQLQQSE fQI’ Thi§ Stugy

By gaining an overview of both the high school writing programs
and the college writing programs, I hoped to be able to evaluate the
students' questionnaires and interview responses to gain an insight
as to how students are handling their transition between the two
levels of writing instruction in west central Michigan. I analyzed the
student responses with my knowledge of their instruction and
experiences at their high schools and colleges as a background. I
wished to answer the following questions: 1)What factors most
influenced a student's college writing experience? 2) What effect
did the high school writing experience have on the college writing
experience? 3) What factors at both levels aided or hampered a
student's transition between the two levels? 4) How significant is
the student's perception of the teacher and the relationship with him
or her in the success of the student's transition? 5) How significant
are the student's personality traits to his or her success in a class at
either educational level? My goal was to know which factors were
the most important in a smooth transition between high school and
college writing programs and which factors generated problems. I
hoped to be able to identify any problems which could be remedied
by changes at one or both levels of instruction and to tell whether
any current practices in articulation could provide such a remedy. In

addition, I wished to determine whether there were ways of

57
improving articulation between the two levels which were not being
employed.

To find consistency with such a diverse group of students and the
many different factors in their experiences would be impossible.
Nonetheless, individual experiences can suggest positive and
negative practices and factors. Some students had good experiences
and little difficulty in transition. Some students had experiences
which were less positive. In Chapter Three I will describe the
insight I gained and my impressions of the students' experiences

through two eventful years of their lives.

CHAPTER III

THE REULTS OF THE QUETIONNAIRE

Twelve High Sehool English Departments

I gained information on each school by sending a questionnaire to
the one teacher from each school listed in the response to my initial
request for participants. Sometimes this teacher was the Chair of the
English Department to whom I had directed the letter requesting
participants, sometimes my contact was another teacher recruited by
the Department Chair. Since the students had had more teachers than
my one contact, I asked general questions about the teaching in the
school, rather than asking the teachers to focus on their own
classrooms. The questionnaires were designed to give me information
about the school, the English Department curriculum, and specific
methods used In the teaching of writing. I asked each teacher to give
his or her opinion about how the department was doing in the
preparation of student writers who would be entering college and to
identify strengths or weaknesses in the process. It is a limitation of
this study that my impressions of each English Department are the
opinion and Observations of one teacher from each school

Seven of the respondents teach the AP English or College English
courses in their schools. The twelve respondents are veterans, over

58

59
half having taught for over 20 years. The remainder have over ten

years of experience.

WW

All twelve of the high schools offer four years of English to any
student who chooses; however, few of the high schools require four
years of English. Most required three, and some required three and
one halfcredits. Of the twenty-nine students who answered my
questionnaire at the end of their senior year, all but two had taken
four years of English classes. Those two had taken three and one half.

Six of the schools offer classes which are called English 9, 10, 11,
and 12 or variations on those titles. Only one of those schools, the
smallest in the study, does not offer various levels of the four classes,
such as Basic, Regular, and Honors, or Advanced Placement or College
English. The remaining six schools offer elective programs after the
first two years. Four of these schools offer several sections of English 9
and 10 or English I and II. The other two schools divide their 9th and
10th grade years into classes called Basic Composition, Introduction to
Literature, Speech, Reading, Composition Through Literature, or other
courses meant to cover the skills of reading, writing, and speaking.
While one of these two schools requires nine-week sections during
which the students rotate through all of these skills, the other
provided several choices of semester classes but required one writing
course and one literature or reading course in each of the first two
years.

The electives offered by these six schools to juniors or seniors
cover the gamut of English offerings: Novels, American Literature,

60

English literature, Research Paper, Short Story, Composition, Rhetoric,
Great Books, Classical Literature, Shakespeare, Journalism, Media,
Creative Writing, Career English, Young Adult Literature, Humanities,
Business English, Forms of Writing, and Communication Skills. Some
of these electives were also offered by the larger of the schools which
were offering English 9 through 12. The larger the student body, the
more varied the selection seemed to be the rule. In addition, a larger
enrollment seemed to be a prerequisite to offering very specific
classes such as Shakespeare. Eleven of the schools were able to offer
extras including Drama, Yearbook, Newspaper, Speech 11, and Debate.
The school which did not offer these extras was the school with the
smallest enrollment, a rural school serving a small city.

Wflting Insg'ttetien
Each school puts a major emphasis on writing instruction. When

asked which of the classes in the curriculum incorporated writing on a
regular basis, the teachers indicated that writing has become
embedded in the English curriculum and is no longer solely the work
of classes called Composition. Five of the responses were simply "AIL"
A sixth answered "Almost all," while the others listed a few exclusions
such as yearbook, speech, developmental reading, acting, drama,
debate, forensics, mass media, and fiction.

The reaction to a query about problems in their schools' writing
programs varied. Some were very disappointed with other staff
members who they considered to be the weak links in their schools'
writing programs. Several specifically mentioned students' lack of
motivation and their desire to take classes which required less effort.

61

One criticized the administration for a lack of understanding of the
needs of the students, which she felt led to poor curriculum decisions.

When asked if college-bound students were prepared to succeed
in the writing they would do in college, one teacher answered,
"Probably not! Our emphasis has not been on writing in past years."
Another wrote, " Many will not do as well as they would like (meaning
that they will not earn A's and B's in their college English classes.)
Reason: though 20-25% of the English curriculum involved writing,
many students refused to do the writing or copied others or put little
effort into the assignments."

0n the other hand, there were some very positive comments about
high school writing programs. One teacher said, "Feedback from
college freshmen has always been positive and encouraging." Another
boasted about his school's writing program, "We believe we're
somewhat unique..." He did not say exactly why he felt that way
other than that he described a well-developed curriculum. Another
commented that the college-bound students in his high school would
"have had good exposure to writing" in four years. In answer to the
question about student preparation, one teacher answered,
"Absolutely! They've had so much writing they're sick of it!" Although
some were a bit more reserved than others in their answers, ten of
the twelve felt confident that their motivated students were ready for
the writing they would encounter in college.

Having ascertained this confidence in the preparation of their
students for writing in college, I asked the teachers questions to
determine what forms or kinds of writing received the most attention
in their schools. The majority of the twelve schools concentrate on

62

expository writing to the exclusion of narrative or "creative" writing.
While a few of the schools assigned a research paper at every grade
level, it was more typically taught at the ninth and/or tenth grade
levels and refined in College English or AP classes in the senior year.
Students who did not take college preparatory classes did not, then, do
research papers beyond tenth grade in most English departments,
although they were often assigned research papers of some type in
other courses (history or government, science courses, art history, or
foreign languages). The instruction in the 9th and 10th grades is seen
as adequate to prepare students to complete a research paper for high
school classes but not for college. Students entering college were
given the most intensive instruction for research in their senior year.
One teacher reveals, "We expect a lot from our junior and senior
college bound students. The attention of the staff is now turning to
what to do about the other 50%."

Other assignments which were typical of most schools were book
reports, short essays, short compositions, and literary criticism. Again,
while the first three were seen as necessary work for all students,
literary criticism was usually limited to upper level college
preparatory classes. These English teachers and their colleagues tend
to give essay tests or to include essay questions along with objective
questions on tests. The use of essay tests is not widespread
throughout the high school, however. One teacher criticized those who
do not use essays: "Too many teachers and students need more of a
commitment to what they are about. Too many simply don't work
hard enough. In the high school ranks it is too easy to gain the good
will of an administrator just by being visible or doing 'Schedule B'

63

assignments. So today's teacher sponsors the National Honor Society,
shows up at a few athletic contests—and then writes tests with no
essays and occasionally grades journal writing holistically.
Unfortunately, that's just not good enough."

Half of the schools surveyed offered a class called "Creative
Writing." Others indicated that creative writing was included in the
kinds of writing assigned in the regular classroom. In general,
however, creative writing was offered on a limited basis for those
students who chose to take it because they knew they had talent or
they wanted talent. It was not considered an important addition to the
curriculum for all students. One teacher feels that teachers don't
understand creative writing and criticized assignments like "If I were
a fruit, what would I be and why," calling them "gimmicky" and a
waste of students' time. In some schools, high school teachers talented
at fiction and/or poetry writing offered instruction which was
valuable to student writers. These teachers often entered their
students' work into contests and arranged for other kinds of sharing.
Such teachers are not widespread among the English ranks, however.
(A look at the winners in state writing contests will show this. Year
after year, the majority of the winners are students from the same
schools taught by the same teachers. Often these are schools which
are able to offer a separate class in creative writing.)

The amount of writing which high school students do varies widely
from school to school The teachers were asked if they could calculate
what portion of a college bound students' four years was devoted to
writing. Several admitted, "I'm not sure how to answer this question."
Others gave it a try. One teacher calculated just over half of the four

64

years by looking at the course syllabus for a typical college prep
program. Two others used the same method to come up with 20-25%.
Several responded by listing required assignments. One department
chair commented, "Our students are supposed to write every week.
That doesn't mean that I get 100% cooperation among the teachers,
especially at the 9th grade level." Another teacher reasoned, " Depends
on the teacher really. In general, however, I think everyone is very
conscious of having students write often . . . One school requires a
composition and revision every marking period as a minimum. This
school (the one which the respondent labeled unique) has used
student folders (portfolios), which are passed from grade to grade, for
30 years. One teacher outlined a heavy paper load for college-bound
seniors, but added, "The course syllabus for grades 9, 10, and 1 1
dictates a variety of writing and speaking assignments, but [it is] very
difficult to police teachers and how much they are willing to correct."

Metheds of Writing

I included another question which asked about methods of writing
or procedures which were encouraged. Five of the teachers answered
that their departments encouraged Process Writing (pre-write, draft,
revise, edit, share). Others stressed organization similar to that
described by one teacher as "introduction with thesis, body with topic
and transitional sentences, and conclusion." The teaching of grammar
has undergone a decline in recent years as more teachers respond to
research that suggests that the isolated teaching of grammar does not
produce significant results. The question now is how many teachers
are committed to or competent at incorporating grammar lessons into

65

writing instruction. Comments ranged from "Some teachers are still
grammar-oriented rather than using it as a part of process writer's
workshop" to "No one apparently cares about or teaches grammar
anymore." Other methods mentioned by at least two schools each
were Power Writing and Dr. John Collins' Focus Correction and Student
Folders. It appeared that most schools assign some writing which
requires a reaction to literature other than the traditional book report.
When the teachers were asked if there was consistency from

person to person in their departments, the answers were telling:
We try to stress continuity from class to class.

There is not much consistency among our staff. One
teacher who's been here 30 years doesn't do any wetting et

en-
Not really.
No!

We're composing a style sheet this year which seems to be
heading in the direction of a composition manual for the
high school students.

The writing process is the common denominator of writing
instruction. Even approaches to this vary from teacher to
teacher.

Writing process, literature based power writing: we all use
these methods-the writing process is used by all of us
most.

The most consistent procedure seems to be the "error
hunt."

There is no set policy in our department.

66

Many of our better English teachers have developed
successful methodology for implementing current and
popular pedagogical techniques like "writing process" and
"peer critiquing."

One teacher's comment seemed a summary of what many felt:

Writing instruction is left to the individual teacher, and
some people do more and a better job than others.

jute Effth ef Dt’tferenees Among Sehools

A look at these twelve high schools through the eyes of these
twelve teachers can, paradoxically, tell us everything about the
teaching of writing in high schools and nothing about such instruction.
Although some surely feel their schools stand out, every high school in
the country is unique, as is each faculty and each individual English
teacher. Nonetheless, these twelve teachers, as they report about
their own very specific situations, can tell us much about writing
instruction in general

We know that some schools are hampered by lack of money and
resources, even lack of students. The two smallest schools in this study
offer very few English classes for the students to choose from. Neither
' offers students a class for preparation for the Advanced Placement
test. As stated earlier, most high schools require only three years of
English, so the students who take English in their senior year are
usually college prep students and the classes at that level are designed
for them. The five students in this study who attended these two
smaller schools took the one course offered seniors, which was a
college prep course. All five answered questionnaires before and after
college. They all received A's or B's in college writing. One student

67

took three freshman English courses in his freshman year in college
and received 2.5 (C/B) in one of the courses but received 3.0 and 3.5
in the other two courses. These students did not seem to be hampered
by the size of their high school or the limited course offerings when
they entered college writing classes.

In addition to these two smallest high schools, two other high
schools in this study did not offer their students an Opportunity for AP
courses although each was large enough to have added such a course
to their curriculum and each had an extensive array of electives. One
was a rural school which reported that 65% of its students went on to
college while the other was a suburban school which reported that
60% of its students entered college. The students from these two high
schools seemed least satisfied with their preparation among all
students in the study. On the second student questionnaire, completed
after the students had finished their freshman year of college, I
included a section in which I reminded the students of the rating
(excellent, very good, good, fair, poor) which each had given his or her
writing preparation on the first questionnaire which they had

completed following their senior year. I then asked, "Would you give
I the same rating now, one year later, after your freshman year of
college?" Two students in the study who gave a lower rating were
the only two students from one of these schools. One of the three
students from the second school also lowered his rating. Although one
of these students earned A's in college writing, the other two students
both earned below a B in their college writing courses. These students
may have been affected by their school's programs or requirements.

One school had no honors or Advanced Placement courses for seniors.

68

The other had ten semester-long English offerings for juniors and
seniors from which only two were necessary to fulfill graduation
requirements. A student in that school could take only one semester
of writing in his or her junior or senior year.

Other schools are aided by money, resources, and a constituency
which values education. The two most affluent schools in the study
offered Honors sections at every grade level and Advanced Placement
classes at the senior level. The students from these two schools
earned A's or B's in college. Only one would lower her rating of her
preparation, stating, "College professors expect so much more than

high school teachers."

lu i n m Teacher e tionnaire

A comparison of the schools and their curricula shows a great
difference in what students are being offered, but all of the students
in the study could have taken four years of English classes which
included regular writing assignments with a college preparation
emphasis. Most of the students in this study did well in college. The
factors which may have caused a student to earn lower grades than
expected in college writing could not conclusively be said to be the
high school curriculum being offered at his or her school although that
may be a factor in some cases.

While there is very little consistency in course offerings or teacher
preparation or methods in the high schools in this study, all twelve
high schools are providing enough writing experiences that motivated
students are able to acquire skills which enable them to do well in
college writing courses. The difference in the students' levels of

69

satisfaction with their high school programs were most often caused
by the teachers who taught their high school classes.

As the answers on the teacher questionnaires indicated, many
departments cannot control how hard a teacher works, how much
writing he or she assigns, and how well he or she works with his
students in evaluating their writing. This variable, the teacher, does
not depend on the size, the location, or economic status of the school.
English teachers are not the only group of teachers in Which some do
a poor job of teaching. Nor are teachers the only group of workers
with the problem of ineffective members. A poor worker in any
group can be a problem. For these students writers, however, having
a teacher who does not give them adequate writing instruction or
evaluation before they enter college can be a major factor in how well
they do in the college writing class. Schools could monitor a situation
like this with more supervision of instruction, but even with an
administrative hierarchy which includes an active department chair,
there is no person who has the time to be aware of what every
teacher is doing in the classroom nor to ask for consistency in
assignments. Sometimes such authority is not given to the
department chair. Also, there is reluctance, due to collegial courtesy,
to criticize a fellow teacher. Teachers who are poor writing teachers
may not be so noticeably lacking in teaching skills to warrant such
drastic action as being fired. The teaching profession is one in which
termination of employment is difficult at best, even when deficiencies
are glaring. Thus a student has a good chance of encountering a poor
teacher at some point in his or her four years of high school.

70
Twenty-nine High Xhool Students

The twenty-nine students who answered the first
questionnaire, mailed to them shortly after their high school
graduation, were each selected by a teacher from their high
schools and, consequently, were almost all top students in their
schools. With but one exception, all of the students had grade point
averages ranging from 3.0 to 4.0 . One student's G.P.A was 2.107.
This student had received grades ranging from F to B+ in his
English classes during four years, including a D+ and a B+ during
the two semesters of his senior year. Fourteen of the students
reported receiving only A's in English classes, while another eleven
reported A's and B's. Only four students were selected who had

received less than a B- in any English class.

' v f ' arati

After asking the students for a list of the classes each had taken in
high school with the corresponding grade, I asked the students to
evaluate their preparation in the area of writing for the colleges
which they planned to attend. They were to use the categories
"Excellent," "Very Good," "Fair," or "Poor." Of the four students who
had grades below C-, two selected "Fair," and two selected "Very
Good." Of the thirteen all-A students, three chose "Excellent," eight
selected "Very Good," one chose "Good," and one gave no evaluation.
The remaining twelve students were fairly evenly divided: five chose
"Excellent," four chose "Very Good," and three chose "Fair."

The eight students who chose "Excellent" represented six schools,
while the five students who chose "Fair" represented five schools.

71

The two schools from which two students each chose "Excellent" were
the largest and one of the smallest of the twelve. The five schools
from which students selected "Fair" ranged from urban to rural, the
smallest to one of the largest, and economically limited to '
economically blessed. I feel these results suggest that the success of a
writing program or a student's viewpoint of the success of writing
instruction rests more on the actual instruction and course
requirements than attributes of the school such as facilities,

economics, size, or number of offerings.

Stpdents Whe Rankg jljheir Preparation As "flcellent"

The students were asked to explain the rankings they chose. Their
statements show more inconsistency than consistency. Of the eight
who chose "Excellent," reasons included success on an AP exam, good
grades on papers, a variety of experiences both in writing and
literature, a very strong teacher, consistent review over a four-year
period of all aspects of writing from mechanics to style, the level of
difficulty of AP or College Prep classes which were perceived to be
‘ similar to freshman college classes, and a perception of the English
department as coordinated and designed to foster improvement over
the years. One student mentioned an "excellent" teacher who had
taught her over two full years while another student wrote in praise
of the diversity of the approaches of several teachers which had
given her a wider perspective. The two most often cited factors were
the teachers and the variety of assignments. Students also seemed to
feel a quantity of work was important. These students had no
hesitation about predicting their own success in college writing,

72
although one made it clear that that was "as long as I take the time
and not throw something together at the last second." If they
anticipated trouble at all, it was in the unknown of the professor or
the workload. One student worried about her vocabulary. Several
students banked on their teachers' belief in them and their abilities.
One student concluded his statement, "I will have the added
experience and knowledge to be able to construct a paper or at the

very least make a plausible attempt."

tud n o Ra ked Their Pre aration As "Ve Good"

The fifteen who chose "Very Good," or added the category "Good"
(which I should have included, but, unfortunately, inadvertently did
not), had similar reasons for their evaluations. Feedback from their
teachers gave them confidence in their abilities; they worked hard on
what was assigned and felt they knew how to do what they had been
asked to do in high school; special classes had seemed to them to
replicate the college experience so their success in these classes gave
them confidence; a variety of experiences gave them increasing hope
that they could handle "anything thrown at them"; they had
experienced a logical progression of increasingly more complex skills
being taught throughout their four-year programs. There was the
perception by some that the methods they had been taught to use
(especially in research) were up-to—date; they cited the continued
emphasis by teachers that writing was a very important skill; and
they perceived the quantity of work they had done as good
preparation for what they assumed would be even more work in
college. As with the previous group, which rated its perception

73

"excellent," this group gave special praise to specific teachers who
were encouraging, knowledgeable, and hard-working. One student in
this group based his confidence on feedback about his creative
writing. He perceived himself as talented.

These students based their predictions on future success on both
grades in school and on AP or SAT test results. It seemed common
for teachers to have made predictions for the students, telling them
that they were " ready for college" or had written a "college-ready
paper." The students trusted these predictions. This group of
students who described their preparation as "Good" or "Very Good,"
like those who had marked "Excellent," had some hesitation,
however, in predicting easy success. One said she would do average
during her freshman year, another predicted B's. Teachers couldn't
erase all fears. One wrote, "In college, I believe the writing
assignments may be difficult for me. Writing has always been a
challenge to me. My teachers seem very confident of my abilities
though." One student predicted "it will take a while to adapt," while
another felt he should do acceptable writing "as long as I apply

myself properly." Two students were nervous about the time factor,
I expressing concern about papers for which they would be given less
time than they were used to or about occasions when they would be

writing under a time constraint.

" air"
The students who chose "Fair" for their evaluation of their high
school writing programs were more similar in their reasons than
either of the two more positive groups. These five students felt that

74

they had not been taught enough. One felt the teachers "never really
taught us how to write the papers. Everything I learned on how to
write, I learned through my own research." This student earned
almost straight A's in high school English courses. Her classmate was
one of the students who marked " Excellent," and who had
commented, "I had all excellent English teachers throughout high
school. . . ." These contrasting opinions from fellow graduates again
verify that it is the human interaction which leaves the most
significant and lasting impression. Another student who marked
"Fair" felt there was a lack of instruction in research writing
techniques in his school Another student wrote that she had not had
enough writing courses although three of her semester selections
were "Basic Comp," "Advanced Comp," and " Rhetoric." I discovered
later, after talking to her, that she had filled out the questionnaire
after having taken a summer placement test at the university. She
had placed lower than she had expected to. Had she filled out the
questionnaire first, she admitted, she would have been more
complimentary and optimistic. Three of these five students were
very pessimistic about how they would do in college writing, one
1 indicating that she was "not anxious to see [her] first graded papers."
Another felt she could express herself well but would not do well at
short stories. She did not explain why she felt she would be writing
short stories in college. The third predicted at least "a satisfactory

job."

75
The Students' Writing Assignments

I asked the students to try to remember how many assignments
they had been given in each of several specific forms of writing: "As
closely as you can remember put a number after each of the
following kinds of writing to tell approximately how many of each
kind you were assigned in total during your four years of high
school." I supplied the following categories: essay, essay test,
research paper (term paper), persuasive paper, expository paper,
written book review or report, other reviews (movie, music, etc.),
character sketch, literary analysis, literary reaction, short story,
poetry, personal narrative, autobiography, and other. There was a
line after each category for the students to provide numbers.
Needless to say, the results would not be more accurate than one's
long-term memory for the small tasks of life; however, the students
seemed to take this numbers game in stride. I felt that one sign of
accuracy would be a correlation between classmates. There seemed
to be two reasons for a high correlation of numbers between
classmates: smaller or more structured schools with few choices in
_ the curriculum tend to give a much more uniform experience to their
students, and schools which expect less writing from their students
place more emphasis on the writings that are done. The structure in
the former and the sparsity of writing in the latter were an aid to
memory. Three schools fit the former description, two the latter.
The other seven schools provided programs which required regular
and varied writing assignments in a variety of courses which
students could elect. The students in these schools were not in
agreement as to what to call their assignments or how many of each

76

there were, often because they had taken different classes and there
were more sections of each, thus different teachers. The students'
confusion as to the meaning of my labels could bode well for writing
since one conclusion might be that students are not too focused on
modes.

A very positive trend which was shown by the students' answers
in this section of the questionnaire was that in half of the schools
there is much writing assigned outside of the English Department. To
answer a question which read, "Which of the papers listed above
were written in departments other than English?" the students listed
a wide variety of classes in which they had written essay tests,
reviews, reports, research papers, essays, and short stories. The
most often listed classes were government, history, and psychology.
Other classes named were economics, sociology, physics, chemistry,
biology, nutrition, science, math, geometry, Spanish, French, typing,
and choir. There have been many articles promoting writing across
the curriculum in professional journals in recent years. The answers
the students gave to this question suggest that this practice is well
established. This could certainly be one of the more positive factors
in successful transition of high school writers to college where a
student may be expected to write in his or her major field of study
and not English classes alone.

I also compared the students' numbers to their teachers'
descriptions of the amount of writing done in their schools. I wanted
to see if there was correlation, whether teachers and students saw
the writing programs similarly. I looked first at the schools whose
students listed the fewest writing assignments. One of the teachers

77

seemed aware of his students' smaller output, but he felt his school
offered quality if not quantity. Judging by the answers of the second
teacher, I would assume that she would not agree with my deduction
that her students' Similar lower numbers meant that less writing
took place in her school than in most schools. There was no
indication that she felt her school offered too little writing
experience.

In most of the schools, however, both teachers and students
indicate that a lot of writing is being done, especially by college-
bound students. In addition to regularly assigned papers, in two-
thirds of the surveyed English Departments, at least one teacher
made use of daily journal writing.

' Wri ° Pr sse

I asked the students to describe the processes they go through
when writing papers. The teachers had described methods of writing
instruction which they felt many teachers in their schools were using
or should be using. These included using the writing process (pre-
write, draft, revise, edit, share), using an expositional format
(introduction, body, conclusion), and Power Writing. Also, however,
there seemed to be agreement with the statement of one teacher that
the methods were "left to the individual teacher." The students did
not use this "teacherese" to describe their methods, although clearly
they had learned the processes in most cases.

Seventeen of the twenty-nine students described a process that
matched the writing process described by the teachers. In different
ways ( but only once with the actual word) students described pre-

78

writing: "collect my droughts," "get basic idea," " brainstorm," "make
lists," "organizing my information in my head," " brainstorm or cluster
to deveIOp ideas," or "think about supporting ideas." After this step
many of the students wrote that they outlined the paper, but several
of the students indicated that they didn't outline although they had
been told they should. Writing was the obvious step mentioned by all
students. Some of the students actually wrote that they did several
drafts while others only suggested that there were several drafts
before they arrived at a final draft. Before the final draft, they
polished their papers, describing this procedure accurately using
words like "edit," "revise," or "correct." When asked if their methods
were considered acceptable by their teachers, most of these
seventeen indicated that their methods were acceptable, often adding
that this was the way they had been taught or encouraged to write.

Another student described a formulaic method which many high
school teachers use to help students organize a paper. This student
earned all A's and, in addition, through the AP exam, was able to
successfully place out of all freshman English at the college level Her
method: "I first make sure I know the information. Next I make a full
thesis, including my thesis statement and three supporting facts. I
then develop this full thesis into an essay. All of my teachers taught
me to prepare a writing assignment in this manner." Although many
educators deride the five-paragraph essay as being too formulaic, this
student employed it successfully on the AP exam.

Many of the students who did not describe a structured writing
process seemed aware of what procedure was encouraged by their

teachers and indicated that their methods weren't considered

79

acceptable. A sampling of their answers may show nothing more
than that students can adapt to situations they must adapt to and will
do it in very individual ways. One student described her method
succinctly: "I start with general ideas, then I break them down into
paragraphs." Another answered that she " basically adapts an
opening, filler, then something that wraps everything up," (which
may be no more than saying "introduction, body, and conclusion").

A student who earned A's in high school English described an
unfettered approach: "I usually first think about what exactly I want
to write about, write down these main ideas and then research those
ideas. Finally I put everything all together." Her fellow graduate,
also an A student, described her process differently: "I usually write
down ideas of what I'd like to say or that are relevant and formulate
in my head the order. I rarely use an outline and if made to turn one
in, I compose it after the assignment is written. Teachers would not
approve. They mention the importance of an outline before the essay
or paper is written, but I work better without an outline."

These latter two students were one of three pairs of classmates
of those who described less organized methods of writing, suggesting
that writing process is not emphasized in those schools even if the
students or teachers may be using the steps known as "Process
Writing." On the teacher questionnaire I asked, "Is there a consistent
procedure from teacher to teacher?" The teacher of these two
students had answered, "Not really." He also described the writing
program in his school as "a good basic program which could be
improved." I felt his casual answers matched his students' casual
approach to writing.

80

Another set of classmates who eschewed order when they wrote
had been taught in a high school which has a very strong creative
writing teacher, who had answered my questionnaire and had,
therefore, selectedthese students. One of the students stated, "There
should be more emphasis on creative writing in school, rather than on
term papers and essays. The student can express himself greater
through creative writing, as well as learn to 'know' himself better."
For his method, he wrote the following: "procrastinate, accumulate
research materials, skim through selected parts, plagiarize, toss in a
few token original thoughts or ideas of my own, process the paper
with a computer (fancy fonts and graphics)." He added, "It's not
encouraged by teachers," then, in order to explain all of this,
continued, "I like to add humor and satire into the 'serious' works,
such as reports and critiques." (And, I might add, questionnaires.)
His classmate described no process at all, but also focused on creative
writing: "I am feeling more and more confident with my poetry.
However, prose seems to frighten me." Their teacher describes a
department in which " [t] he writing process is the common
denominator of writing instruction." Both of these students had taken
a class called "Composition" in addition to "Creative Writing." it was
obvious that the strength of the creative writing teacher had had a
greater impact on them, however.

Another pair of classmates described very similar processes. The
first said, "I think about the assignment for a long time, do some
research if any is required, put any ideas for what I want to write
and how to organize it in the back of my head, and let my

subconsciousness work on it for awhile. I might jot down some topics

81

and details, but usually I will just type. My teachers think my
method is terrible, but are satisfied with the result . . . ." Her
classmate wrote, "First, I think about what I want to write about. I
don't usually write anything down right away. After the ideas float
and filter through my brain, I pick the topic that appeals to me the
most. Because the topic has been in my head for quite some time, the
actual writing of it comes easily. My subconscious already has the
sentences pieced together. Then, with a few minor draft adaptations,
the paper is finished." It is unclear whether these two are unique, or
their school is full of "subconscious" writers who incubate their
papers like baby chicks. Their teacher wrote that " [p] rocess writing is
encouraged." These two students describe the pre-writing stage of
process writing fully, but seem to gloss over the drafting stages.

As I contemplated the above results, I found it significant that
among the eleven students who did not describe a structured process
for writing papers, there were three pairs of classmates. In looking
ahead a year later I found that while two of these pairs had very
successful college experiences, the two creative writers were not as
happy with their freshman writing experiences as the others. These
students found that the kind of writing they had to do in college to
get good grades was not always compatible with the kind of writing
they had enjoyed doing in high school. While each had a creative
flair, they had trouble with the expository prose asked by some
college professors they encountered. In his post-college
questionnaire, one of these students lowered his evaluation of his
training. He gave as his reason: "I noticed that the writing that I was
taught in high school was not nearly good enough for college writing."

82
Stpdepts' Impressipns of Themselves As Writers

Before they mailed me their questionnaires, I asked the students to
describe themselves as writers in a short letter or essay. I hoped to
compare their actual writing to their grades and answers in the
questionnaire. The students, however, did not see my invitation to
"describe yourself as a writer" as a situation which required polished
writing. While some wrote these smoothly and correctly, others were
hurried and sloppy. The condition of these letters, moreover, seemed
to have no conformity to their grades or questionnaire comments, so I
read them merely as additional communications. '

One student began with the kind of comment that I'm sure most
English teachers hate to read. "I think I am a fairly decent writer,
although I would do just about anything to get out of doing it. I hate
writing both in and out of school." A second student indicated that
"writing becomes a frustrating task, one that I wouldn't voluntarily
do." A third stated, "I really don't like to write, it takes me awhile to
get started. I definitely don't write for fun." Another echoed that
thought: "Some people consider writing fun. I am not one of them. I
will write when I have to but not just to do it."

These four students were the only ones of the 29 who shared this
dislike for writing, although others said they did not write outside of
school. While four is not many, I'm concerned, as an English teacher,
since these are four bright, college-bound students. They didn't
explain, if they could, why they found no pleasure in writing.

More positive were comments like this: "Writing has always been
a favorite activity of mine. While many people look upon it as a
chore, I consider it fun and challenging." This student liked writing

83

both in school and out of school Other students had a preference.
Many preferred writing in school. One said, "I enjoy writing reports
and essays as long as it is easy and a well-structured assignment that
I can get done quickly." Another, however, found writing "a struggle
at times," but mainly in school, adding, "As for writing out of school, I
love to write long, detailed letters to pen pals and other friends."
Writing about one's own interests is a proven catalyst'to fluent,
good writing (Emig 1971, Mayher 1990). The students support this:

In school I enjoyed day-to-day writing assignments and
especially creative writing assignments where I was
allowed to choose the subject matter or the format.

If the topic of the paper is something that I am quite
familiar with or something that I enjoy writing about,
then I usually have little or no trouble completing the
assignment.

I'd be lost if I was not able to sit down and write howl
felt.

I feel I am a strong writer when I write about a topic of
my choice; otherwise, I'm a fair to good writer when the
subject is chosen for me.

I enjoyed writing in school very much, especially when
we could pick the subject to write about. I like to write
about my life and my family . . . .

Several students verified that good writers often have a
background that gives them an added advantage over other students
(Hirsch 1987, Rosenblatt 1978, Taylor 1983). One student wrote,
"Ever since I can remember, I have known how to write, whether it
be just individual words or stories." Another wrote, "My voracious

84

appetite for books has allowed me to absorb sentence structure from
an early age without my being aware of it." Still another indicated
"For me, writing has been an important outlet of my feelings. I have
kept a journal for over eight years."

These comments and many more on the questionnaires supported
one major conclusion: How well a student will do in any writing
program is very dependent on the attitude and background which the
student brings to the experience. The teacher he or she encounters is
the other major factor in a successful outcome. These same factors

were significant to the student's success in college writing courses.

T F r ll e

The four universities which I chose for this study are located in
west or central Michigan just as the twelve high schools are. These
universities are no more than a two-hour drive from any of the
twelve schools. All are four-year universities which are part of the
public university system supported by the State of Michigan. I will
call the universities A, B, C, and D, representing their freshman
enrollment in descending order. I sought information about each
college's writing program for freshmen from a department
chairperson or director of writing instruction. I also received
questionnaires from several of the professors or instructors who
taught the freshman writing classes attended by the students who
were interviewed.

University A is by far the largest of the four universities. This
university has an extensive graduate school and is considered a

research university. Universities B and C are similar in size to one

85

another. University B has a larger freshman enrollment; however,
because of its more extensive graduate school, University C has a
larger total enrollment. There are masters degree programs in most
departments at these two universities. University C grants doctorates
while University B does not. University D is half the size of these two.
The graduate school at University D does not include doctoral
programs. While entrance requirements vary, generally the
freshman classes of the four universities are similar. The majority of
their students come from Michigan, yet each university has students
from most of the other states and many foreign countries.

Each university accepts the Advanced Placement test as a means
of waiving or gaining credit in the required freshman
writing/ literature course(s). Other means of waiving or replacing the
required freshman course in each university were taking an
established equivalent in another department, taking an English class
which is approved for English majors to use as a replacement, or
taking a placement test (which includes a writing sample) during
summer orientation and scoring high enough to be allowed the
waiver. While there are slight differences, the four colleges are
similar in their waiver guidelines. Depending on the score on the AP
test or what kind of placement test was taken, sometimes credit is

also given for courses which a student has waived.

11mm
During the 1991-1992 school year, University A required a full

year of freshman writing/ literature study. Three ten-week courses
were designed to improve the students' writing ability with writing

86

topics derived from literature and non-fiction reading required in
each course. A research assignment was included in the third course.
This university changed its format in the fall of 1992 and now
requires only one semester of writing/ literature in a student's
freshman year and one semester in a writing intensive course to be
taken within the student's major at a later time. The guide for
writing instruction for the three—course format taken by the students
in this study during their freshman year (1991-92) emphasized the
following: getting started; drafting; revising; using effective sentence
structure and standard grammar, punctuation, and spelling; editing;
and research. The three classes were designed to provide a continual
improvement of writing skills. The focus of both the literature and
the writing was the American experience. The three courses required
of freshmen need not be the same for every student. There were
several tracks from which the students could choose with topics such
as Americans on Film, American Humanities, or Women in America.
Students were not required to continue with the same track
throughout the three courses.

Unlike the arrangement at the other three universities, the
department which developed and staffed these courses is not the
English Department at University A. It is an interdisciplinary
department established to provide the general university writing
course required of every student. Usually the Course is taught by a
tenure stream faculty member with a Ph. D. While the focus of the
skills to be introduced remains consistent from class to class
according to the guidelines mentioned above, there may be a great
disparity among the sections in the methods used to teach, the

87

literature and readings used by the individual faculty members, and
the requirements of the course. Because of individual freedom among
faculty and the thematic approach to the various tracks of the three-
course system, there was opportunity for a very different experience
from section to section of the required freshman writing courses.

tinivetsig; A Faeulg; Resmnses

One professor, when asked to comment on the diversity in
freshman writing at University A, wrote: "Since the department is
composed of a wide variety of faculty, with degrees in a broad range
of subjects, we all approach our teaching with various backgrounds;
however, statistical studies suggest we tend to be fairly close in
grading criteria and end-term grades. "

Two other professors responded simply and divergently to the
question about similarity of content and requirements among
sections of the same course. One answered, "I would guess that there
is considerable variation," while the other responded, "I believe
similar, since there is a course syllabus all are supposed to follow."
All five professors who responded reported using peer evaluation
and individual conferencing as evaluation methods. A

When asked what attribute was the greatest determiner of
success for a student in the sections they taught, the answers were
varied. One responded "self-discipline," while another answered
"keep submitting repeated revisions." One professor cited reading
ability and another mentioned the ability to "organize, develop, and
support a thesis." Another answer is perhaps the basis for all good
writing; "Whether or not the student sees any point in writing."

88

When asked to describe their students' most detrimental writing
habits, one answered, "Writing to please the instructor and satisfy the
requirement of an assignment." Another listed, "lack of motivation,"
while one deplored the student's "inflated idea of how good a writer
he/ she is." The final answer described the difficulty in motivating
students to re-write their papers.

If these professors could tell high school teachers what to teach,
their answers would vary. Revision, grammar and paragraphing, and
"the ability to analyze and discuss their readings" were three

suggestions.

University B
At University B only one semester of English is required of all

freshmen - an introductory course in nonfiction writing. The
students must take a second semester of writing, however, preferably
in the SOphomore year. This second semester may be focused on
writing in the humanities, physical sciences, or social sciences, but all
are still taught in the English Department.

English Department masters degree candidates teach some sections
of the freshman composition course. There are about 90 sectiOns, 45
in each semester, of which about half are taught by the graduate
students and the other half by temporary faculty or tenure-track
faculty. The graduate students are supervised by an English
Department faculty member who teaches a required three-day pre-
semester workshop followed by on-going weekly meetings. The
graduate students receive three credits for this workshop and the
meetings. In addition, the supervisor visits the classes taught by the

89

graduate students. One benefit of the supervision and training of the
graduate students while they are teaching the freshman writing
course is that they can be shown methods of teaching writing based
on current theory, such as process writing, peer editing, etc. What
each does in the classroom, their required assignments, and methods
of evaluation can also be standardized among these graduate
students. Some of the regular faculty who teach these classes also
employ similar methods, assignments, and evaluations, but some do
not. This may create a disparity in the experience students have
while taking different sections of the same freshman course. The
students taking courses from regular faculty may benefit from the
experience and expertise of these faculty members, a benefit which
may be lacking in the sections taught by graduate students. They
may also encounter a faculty member with more traditional methods
of teaching which do not take recent theory into consideration and
whose style may be pedantic and teacher-centered.

Each section must be designed around a master syllabus which
gives the types of writing required ranging from narrative to
expository, but there is room for a great variety in assignments from
section to section. While some professors may stray far from this
syllabus, considerations of collegiality, assumptions of expertise, and
issues surrounding academic freedom often prevent there being
pressure to bring the course more solidly within the guidelines of the
syllabus. The departmental syllabus for the freshman course lists five
general objectives: fluency and flexibility, invention and
arrangement, style, usage and mechanics, and rhetorical skills. Goals
in the syllabus include knowledge of the following: the self-discipline

90
required by writing; the planning-drafting—revising process; the
impact of audience and purpose on content and style; the techniques
of persuasion; the concept of thesis and support; analytical,
evaluative criteria for nonfiction writing; mechanics, basic skills in

English; and manuscript conventions.

iv rsi B Fa u Re nse

Only one instructor filled out a questionnaire in response to my
request. She was one of the graduate instructors. She had used many
methods to encourage writing: journals, peer evaluation, group
critiques, draft submissions, conferencing. She was very positive
about her students: "With very few exceptions, the students have all
been very able to handle the challenges of [the course]. What they
lack in experience they make up for in enthusiasm and desire to
improve their skills." She felt the students lacked an ability or desire
to proofread final drafts. She wished they were more receptive to
re—writing and revising, and she wished they "were better prepared
in areas of grammar, Spelling and punctuation."

When asked to comment on diversity among the sections of the
same course, she answered, "I try to place a great deal of emphasis on
developing the ability to generate ideas, focus and organize work and
develop critical thinking skills. Many of my colleagues use a similar
approach, while some are concerned mainly with the finished
product.”

91
Mix/ems:

University C has a system similar to University B, using English
Department masters degree candidates supervised by a member of
the English faculty to teach freshman writing. Except in special
sections not under the auspices of the English Department (Honors
College courses, for instance, are taught by faculty from the Honors
College although the course title may be the same), all sections of the
freshman writing course are taught by these graduate students. This
one-semester course fulfills the lower-level writing provision. The
one-semester upper-level required writing course will be taken by a
student at a later time in his or her major discipline. If the major
department does not have such an upper-level writing course to
offer, however, there is another English course which fulfills the
upper-level writing provision.

The graduate students who teach the freshman writing courses
must take a one-week training before beginning the semester course.
Then, throughout the semester, the graduate students attend a
weekly three-hour seminar. Credit is given for this training. The
supervisor evaluates assignments she gives to the graduate students
and also visits their classes and provides evaluations. Students who
have finished the training may teach two sections. Those who are in
training teach one section. Such a system allows for consistency in
methods, assignments, and evaluation.

Each freshman must produce six final products, each with three or
four drafts. The grade for the semester is provided by evaluating a
final portfolio which must contain the six final products which must
total a minimum of twenty pages. The instructor can choose the six

92

assignments from a list, provided by the English Department, of ten
types of papers: descriptive, comparative, or casual analysis;
summary/ response; research report; problem definition; proposal;
evaluation; hypothesis-testing; and defense of a position. The
guidelines allow the freshmen to choose topics and data from their

own fields of study.

Lipiveteity C Faeulg Resmnse

One of the graduate instructors at University C returned a
questionnaire. She reported using journals, peer group evaluations,
group critiques, draft submissions, and conferencing. She felt that
one of the hardest tasks she faced was to break old habits: ". . . m_ost
students are too rigid, want the easy way out."

Her most successful students are able to " take the" paper's subject
(which is usually fairly open) and make it his or her own. " She also
finds that those who finish assignments on time "can make best use of
peer revision and conferencing." Her biggest complaint was that the
students seemed to have been " 'work-sheet' ed to death as far as
grammar and mechanics are concerned" and she added that they are
"far too worried about doing things the 'right' way, aren't aware that
there are many 'right' or correct ways." It was her observation that
all the sections of the course were fairly similar although she
described her approach as " more flexible."

W
University D offers a one-semester English class which fulfills the

writing requirement. There is a course, however, which is designed

93

for students not considered to be at college level writing. This course
is also one semester. If a student is placed in this course, he or she
must then take two semesters of writing in the freshman year, since
the first course counts towards graduation but does not fulfill the
writing requirement. The first course concentrates on personal
writing. Several biographical writings are assigned as the class
focuses on voice, detail, and audience. Then these writings are
combined into an autobiographical piece with a central thesis. All
students in this course are part of a peer writing group which must
meet at a writing center once a week for an hour. Tutors at the
writing center assign writing exercises either provided by the writing
instructor or designed by the tutor. The tutors are junior and senior
students at University D.

The second course, the course which actually fulfills the writing
requirement, focuses on essays across the disciplines. Research is a
component of at least one assignment. There are no standard syllabi
for either course, but there are goals provided for the instructors
along with the course descriptions and guidelines published by the
English Department. Generally the instructors design their courses
with a great deal of freedom based on these broad guidelines. The
guidelines give general suggestions for assignments and texts, but the
instructors are free to choose their own. This policy allows for a great
diversity from section to section of each course. Another course,
which uses literature and requires papers which analyze the
literature, is offered to fulfill the writing requirement for those who
wish the literature focus. This third course is like an honors course,

94

however, and students must score high on the placement examination
to qualify.

Whether a student is placed in the first course or the second
course is determined by a one-hour writing examination during
summer orientation in response to a prompt. Two graders score the
examination. Approximately 70% of the students are placed in the
first course. This course is not considered remedial, but since only
the second course is necessary to fulfill the requirement, placement in
the first course has become tantamount to placement in a remedial
course in the minds of many of the students. Two students made
specific comments on their final questionnaires regarding their
placement in the first course. One said, "Although my high school
English classes taught me some important things about writing, it
didn't give me enough background in writing to start-on the same
level as others in college." I wondered, when I read this comment,
how she would have felt if she knew that 70% of the freshmen were
placed at the same level she had been. The other student wrote, "The
classes at [University D] were not as hard as I thought they were. I
was better prepared than I was led to believe with placement scores."
Due to complaints from students, the English Department at .
University D is studying the two courses to determine if the first
course has, in actuality, become a "hidden" requirement. After a
student has passed the required course in the freshman year, he or
she must also take a second writing course in the SOphomore year or
later in either the English Department or in his or her major academic
discipline.

95

Almost every section of the first course is taught by adjunct
professors. Due to budget restraints, the department has a low
number of tenure-track positions and cannot staff the many sections
of the two freshman courses needed for all students to complete the
requirement. There is adjunct training in the fall, although many are
unable to attend. The adjuncts must have masters degrees. Some are
experienced, many retired from teaching at the high school level.

Five of the seven students in the study who attended University D
took both of the courses offered for freshmen. Three of these five
expressed dismay at having been placed in the first course after
having earned A's and B's in high school English, yet all three rated
the first semester course as "excellent." University D has designed a
good two-class series for average freshman writers. While they may
need to cut costs by joining the other three universities in decreasing
to one semester except for very severely limited writers, the two
classes provide a very solid writing foundation for the students. The
problem, which they have already recognized, is the negative

connotation attached to placement in the first class.

umvetstty Q Feculty Resmpses
Three instructors from University D responded with

questionnaires. When asked about common standards, one instructor
answered, "Every instructor determines how many papers students
will write. Some classes require two papers-others ten or more."
Another answered, "I think that I build the course around each
Individual class or section more than my colleagues do . . . . I don't
think my courses are typical of classes in this course." The third

96

commented, "I'm sure that I focus more on organization and technical
correctness than my colleagues do."

One second-course instructor was fairly critical of the first course:
"In my Opinion, the emphasis on autobiographical writing doesn't help
college writers much, especially in the areas of grammar and
mechanics where they generally need a lot of help. Writing
autobiography also encourages narrowness of thinking in students, I
believe." She adds, "I'm continually surprised by how many of my
students [in the second course] cannot consistently write correct and
coherent sentences and paragraphs."

Two of the instructors wished students had learned to value re-
writing before entering college. One comments, "Again, they need to
know that several attempts (drafts) are necessary to produce good,
effective and interesting papers." The third instructor suggested
three improvements: "taking personal responsibility for learning to
write well; paying attention to detail—editing, etc.; students don't
realize how much the way they write reflects on them personally."

i n n 011 a lti

If all of the freshmen at these four universities were viewed as
one group, a significant fact is that almost half of them are not being
taught writing by tenure—stream faculty. About one-third of the
students are being taught by graduate students with bachelor's
degrees, usually in English, and some classes in methods of teaching
writing. Another group of freshmen, approximately one-eighth, are
taught by adjunct or temporary faculty. These teachers may have a
Ph. D. degree, but most have a master's degree. Some are not trained

97

in writing or even English while others are veterans of high school
and/or college classrooms. Almost half of the students are taught by
tenure-stream faculty, most at University A. Many of the tenure-
stream faculty at Universities B, C, and D, however, have not
completed their doctorates.

It is a common assumption of students and their parents that
when the students leave high school to attend a university that they
will be taught by professors who are better educated and more
highly skilled teachers than their high school teachers. Given the
increasingly higher education of high school teachers, this is not an
assumption that one can make anymore, but the chances are even
slimmer when it comes to freshman writing courses. The most
extreme case in this study is the Student who left a high school
where she was taught Advanced Placement English by a teacher with
a Ph.D. and many years of experience, and went on to college where
she took a freshman writing course taught by a graduate Student
working on a masters degree who was in front of a classroom for the
first time. The Student ended the class with the feeling that She had
wasted her time. Other cases were similar although not as extreme.

It would be incorrect to State that the level of education or the
years of experience a teacher has determines his or her ability to
teach writing. Nonetheless, the practice of using graduate Students to
teach freshman writing is a practice that has to be questioned when
discussing articulation. The use of temporary faculty, while not
necessarily a problem as far as training for the position, can also be
problematic because there is less consistency, and, perhaps as in the

98

case of University D, less control in how the material is presented or
in how the students are evaluated.

One student in the study was in a classroom at University D
where the teacher could not control the students. A temporary
faculty member, this woman left in the middle of the semester due
to medical problems. Only with the faculty replacement did this
student feel she was receiving quality writing instruction. Another
student was in a classroom at University B in which She was told by
the graduate instructor to forget everything she had learned in high
school about writing papers. A student at University C was initially
pleased to be chosen to take the Honors section of the required
freshman English course. She did not have one of the graduate
students used by the English Department for this course because the
Honors College hires its own professors. Her professor was an
adjunct professor, a retired faculty member who ran a highly
controlled classroom in which the assignments were all literary
criticism, a format not promoted by the English Department for the
required freshman writing course because the course is considered
interdisciplinary. In the end, this student was very unhappy with
the professor's pedantic approach to writing and his strict writing
expectations which remained difficult to perceive throughout the
semester.

These experiences were not the usual experiences of the students
in the study, only some of the worst experiences. Some conclusions
can be drawn, however, from these stories. The first is the obvious.
The college faculty is not necessarily a better faculty than the high
school faculty. Knowing this might help the students approach

99

college writing with less fear. Admitting this might help the two
faculties work together with more respect and cooperation.

The adjunct faculty are mixed in both their experience and
education. They are the group less apt to be supervised or trained
for the classes they teach. When discussing the temporary faculty
who taught the first writing course at University D, the freshman
writing director described some by saying they are "people who are
in business who like teaching on the side, some are writers who are
writing and want the income but they don't want to work full time."
While she indicated that some pretty good peOple walk through the
door, She admitted that there isn't a lot of consistency in the abilities
of the adjuncts or their methods in the classroom. The English
Department at University D has twice as many adjuncts as full time
positions. This university needs to train and monitor its temporary
faculty in the same way that the graduate students are supervised at
Universities C and B.

The graduate students in Universities C and B are more closely
supervised because of the classes they must take while serving as
graduate instructors. While these graduate students are carefully
chosen, it is possible that they are no more skilled at writing than
their best students. It is not a requirement that these students have
any previous education in teaching methods or techniques. Given the
current economic situation, the use of graduate students to teach at
universities is a practice here to stay. The colleges who employ
graduate students to teach freshman writing are on the right track
when they require constant supervision and adherence to proven

classroom practices.

100

Some faculty members, often younger ones who have not
developed the professional Standards of the older faculty, perpetuate
the contempt towards high school writing instruction that has caused
articulation problems. A department could promote attitudes which
don't denigrate the high school experience while building upon it.
Graduate students who are being prepared to work with college
freshmen could benefit from a direct requirement to respect the
work of their colleagues in high schools or to show respect whether
they feel it or not.

To ensure consistency in the experience that Students have in
freshman English, all faculty, including tenured faculty, should have
departmental guidelines to promote consistency of requirements and
evaluation in the sections of the same course.

The students who encountered the problems summarized above
had a more difficult time learning about themselves as writers
because they were not getting useful feedback nor feeling that they
could rely on their past experiences.

rn s tw n Tw vel Which f icul in
Several of the college faculty who answered the questionnaires

believe as the Harvard faculty did over one hundred years ago that
all students who enter college should have mastered grammar,
spelling, and mechanics completely. Those who made these
comments included both tenured faculty with doctorates and
graduate students. It is a mistake to suggest that high school
teachers Should abandon writing instruction until students are
masters of the syntax. High school teachers also Struggle with

101

students' deficiencies with the language. If the teachers at the two
levels need to agree on any one truth about students of writing, it
should be that very few will have fully mastered grammar, spelling,
and syntax, and that learning to incorporate correctness in writing is
an ongoing process which will continue for a lifetime, most certainly
throughout formal schooling. The teachers at both levels should
demand correctness in final drafts, but should continue to help the
students learn what resources are available to help them achieve
correctness. It is detrimental to a student's growth in writing to
suggest that he or she is a remedial writer because of spelling or
grammar miscues at either the high school or college level (Emig
1971, Shaughnessy 1977, Bartholomae and Petrosky 1986).

There are several aspects of the college writing classroom that are
clearly different from high school and these are the factors which
college professors can take advantage of to move students beyond
high school level writing. One is the greater degree of academic
freedom. College students are seen as adults. No matter how
conservative or controlling, a parent is highly unlikely to try to
control the assigned readings or subjects for discussion of a college
classroom as he or she does a high school classroom. This freedom
allows the college professor much greater latitude when seeking to
appeal to the students' interests. When answering the
questionnaires, many of the students cited their pleasure at being
able to choose their writing topics and of having a greater freedom in
subject matter. The availability of a much more extensive library
enhances this advantage.

102

Another advantage that the university has over both high schools
and community colleges is that the students are, for the most part,
living on campus among their peers, no longer under the heavy
influence of home and hometown. While this lack of parental
authority can cause social problems for the Students, academically
the situation is positive because the students are more willing to
explore and experiment with concepts or theories which they would
not feel free to express at home or in their high school classrooms.

Not all professors take advantage of this new freedom of
expression being experienced by many college freshmen. When the
discussions are limited by a teacher-centered classroom atmosphere;
stifled by a rigid adherence to dated topics, methods, and literature;
and intimidating due to a lack of respect for the students' ability or
past experience, then articulation will fail.

The college writing classrooms which introduce new subjects for
thought, which incorporate reading and discussion into the classroom
practices, and which encourage peer interaction are sure to benefit
from the new freedom and increasing independence of the Students.
The transition from high school to college is best achieved when the
student finds not a repeat of the high school classroom but the more
sophisticated classroom she expects to find in college. When the
college professor has an open classroom with current topics, when he
or she encourages the students' new-found freedom, and when the
professor is willing to accept the student writer with the abilities he
or she brings, then the articulation will be successful The second
Student questionnaire verified many of these observations.

103

h n Student u stio naire
Twenty—seven students responded to a second questionnaire at
the end of their freshman year of college. The questionnaires were
designed to elicit a comparison to the evaluations made a year earlier

when the students had completed their senior year.

The Stpdents' ReEvaluatipn of Their Prepatetion for College Writing

On the first questionnaire, the students had been asked to
evaluate their preparation for college writing before they started
college. On the second questionnaire they were asked if they would
give the same evaluation. Seventeen of the students felt they had
predicted correctly. Seven felt they would lower their estimations
after having been through their freshman year, and three would
raise their estimations. The final rankings included eight
"excellents," seven "very goods," seven "goods," four " fairs," and one
" poor." These rankings were not necessarily related to grades. Most
of the students earned B's or A's in college writing courses. There
were only four students who earned grades in freshman English
courses which were less than B. One was the student who ranked his
preparation as "Poor." A year before he had ranked his preparation
as "Very Good." On the second questionnaire he wrote, "I noticed that
the writing that I was taught in high school was not nearly good
enough for college writing." The other students with grades below a B
ranked their preparation as "Good" or "Very Good" just as they had a
year before.

As another means of evaluating the Students' high school writing
training, I asked the students what more their high school writing

104

courses could have done to prepare them for what they encountered.
The comments the students made in reaction to this question often
were indicative of the different classroom formats between their two
experiences. If a student encountered a workshop approach in
college in which much peer editing was done, he or she often
answered the question by suggesting that the high school classroom
should afford more opportunity for peer review. If the student had
encountered a process format in college during which he or she had
worked on multiple drafts and was graded on process and
improvement rather than a final draft done outside of the classroom
and not returned for rewriting, then the student often suggested
that multiple drafts and process writing should be part of the format
and evaluation procedure in high school. Five Students answered that
their high schools Should Stress punctuation, spelling, or grammar,
although one seemed to give this answer because she could think of
nothing else: "Actually my high school prepared me enough for
college English, but if I had to pick one, it would be grammar." She
was one of five students who essentially said nothing needed
improving. Those five students represented five different high
schools and three of the four colleges in the study. This was true of
other comments made by the students. There was not a correlation
between school or college attended and comments made throughout
the questionnaires.

Some students felt their high schools did nOt emphasize enough
writing:

They could offer an in-depth writing course that is not
review of basic and structural grammar and vocabulary,

105

but challenges the Student to broaden his writing ability
by writing clear concise, relevant essays of many
different styles on many different topics at many
different lengths.

I think they could have put a little bit more of an
emphasis on writing. Basically most of the teachers gave
an assignment and never really explained how to write.
We had to learn how to write on our own. They could
also have put more emphasis on the Style rather than the
content of our writing.

My high school could have taught the Style of writing
used in colleges for papers and taught more grammar
Skills.

Focus more on writing styles.

Assigned more composition papers for practice and
provided more techniques to improve on students'
weaker areas of writing.

It could've offered more writing courses. . . . we focused
way too much on literature. In college you don't need to
be all that familiar with Chaucer or Shakespeare unless
you're an English major. You need to be able to write
effectively for ALL MAJORS!

Students mentioned Specific concepts which they would have
liked to have known before college. One wished he had known to use
details in his writing, while another said she needed to know how to
"show" and not "tell" Many were concerned with tOpic selection,
feeling that they had not been free enough in high school to choose
topics. Several students commented that they had had to do long
research papers in high school whereas in college they were asked to
do shorter papers, both research and persuasive, for which they had
to generate a thesis. They felt the high schools could have asked for
more, shorter papers, and they were concerned that they had not

106

been asked to think about their focus enough in high school For
some, the concept of a central thesis being the focus of the paper was
finally arrived at in a college course. One commented, "The thesis was
heart and soul for college work and at times my thesis statement was
lacking." Another wrote, " My high school teachers could have
introduced topic writing and made it into a fundamental part of the
class. The only kind of writing I was exposed to was analyzing
literature and poetry and having to prove a specific given thesis." A
third suggested argumentative writing, "coming up with a thesis and
being able to argue a point effectively." One students who was a
satisfied "A" student was still in agreement with this idea: "The only
thing I think could have helped is if we had more assignments in
high school where we had to come up with our own writing topics
instead of always having them given to us." '

Two of these latter four students were from the same rural high
school and a third was also from a rural high school. That fact that
the schools are rural schools does not seem to be a Significant factor
because in central west Michigan teachers, even in rural districts, are
not isolated to the point that they could not attend conferences or
college courses. It is unlikely that these teachers are unaware of the
desirability or practice of allowing students choice in topic selection
because this practice is not uncommon among high school English
teachers. A more likely reason may be that the schools are smaller.
They may not have made significant change over a period of years
because of a very limited curriculum. Schools with a larger selection
of classes tend to change the content of those classes more often if
for no other reason than that they may be taught by only one or two

107

teachers who feel free to make small changes often and sooner as the
need emerges. A smaller high school may have a more static
classroom routine because the same course is taught to all Students
in a given grade and one teacher may not feel as free to make

changes in the routine.

The Students' Evaluatipn pf Their College Writt'ng Courses

I asked the students to evaluate their college courses which
taught literature, composition, or a combination of the two. The
rankings I provided were the same rankings 1 had asked for when
they ranked their high school preparation. "Very Good" was the
description most often chosen. "Excellent" and "Good" were chosen
less often and by almost the same number of Students. Only a few
chose "Fair" or "Poor." The Students added comments to explain their

choices:

This class did not teach composition, we were expected to
already have those skills, although we were allowed to
rewrite our term papers for a higher grade.

I learned quite a bit this semester. It just expanded and
was more detailed than my high school writing.

It was a frustrating experience, but I learned how better
to deal with a frustrating teacher. I'm not sure how much
my composition has immoved.

The professor tried to teach the process and procedures
for writing but failed to explain how to improve the
techniques students had already known.

The teacher did an excellent job transforming us from
high school writers (dull and boring) to college writers
(vivid and full of life).

108

I thought my high school teacher was a better teacher
than my college instructor, but she [college instructor]
Still made some improvements with other students.

I learned a different style of writing that I will be able to
use more in future coursework rather than analyzing
literature as in my high school class.

I gave the students a list of the elements of a learning situation
(teacher, content, students, assignments, classroom style) and asked
them to rank them as to the importance of each in the effectiveness
of the college writing courses. Most of the students ranked the
teacher of the class as the most important element in the
effectiveness of the class. If the student did not think the professor
was the most important element, then content or assignments was
chosen. The least important element according to the majority of the
respondents was the other students. Classroom style also did not
have as much of an impact on the Students although those who did
mark classroom Style were evenly divided between considering it
significant because of a strict classroom focused on the teacher
(which was not seen as positive) and because of a student-centered
workshop approach (which the students favored). The factors
coming in second behind the teacher were the content and materials

used or presented, and the assignments.

lti ,¢:.l..'ri“uo _o_ hem IV . olVWl‘2‘_'

When the students were asked what their Strengths were and
from where these strengths came, their answers could be divided
into three groups. One group cited strengths such as vocabulary,
creativity, voice, or personal writing which they attributed to their

109

families or their own personalities. A second group named specific
skills which they had learned while in college and which became
their strengths. Examples are paragraph transition and self-
evaluation. Almost half of the students selected a skill which they
attributed to a high school course. These Skills were grammar
(mentioned by three students), organization skills (mentioned by
four students), descriptive writing (mentioned by two students),
knowledge of literature, and the writing of introductions.

One Student's strength was another student's weakness, however.
Ten students mentioned mechanical errors such as incorrect
grammar, punctuation, or spelling as their greatest weaknesses.

Several Students felt that keeping a focus was difficult:

As a result, the beginnings are rich with detail and well
thought out happenings, but the ends were more " thrown
together."

I don't do very well at sticking to one topic and logically
following that topic. I tend to wander.

I had difficulty stating a point and then supporting it
with facts or ideas because I would often stray from my
idea.

It was evident that college courses had helped the students be
more aware of themselves as writers. Students seemed to have
learned what makes a good paper and could explain their
weaknesses well: "generalization," "instead of critiquing something, I
attack it," "I would not deveIOp paragraphs fully," "transitions, being
too wordy, not writing powerful introductions or conclusions."

One student's weakness was coming up with ideas, whereas one
felt his strength was getting the ideas while his weakness was

110

organizing them. Several students had trouble with research, some
in finding the material, others with organizing it, and Still others with
the wording. Several students felt their weakness was a result of a
difference in viewpoint between high school teachers and college
teachers. The students had heard their high school teachers say to
express their own Opinions while some college teachers felt the
students were unable to separate fact and opinion. They described
the kind of papers they had trouble with:

Research papers that were to contain no opinions of your
own....

Research papers, factual writings, and any kind of
readings that showed no creativity or personal opinion or
input.

. . . he [the professor] kept saying that we were just
describing what the book said or repeating what we had
taken down in our notes when writing our papers. Well,
that's what we had done in high school and that was how
you got A's (by showing that you knew what was being
taught). He wanted us to evaluate what we had learned
and rephrase it . . . . This was really hard-you really had
to know what you learned, instead of just writing in
detail everything the teacher said. Frustrating.

When I asked the students to write about factors which they
identified as contributing to their success, they listed hard work,
interesting subject matter, enjoyment of reading and writing, good
background knowledge and preparation, an interested and helpful
professor who was easily approached, easy assignments, a focus on
content rather than mechanics, a focus on mechanics rather than
content, peer-editing, and acceptance of rewrites. Factors identified

111

as contributing to poor grades or grades lower than the students
considered acceptable were lack of time, unclear instructions from
teachers, missing classes, procrastination, lack of organization and
classroom control on the professor's part, and too many facts to
learn for objective tests.

Finally, I asked the Students how they had changed as writers
during their first year at college. Although never worded the same,
the most frequent change to be gleaned from the students' answers
on this question is that they are more aware as writers. They can
look at their papers with more knowledge and are better able to
judge their own writing and, therefore, improve their own writing.
Students said they spend more time now on each piece of writing
and are more careful about correctness. A Significant change for
many of the students was a new awareness of audience. As a result,
they feel their writing is more interesting. One student answered, "I
write with more depth and description. I have to bring the paper to
the reader, not just write down facts or opinion on a topic." Another
says, "I put myself in the reader's position and tried to liven it up so
that they wouldn't fall asleep reading it." Still another writes, "My
overall style is more mature, and I know how to keep a reader's
attention through the whole essay or paper." Maturity was a factor
cited by several students. Being on campus away from home and
high school, especially for those from rural settings, has expanded
the knowledge of many of the Students, and they see this reflected
positively in their papers. One student talked of a new self—

confidence:

112

By showing my writing to my peers, they are able to pick
up the flaws in the writing that I didn't. I could then
work to improve the areas where I had made mistakes.
This method also gave a little boost to my self-confidence.
It Showed me that I was not the only one who made
mistakes in my writing.

While many of the students had had group experiences in high
school, none felt high school grouping matched the peer group work
they did in college where participants were more motivated and the
work of the group was more mutually responsive and equally
shared.

Five Students said they had not changed as writers. There were
two students in this study who did not take any required English or
composition classes as freshmen because they had passed AP exams
which allowed them to waive these requirements. Both of these
Students answered that they had not changed as writers. I know
these students are good writers, but after reading about the growth
experienced by most of the other students, I began to think that
students shouldn't waive the freshman writing course because there
are Skills to be learned that can't be learned in high school simply
because it is high school A third Student took one course from an
instructor whom She perceived to be much less knowledgeable than
her high school teacher. (I received questionnaires from both
teachers, and the student's perceptions are correct if one bases this
judgement on education and experience in teaching. My judgement
based on the comments on the questionnaires also backed up the
perception that the high school teacher was much more adept at his
teaching although the graduate student was not a poor instructor.)
The remaining two students were from the same high school Each

113

was somewhat resistant to change, having been nurtured in high
school by a teacher who thought him an excellent creative writer
while encountering college inSchtors who found his writing much in
need of repair. One of these students answered: "I seem to not care
about grades anymore, so I treat my subject matter with contempt
now." The other, while not changing his writing style, is more open:
"If anything, I believe my mind has been opened to many new and
interesting ideas."

I left a section for additional comments at the end of the
questionnaire. Most Students wrote in that space. Their conclusions
are enlightening. It is apparent to me that the students saw a great
change in themselves and their writing during their freshman year.
Many credited their high schools with contributing to this change
because they provided the skills which allowed them to succeed in
college; others saw the change as a result of the very different
experience they encountered in college. Sometimes their comments

very honestly pointed out the problems at both levels of education.

There is no comparison between college writing and high
school assignments. I don't know how I became such a
good writer when I look back at the type of writing I was
required to do in high school

I ny not to fear writing as much as I did in high school.
College has helped me get over that fear.

I think that the most important thing for Students to
have is an instructor in high school who takes the time to
Sit down and Show them what they can do to improve
their writing skills. The teacher should Show them the
result of a good mixture of vocabulary, style, and
structure and make their writing assignments shorter so
that quality not quantity becomes the goal My [high

114

school] teacher not only expected high-quality work, but
she did everything possible to help us excel.

I write papers I never dreamt I would be writing a year
ago.

Every instructor has something different in mind so you
need to " learn" your professor and adapt your writing to
what he/She wants . . . . You just need to adapt your
writing for whatever class you are taking. This may
sound really harsh or bad to some people, but it is the
plain and simple truth in most [college] classes.

It is really incredible how college writing expectations
and professors' abilities to teach are so much different
than the average high school teacher. If high school
teachers would be just a little more aware of the
importance in writing abilities that are needed before
entering college courses, I think things would be a little
different.

The biggest adjustment was the realization that my
professors have no idea who lam (and could probably
care less). In college, you have to constantly prove your
talents, over and over. This differed from my small high
school experience because the teachers were familiar
with my work and knew my capabilities. As a result, I
think I was a lazier writer in high school because I knew
I didn't have to knock myself out to prove my abilities to
the teachers.

College professors expect so much more than high school
teachers. They are very picky and often don't tell you
what you need to improve.

No system will be perfect, but I feel that I've never been
hampered by what I did or did not learn in high school.

1 l 5
Implieations for Articulation of Students' College Exmrienees

The last Statement made is one which many students could have
said. These students did well for the most part in their freshman
English classes. Nonetheless, the Students' responses to the second
questionnaire suggest several changes which could be made at both
the high school level and the college level to improve articulation.

After having experienced college writing, students looked back on
several assignments which are typical of high school English classes
and suggested they be altered or eliminated. One of these
assignments is the long research paper. All 29 Students had done at
least one research paper in high school. In many high schools this is
an important part of one or more classes and is often the longest
paper a student does. One student Specifically suggested more, but
shorter, research papers. Another student asked for a greater
variety of papers. She wrote that her high school had focused too
much on writing about literature or on reading literature. One
student described her writing in high school as "analyzing literature
and poetry and having to prove a specific given thesis." Other than
these literary analyses, the only other paper she mentioned was a
research paper. It is my conclusion that fourteen of the students
answered the question "What could your high school have done to
better prepare you for the writing that you had to do in college?"
with suggestions which lead to one kind of format for high school
writing classes. The students want to be assigned more, shorter
papers for which they develop their own theses. The theses for
these papers, they feel, should be topics of interest to them and not
an analysis Of literature. While the students do not mind literature

116

as a part of the classroom format, they don't want it to be dominate.
They want to do more writing. When they write in reaction to
literature, they want to choose a topic which is an issue of a general
or personal nature which they can argue or persuade others to accept
or which they can explore in an expository format. Within these
fourteen answers there was a clear request for practice in topic
development. There was a request for teachers to help them develop
style in writing. Several felt they could have been taught to be more
detailed and less general as they wrote. Their answers show that
they think high school teachers should become more involved in the
process of writing and not be so focused on the finished product.
Those students who prior to college had never been involved in
writing multiple drafts with feedback several times in the process
from either teachers or peers or both wished they had been able to
experience such a format in high school

When asked what strengths they brought from high school, seven
students mentioned organizing details. Several attributed this skill
to the research papers they had done. Two students said their best
skill was writing introductions or conclusions, again because these
aspects of a paper had been emphasized. The high school format, it
appears, emphasizes organization of a paper but not content. I feel I
that this may have something to do with the students' maturity. As
mentioned earlier, the college teacher has the advantage of a student
who is suddenly on his or her own and trying new ideas and
philosophies almost daily. Still, high school teachers could be
promoting critical thinking skills by the junior or senior year.
Helping these younger Students explore issues in their personal lives

117

or in the world around them can be done without bringing out
protests from those who are afraid the schools are teaching values if
the teacher is careful not to promote one viewpoint and if the
student is allowed to select the topic.

When asked how they had changed as writers in a year's time,
the students' answers Showed that many now grapple with one
paper more thoroughly. They have learned, especially through the
use of peer groups, to read what they write with an audience in
mind. One student wrote, "I can actually read my papers and come
up with the central idea or message that was intended to be
contained in them." This may seem an ironic statement. It may be
hard to believe that anyone who wrote a paper doesn't know what
the central idea or message is in that paper. This student's statement
supports what is often true about student writing, that too often it is
a mindless activity done to fulfill a requirement to pass a class to
graduate. The student at both levels often follows a routine in which
he or She adjusts each new paper based on a few comments written
by the teacher in the margins of the previous paper. As each paper
is written, it is forgotten and the grade and comments are applied to
a future paper, not to improving what is written in the paper for
which they are intended. This is the major fault of a format in which
papers are written to be read and evaluated by no one but the
teacher and only in final draft form, never to be revised. This is why
revision of papers is such an excellent teaching tool. For many
students in their freshman year of college, learning to revise was the

most valuable writing practice they were given.

118

It is clear from the questionnaires that many students had
valuable writing classes in both high school and college, while others
had useful classes at one but not the other level. It is clear that
certain practices such as the use of multiple drafts, peer group
evaluations, and student-selected topics are valuable aides in the
development of writing skills. Research confirms this conclusion
(Myers and Gray 1983, Moffett 1988). These methods could be used
at both levels. Ideally, practitioners at both levels should be working
together to promote the widespread use of these techniques. If these
students had been given the benefit of such a format in their high
school years as well as at college, articulation would be more easily
achieved and transition would be smoother. What these Students
learned at one level would not only be reinforced by the other, but
by the end of their freshman year of college, every one of them
would have had the chance to have become an excellent writer.

CHAPTER IV
INTERVIEWS

In this chapter I will summarize the interviews with thirteen
students. I will divide the students into four groups determined by
the universities they attended. In addition, I will analyze the results
of the interviews at each university.

I initially chose twelve students to be interviewed from the group
of twenty-nine who filled out the first questionnaire. They were
selected so that I would have one from each of the twelve high
schools and three at each of the four universities. A thirteenth
student was added because one of the twelve transferred between
two of the universities. At that time, I added another student from
the university that the transfer Student had left. Having already
agreed to be part of the study by filling out two questionnaires, the
thirteen students were not reluctant to be interviewed as well.
Several, in my opinion, felt very good about being asked to be one of
those who would be interviewed. Only two of the students proved to
be hard to schedule even after agreeing to the interview process, and
only one of those seemed to find the interview process uninteresting.
All others were very vocal and seemed willing to give whatever time
I needed. I will use pseudonyms in referring to these students and
their universities.

119

1 20
mil/me
Joe

Joe was an out-going young man who was very easy to talk to. I
first interviewed him in April of his freshman year. By then he was
in the third of the three freshman literature/writing courses
required at University A. Joe had taken the same track of the
freshman offerings throughout the year. The track he chose had as a
theme "American Radical Thought."

Joe had attended a rural high school. His high school grades had
included an A in English 9, a D+ in English 10, and A's in three 1
semester electives: Composition, Journalism, and Creative Writing. In
college he had earned 3.5 the first term and 2.0 the second term. He
was confident that this third term would result in another high
grade.

I asked Joe if he could account for the D+ in high school and the
2.0 in his second term at college. I told him I wondered if he could
explain the inconsistencies in the grades he received. It was the
teacher's reaction to his unique style of writing in both cases,
according to Joe. He explained that in high school he had learned to
love creative writing. The teacher who had selected him for this
study, in fact, was his creative writing teacher. She had given him
good grades and praised his writing. She was not the only teacher,
however, that was satisfied with his ability to write. The A's he
received in all English classes he took in ninth, eleventh, and twelfth
grades attest to this. His tenth grade teacher, however, had not
found his writing satisfactory. Joe said he liked this teacher but
could never write papers which met his standards. He said the

121

teacher said Joe generalized everything. When I questioned whether
there were other factors which he remembered which affected his
grade, Joe could think of none. He remembered that he did all
assignments completely and did them on time. One result of this
experience, Joe indicated, is that since then he has never been
confident that a paper he writes is good because he feels his
judgement of his own writing is not accurate. As a creative writer,
Joe received much praise, even being elected the "class poet."
Nonetheless, he said that although many people praise his writing, he
never really knows himself whether something is good. '
During his first term at University A he had by chance taken a
class from a woman whom he found to be the perfect teacher for his
style. She was dramatic, even theatrical in her manner of teaching,
and her assignments and lessons were very unusual She had
announced that there would be a paper due every two weeks. The
theme for the term's writing was finding one's own place in
American thought. The students were to write from their own
experiences. Within that broader framework the specific topics were
the students' choice; papers could be on anything a student wanted
to write about. Joe thrives when he is given license to create, so free
choice in topics appealed to him. He said the teacher looked at the
writing for creativity and quality of writing. Joe said he wrote
oddball things; for the first paper, he re-wrote an idea he had used in
high school, a farce about a guy he named John Doe. The teacher had
really enjoyed it, he said. He laughed at this point in the interview
and said that he had won a kind of an award. Joe guessed it was
kind of juvenile, but I could tell he was pleased. The professor gave

122

him her "Outstanding Achievement Award" which he could turn in at
a later time for a one-day extension on a paper. (Joe gave me a
hand-out on this award--the professor explained that it was a way to
say that a piece of writing had merit even when the idea had not
been dealt with well enough to receive a 4.0.) When I asked Joe
what grade he earned on that paper, he said she really didn't grade
papers because she didn't want them worrying about a grade. She
just made comments on the paper. Since he was going to be graded
at the end of the term, Joe worried a little about the grade anyway.
He was quick to add, however, that her comments were very useful.
He earned a 3.5 in that course.

His second term class was based on the theme " Paradox." He gave
an example: after reading a book on Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., the
paradox the students were asked to examine was King's dream
versus the reality of the society in which he lived. Joe found this
class more demanding because the reading assignments and the
paper assignments overlapped so that while writing a paper which
was based on one novel or book, Joe was reading the next novel. For
the first paper, the professor said he wanted the students to use
their imaginations. Based on his grade, Joe felt the professor did not
care for his imaginative writing. He had questioned the professor for
more input, and was told to use imagination but to be concrete as
well, to include facts. Joe said he tried to be imaginative while using
facts, but he still failed to produce a satisfactory paper. "For some
reason, things just did not click with us. I could write anything for
her [the first term teacher], and she would enjoy it, but for him it
was like I had to figure out what he wanted. I wasn't writing for

123

myself, I was writing for him, which I didn't do for her. It was for
myself, but with him I had to write trying to please him, and I did
not find that good at all" As stated above, Joe earned a 2.0 from this
professor.

With these two experiences behind him, Joe made sure that he
chose a section for the third term which was taught by his professor
from the first term. Again he found the class stimulating. The third
term was based on cultural pluralism. There were assigned readings
by authors such as Nora Ephron, Leroy Jones, Hunter Thompson, and
Robert Heinlein. A requirement of the third term at University A is a
research paper. His professor said the general topic would be "Sub-
cultures." She gave three choices: 1) interview a Vietnam veteran;
2) pick two or three people who can be defined as members of some
sub-culture and do a paper about the sub-culture; or 3) interview
50-100 people about their attitudes toward some sub-culture and
write a paper based on the results. The students were also divided
into groups in the class. Each group was to find a member of some
sub—culture to come in and talk to the class. Joe felt this class had an
interesting atmosphere. Many of his classmates were in his first
term class and, like him, had chosen this professor again.

Joe said that a conference with the professor was required third
term. He had gone in for a conference first term, too, even though it
wasn't a requirement. He just went to get some more feedback than
he was getting with written comments. Joe felt that this professor
was very good at conferencing.

Joe said he had not done any writing at University A other than'in
the three required literature/writing classes. His American

124

government class had a final exam which featured short essay
answers on some questions. When I asked Joe about midterms and
finals in the writing classes, he said his first professor had good tests,
some multiple choice, some essay. His second professor had an
optional essay on his objective final, but Joe had decided not to do
the essay since he felt that the professor didn't like his writing. Joe
said, "There was an optional essay at the end, but I was just so happy
to get my 2.0, I was not going to jeopardize that with him, so I just
left that one off."

I asked Joe about his high school background. He had avoided
literature classes after his general 9th and 10th grade years. He said
that three English credits were required, but that no advanced
literature class was required. The school he had attended offered
American Literature I and II, English Literature I and II,
Contemporary American Literature I and II, and Fiction. None of
these classes, however, was required for graduation. He had taken
only writing classes in his junior and seniors years. When asked if
he felt he had been hurt at all by his choices, he said perhaps he
would have been better at classroom discussions if he had taken
literature classes in high school He felt he would have had a broader
knowledge of literature to which he could make references, a
practice he had observed in classmates. He did not feel, however,
that avoiding these classes had any effect on his writing ability.

Joe thinks he is poor at mechanics, never knowing where the
punctuation goes, but even though both professors marked
mechanical errors, he has not had many of these marks on his

papers.

1 25
When asked if he was learning anything about writing, Joe said, "I

am just learning more or less through myself as I create, I would say,
and she [his first and third professor] leaves it open to that. Dr. _
[his second professor], he just wants what he wants. You give it to

him. You don't really experience anything. You just try to make him

happy."

Janet
I interviewed Janet twice during her freshman year. The first
interview was in November. Janet had not taken the first of the
three freshman literature/ writing courses at University A because
she earned a 2 on the Advanced Placement test, and the university
accepted that score as sufficient to allow her to waive one of the
three courses.

Janet's suburban high school sends approximately 90% of its
graduates on to college. She had given her school a rating of
"excellent" on her first questionnaire. She earned B's in English
during high school, and her overall grade point average was 3.7.
Janet wanted to be a student in one of the special programs at
University A, but She did not apply soon enough to get accepted. Her
disappointment with that situation caused her to consider leaving the
university after her first year. At the time of her first interview, She
was dissatisfied with her classes and the university.

Although Janet was not in a class in which she was being asked
to write at the time of this first interview, she still had formed the
opinion that high school teachers should start asking for harder
papers at an earlier time. After Janet had some good writing

126

experiences in her second and third terms at University A, she was
able to be more concrete about what a high school teacher should do.

On her second questionnaire, she wrote:

I think that the most important thing for students to
have is an instructor in high school who takes the time to
sit down and Show them what they can do to improve
their writing skills. The teacher should Show them the
result of a good mixture of vocabulary, Style, and
Structure and make their writing assignments shorter so
that quality not quantity becomes the goal.

Janet added that she had actually had that kind of teacher, but she
felt that she had not been asked to be as detailed in her writing as
she Should have been.

At the time of the first interview, she was taking a class in the Air
Force ROTC program in which she was required to give a mini-speech
in a format similar to writing She had done in high School. The
instructor required an introduction, body, and conclusion in the
speech. He assumed that all of the students could handle an
assignment like that and did not give instruction. Nothing written
would be handed in to him. He would give credit/ no credit grades
after listening to the speeches. Janet was confident that the speech
would not be a problem for her.

I asked Janet about other classes she was taking. She said that
her Political Science class was all lecture for 90 minutes. The tests
she has had so far were multiple choice and she assumes all future
tests will be. She feels forced to take notes on minute points all
during the lecture in order to do well on the tests. Her grades at this
time were much lower than they were in high school, and she was
upset with her overall experience.

127

I interviewed Janet a second time in April during her third term
at University A. She had taken the second required
literature/ writing course during the second term and had earned a
3.5 in the class. She had also taken a Political Science course in
which six papers and a take-home final were assigned. She earned a
3.5 in that class, too.

By the time Janet had come this far in her freshman year, she had
decided that not only wouldn't She change universities after her
freshman year, but that she would try to graduate from University A
in three years. She gave finances as her reason for both decisions.
Janet did not seem as frustrated or as dissatisfied with the university
as she was the first time I talked to her.

Janet was very satisfied with the writing course she had taken
second term. The professor was a retired professor who had come
back to teach part-time. She felt he was a good professor. She found
him very organized and clear in all of his instructions. Aspects of his
classroom included peer pair work and multiple drafts of each paper.
Each student in the class was to pair with another student and edit
papers in draft form. There was a peer edit sheet with questions
which each student had to answer about the other student's paper.
The Sheet listed parts of a paper which were required, such as
introduction or conclusion and other attributes of a good paper, and
had questions about whether the writer had included each aspect.
(Janet did not have a copy of one of these sheets, so I could not see
the actual questions.) Janet felt these sessions were valuable except
for her first one. For the second paper she had found a classmate
who was near enough her equal that She felt they could evaluate

128

each other well. She had continued to pair with that classmate the
rest of the term. The professor would also examine the paper and
write notes on it before the final draft if the Student wished him to.
At that time he would also give a grade to show how he would
evaluate the draft if it were a final copy. Janet took advantage of
this optional early grading and found it was very helpful.

Janet listed the progression Of grades she received on her final
drafts of five papers: 3.0, 3.5, 3.8, 4.3, and 4.0. She felt the steady
rise in grades Showed that she had learned to be clearer and more
organized. When I asked her what a grade of 4.3 meant, Janet said
that the professor had indicated that her paper was so good that a
4.0 would not suffice. As She said this, I felt that Janet was very
proud of her writing.

In Janet's second term class the students read from Norton's
Anthology of Non-fiction. There were general topics given for the
papers which related to some of the readings. The first paper was to
be on the environment, and Janet had chosen deforestation. Her
second paper was to be on a chosen sub-topic from several given
main topics. She chose from the main tOpic "20th Century Scholar"
and chose as her paper topic a contrast between Fitzhugh and
Douglas, two historical figures she had read about. The Students
were not required to do research for their papers other than what
they read in their anthology. The only topic which did not interest
Janet was transcendentalism. The professor prepared a course guide
in which he had included everything he wanted the Students to know
about topics, assignments, due dates, and manuscript form.

129

I asked Janet whether she felt her work in high school helped her
in this class. She said she did not know where her writing ability
came from, but it seemed to her that reading and writing came easily
all her school years. Janet discussed her first peer pair classmate,
whose writing was poor. She had very poor mechanics, and,
according to Janet, her organization "was shot." Janet felt these
problems were based on the high school this girl attended although
she didn't know where the girl was from.

Janet concluded that it was the professor who made this class
good for her. "I felt the teacher was a good teacher. I think he was
the one who made the class interesting because it's basically a
generic class. Some people can have the exact same class and have a
bad teacher and hate the class. So it mainly had to do with the
teacher."

Unlike her first Political Science course, the one she selected
second term had much writing in response to questions raised by the
professor. She wrote four two-page papers, one one-page paper, and
one four-to-five-page paper, and for the final there was a three-page
paper. There was no instruction on how to write nor drafting done
in class. The professor gave the due date and expected to see a
completed paper on that date. Actually, according to Janet, he really
didn't want a "paper" because he asked them to dispense with
Introductions and conclusions and just deal with three related
questions he gave for each paper. The subjects—Hobbes, Locke,
Rousseau, Marx, etc—were boring to Janet and she found it very
hard to pay attention or write papers for this class. She said the
professor wasn't looking for an organized paper, he was looking for

130

thought on the readings. This course was once listed as a
requirement for her Political Science/Prelaw major, but it had
since been drOpped as a requirement. She earned a 3.5 in the course
and felt that grade showed that she was a good writer.

Because she liked her second-term writing professor so well, She
took his recommendation for the teacher she selected for her third
term class, which she had been to twice at the time of the interview.
Of this third-term professor, she said, "He seems to be somewhat-J
don't know if the term 'craSS' would be appropriate or not--he seems
to be somewhat rambunctious." Janet felt her second-term
professor spoiled her with his organization. Of her third-term
teacher, she said, "This man doesn't seem to have any idea when the
assignments are due."

Janet stayed in the same track, "Writing The American
Experience," for her third term. Research is a requirement of the
third term writing class at University A. There would be three
papers in Janet's class, the third one being the research paper.

During this interview, Janet said she thought she would do well
in the third term writing course even though she did not enjoy
research papers. She said She was going to do the best she could. On
her final questionnaire, Janet reported that she received a 4.0 in the
class. Also on the questionnaire, she wrote, "During my [second]
term of [writing] my professor was always there to help read over
my assignments and let me know what needed more work while my
[third] term professor left me on my own to figure out what was
needed. A general lack of organization made my job as a Student

131

that much harder during the [third] term because I had to try and
figure out what he wanted."

On her final questionnaire, Janet again rated her high school as
"Excellent" in its preparation of her for her college writing
experiences. She wrote, "I would give the same rating now, because
Mrs. _ not only expected high-quality work, but she did everything

(except write the paper) possible to help us excel"

Bill

Bill attended a suburban high school, from which 65-70% of the
students attend college, and graduated with a 3.44. He received
either an A- or a B in the four English classes he took which were
full-year classes named English 9, 10, 11, and 12. On both the first
and second questionnaires, Bill rated his school "Very Good" in its
preparation of him for college writing.

After he had attended Summer Orientation for University A,
based on a placement essay examination, Bill was offered an option
of a series of English classes focused on writing for science rather
than having to take the interdisciplinary courses that most students
take to fulfill their writing requirement. Bill is a physiology major.
He decided to take the series because its focus would be appropriate
for his major.

I interviewed Bill twice. The first time I talked to him was in
November when he was taking his first term of English. The
instructor was a graduate student working on a Ph. D. in English. Bill
liked the English course because it was aimed at science majors. He
felt it allowed him "to put down what I feel in exact details; [when]

132

writing everything else I can be abstract, but here I have to be
straight to the point." He was assigned four papers, one every two
weeks for eight weeks, and he kept a journal in which he was to
complete four pages a week to be handed in weekly. For the journal
he was instructed to write about some experience he had had each
week and then to write what he might have learned from that
experience.

Bill said his instructor assumed that the students in the class were
already good writers. The instruction was aimed at style or content,
but not at mechanics or manuscript form. There was a required Style
book which provided manuscript form.

Bill said that his biggest problem with writing in college was
giving enough specific details. He felt this was the main
improvement he could make in his writing, Since it was his
impression that details were not demanded in high school. I asked
what process he used for writing in college. He said that once a topic
is given, he narrows it to the Specific focus he will take in his paper
and then begins writing. He hands In a second draft for feedback
from the instructor, then re-writes again. He doesn't mind this re-
writing because he does it on his computer. So far in college he had
completed this process over a period of one week. In high school he
had used a similar process but without a computer. While the
teachers in high school considered the first copy they saw the final
copy, he was allowed to re-write for a new grade. The difference in
the tWO procedures at the two levels may seem a matter of semantics
until one considers that Bill is motivated. He felt few of his high
school classmates actually took advantage of the opportunity to re-

133

write for a new grade. In his college class, re-writing was part of the
required process. His college paper grades were a little bit lower
than the grades he received on papers in high school, but he said he
wasn't upset about that.

His class met three times a week. During one of those sessions
every other week, he met with a peer group of four students. Each
student brought a copy of his or her paper for all members of the
group. Attendance was very important to the peer group process, so
poor attendance was factored into the final grade. Bill was definite
that the peer group process helped him get a better grade. He had
felt this way in high school, too, but there was little use of formal
peer groups in his high school. Once in a while they got into groups
in high school classes, but usually it was in his social group after
school that he experienced mutual help with papers.

For Bill's first English class, students were required to read The
Double Helix and the science section each week from the Sunday
New York Times. One weekly assignment in the class was to
summarize an article from the Times. This was an in-class essay quiz
Since the students could not choose the article nor look at it while
writing. The teacher indicated that She wanted to test their memory
for the details of what they read. One of his assigned papers was
based on The Double Helix. The students were to select some idea or
theory which they had developed while reading the book and write
about it using the book as a source. One of the assignments in the
class was to go to the University A Museum and write about some
science object or display observed there. Another assignment
involved Bill and his classmates in a project designed by his

134

instructor. They wrote descriptions of career fields to be used by the
Students in the second class of this course series taught by their
instructor. Each Student interviewed a professor in a science field
(Bill chose a chemistry professor) and wrote a paper on the
interview. The goal was to make it clear to students who would be
reading the paper what a career in that field of science might be like.
The students in the next class would then use the papers to see if
they wanted to consider that field as a career field and choose that
field for a writing project the instructor would assign. Bill enjoyed
the project, especially the interview.

I asked Bill what he was learning about writing from these
assignments, and in response he described his experience when he
was at the museum. At first, he said, he just wrote down everything
he saw. Then as he started writing his paper, he realized that he was
"seeing" it again, using a lot of detail and being selective about the
detail He felt his journal brought out the same attention to detail as
he wrote about his experiences and how they affected him. Bill said
that in high school he used reference books for details, whereas now
he uses original sources. Because of this, he felt he was learning
more about writing with detail. He also felt that his assignment with
The Double Helix taught him not just to write about what the idea of
the writer of a book was but to reach for an original idea of his own
as a reaction to reading.

I asked Bill to compare and contrast high school and college
writing. He said that in college the papers must be more focused,
more detailed, and longer. It isn't his writing that is different now, it
is the content of the writing. "It's not that I'm a better writer or a

135

smarter writer, I just feel that I can express my feelings better,
that's all It isn't like style or format, that's all about the same."
When I asked Bill about writing in other classes, he said that he
erte out lab results in chemistry, but that in psychology they just
"fill in bubbles."
I asked Bill what he had observed about other students' writing

and how he compared his writing to theirs. He answered,

There's a couple of people in there [who] write—the way
they write and the words they use and how they put it
all together, it's so, it's just so much better to me than my
own writing, but when we get our papers back, our
grades are about the same. I think it either is how we
get our point across or just what we have in our papers. I
don't know, it seems like that even though there is
writing in [their papers] that seems to flow better and
looks much better and sounds much better, they're—they
just get about the same grades [as I do] I guess, about the
same.

Bill has met Students at University A whom he judges as not
ready for college writing. They have problems getting started with
papers, and they don't know how to set up a paper. He felt they
didn't like the idea of having to do a paper at all. He felt good that
he had come with an understanding of how to do a paper. He blamed
the students' high school if a student did not have any idea of how to
do a paper.

Bill was required to have a conference with his instructor
twice during the term. He had had both conferences at the time of
the interview and found them helpful. He learned about his problem
with examples and details during these conferences and found that

136

his instructor felt that he was showing improvement. During this
class, he realized how much he liked writing. He also enjoyed the
interview with the chemistry professor. During his second .
conference, his teacher told him about possible careers in science
writing, and he is now considering declaring a journalism minor.

My second interview with Bill was in April. By then he had
finished two terms of his English series. He had received a 3.5 from
the class we had discussed during his first interview and a 4.0 during
the second term class. He had had a different teacher during his
second term class, also a graduate student working on a doctorate in
the English Department. The second term class used fiction readings
instead of non-fiction. Bill said the teacher didn't teach writing Style
or mechanics, but on her feedback on writing drafts or in conferences
she let the students know if they were doing well on papers and
what their problems were. She also gave feedback so that students
knew how they were doing in class participation.

One of the papers he did in the second term was a reaction to an
assigned writing. The students read Fantastic Voyage TWO. Bill
decided to compare the happenings in the book to the Cold War. He
did research on the Cold War in books and magazines. He received
3.0 on that paper. The grade was a combination of two grades: 3.5
on the paper and 2.5 on his analysis of his peer group's reaction to
drafts of his paper. The students met with the peer group outside of
class time, although sometimes class was canceled to allow peer
group time. Bill was required to write about his group's on-going
reaction to his writing of the paper. He attributes his lower grade on
that section to his group's lack of meeting time. He did not have

137

much to write for this aspect of the total process, and it affected the
combination grade. His instructor felt that the paper flowed well and
was well organized. There were some marks on mechanical errors,
but not many.

The second paper Bill did in that class was a research paper on
laser surgery. He received 3.5 on that paper- When I asked Bill
about the comments on that paper, he said, "Well I got that back at
the end of the term, really late, so I really didn't look it over really
that much." There was no peer group process analysis as part of
that grade. Instead, each student had to submit an annotated
bibliography to Show his or her research. There was a requirement
that they had to include various kinds of sources, including kinds
that Bill usually wouldn't have included like other students' papers
or movies. Bill received a 4.0 on the bibliography. By grading
annotated bibliographies and peer group analyses, the teacher
stressed that the process and on-going evaluation was as important
as the finished product.

Part of the final grade was class participation. The students were
expected to voice their opinions on topics being discussed in class.
Attendance also counted. There was no final or midterm. On a
teacher questionnaire, Bill's instructor in this class said she graded
using a combination of 80% written work and 20% class participation.
Bill felt his improvement in writing and his class participation helped
him get a 4.0 in the class.

Bill was into the third week of the third term at the time of the
interview. He had selected the same instructor whom he had for the
first term of English. He didn't choose her over his second term

138

teacher. He would have been happy with either one, but his
schedule worked out better with the class taught by the first
instructor. When we talked, he had completed the first draft and
was working on the final draft of a research paper on astronomy.
From what he knew about other series of courses which students can
take to fulfill their writing requirement for University A, Bill is
certain he has done more research than most students do in their
first year. He assumes that is because he is taking the series which
focuses on writing for science.

The writing process third term involved giving the instructor and
members of his peer group a draft of each paper. There were four
members of each peer group. After receiving feedback from
members of his group and the instructor, Bill wrote his final draft.
The final draft of the paper on astronomy was due the week I talked
to Bill In the meantime, however, he had already begun the first
draft of the second paper, also a research paper. His first paper was
six pages long. His second paper must be eight to ten pages long.
There would be two more papers, which he assumed would be
research papers also. There would be no midterm or final

The students in the class had been assigned Stephen Hawking's A
Brief History of Time Bill said they would debate issues from the
book. Each students was responsible for introducing ideas for
debate during class discussion. In addition they must hand in a one-
page written response to each section of the book. Finally, there was
an option of keeping a journal For extra credit, the students could
write three pages a week on anything they were observing, learning,

or seeing.

139

Bill said he learned more in high school writing than he had
previously thought. He felt that some of the students he observed in
his college classes were better writers than he was, so he was
shocked at the grades he received. His grades were better than he
expected them to be. He actually thought college would be harder.
He did work very hard and his roommate teased him about the
amount of time he spent in the library. He had learned that he must
have details in his writing and felt that being more concrete and
specific was the improvement he saw the most from his high school
writing. He feels that college writing Stresses audience more than he
remembered high school writing doing. He didn't use a process
greatly different than what he did in high school except that his use
of a computer for writing meant that he made more changes and
wrote more drafts of his college papers.

Virtually all of the writing Bill did at University A was in his
English classes. Most of his tests in other classes were multiple
choice tests. In his third term Psychology class he could write an
optional paper for extra credit.

On his final questionnaire, Bill reported receiving 3.0 for the third
term class. Bill is glad he took the science writing series. He liked
the focus on science and felt he learned a lot about both writing and
science. Bill answered one question differently than many of the
others in the study. When asked what factor from a list of given
factors was most important to the effectiveness of the classes he
took, Bill ranked "Assignments" first and "Teacher" second. Only one
other student ranked "Assignments" first. I feel this has to do with
Bill being able to take these science-oriented English classes to fulfill

140

his writing requirement. Because his interests focus on science, these
assignments were very interesting to him and helped make the

entire class experience more satisfying.

Copelpstpns From Llniversigt A Interviews
We

The teachers these three students had are varied in their
educational levels. While the English Department instructors are
graduate students, those who teach in the interdisciplinary
department which offers the required writing course were mixed,
some with Ph. D.'S, some without. Most of these teachers were using
a variety of writing techniques: drafting, peer groups for editing and
feedback, conferencing, thematic units using literature to inspire and
suggest writing topics, student choice of specific writing topics, non-
traditional research, group projects, and journals. These techniques
not only helped keep students' interest, but served as catalysts for
learning. Bill and Janet felt they had learned more about writing
from their classes. Joe, who feels he learns more from himself as he
explores writing than from a teacher, didn't feel he had learned as
much. According to Joe, one of his teachers allowed that exploration,
the other did not. It would be easy to accept Joe's evaluation of his
two professors. One was nurturing and supportive and Joe had a
good experience; the other was rigid and demanding and Joe had a
bad experience. Another viewpoint, however, might be entirely
different. Joe's first teacher, as described by Joe himself, was
unusual to the point of eccentricity in her lifestyle and elements of
learning which she introduced to the classroom. Could it be, then,

141

that Joe's first teacher accepted any imaginative writing regardless of
Style or format while Joe's second teacher asked Joe to adhere to
Standards established by the department which included Specific
requirements of style, content, and format? I think the answer can
clearly be that either viewpoint may be right. What is learned is not
that either teacher is a poor teacher, since there is not enough
information from this study to make that judgement, but that the
combination of a teacher and a student can result in a poor writing
situation.

Janet felt that one of her teachers could have been better if he
had been more organized. She found him a hindrance to the process
at times. Nonetheless, because Janet was determined to succeed, this
professor was not cause for her to do poorly in the class. While Janet
and Bill described how they had improved in their writing both in
the interview and on the final questionnaires, Joe wrote on the final

questionnaire, when asked how he had improved, "I don't believe I

have."
Student Preparation and Attitude

There are other factors that may be a source of Joe's writing
problems. One factor is his preparation for college writing. His
description of his own high school program Shows that he did not
select a good variety of classes for college preparation, although his
high school offers a good variety. One could fault the high school for
not requiring Joe to take a literature course at any time during his
last two years. Joe's experience in tenth grade English caused him to
be wary, and he selected classes from then on over which he had

142

some control. His favorite high school teacher taught all but two
classes he took: his tenth grade class in which he earned Di», and a
journalism class. In college, Joe fell into the same habit. He did not
progress in his writing skill with the professor who evaluated him
with the 2.0. He reacted to that situation by signing up for a third
term section taught by the professor he had liked from first term.
Joe's personality may be a block to his learning any kind of writing
other than that with which he is comfortable.

Bill, on the other hand, is very motivated to succeed. He saw each
assignment as a challenge. In Bill's mind, the assignment was the
important aspect of the class. He liked both of his professors, but he
did not at any time in the questionnaires or the interview, discuss
the personalities of his teachers as a contributing factor to his success
or failure as a writer. Bill's preparation for writing was solid. He did
well in a high school writing program which offers only the four
years of traditional English. While he did not describe doing a lot of
writing in high school, he felt he learned a lot from what he did.

Bill's very receptive personality is extremely conducive to
benefitting from learning situations.

His hard work was a major component for Bill. When I asked, on
the second questionnaire, what factors contributed to success or
failure, Bill answered, "Hard work and a lot of time is what made my
grade. I worked hard and I got the grade that I worked for. " In
answer to the same question on the questionnaire, Joe and Janet
mentioned their teachers or the format of the classroom. Janet did
well in her classes, nonetheless, because she was motivated to
succeed. The same teachers, assignments, and classroom styles can

143
be seen as challenges by one student and obstacles by another. Joe
requires a very specific Situation to feel nurtured as a writer. Joe
also only wants to write in a certain way. His failures don't change
hiSStyle of writing; they merely motivate him to avoid situations like
the ones that caused him failure. Janet succeeded as a writer.
Throughout school, she perceived herself as a good writer and every
experience she has had has confirmed that perception. She had an
excellent preparation before entering University A. She did well in a
four-year, four-class format which was aimed at college prep
students and had rigorous standards. Thus, despite her
dissatisfaction with the University in general and her dissatisfaction
with one of her two writing teachers, Janet still performed well in
her classes. Bill did not even consider criticizing his teachers or the
classroom and assignments they designed. He could have been
critical of his first writing teacher for asking Students to do a
research project which she intended to use in her second class,
perhaps feeling that she had students doing work which she should
have done herself. Judging by our conversation about that project,
however, it never even entered his mind to find fault with the
assignment. Bill always focused on the assignment and what he

could do to complete it well

iv ' l

The students at University A had an interesting variety of classes
to choose from. Despite the guidelines which dictate certain
requirements of each of the three classes in the series, the classes
were quite different from section to section. There were several

144

tracks of the required class to choose from, based on themes. The
University required the readings to be by American writers, but
there was not a required set of readings. Teachers could choose their
own readings to assign, depending on how they chose to introduce
the thematic topic they were teaching. Assignments also were left to
the teachers, although they were required to assign a minimum
number of pages and writing and introduce certain kinds of writing.
The option which Bill had, the writing focused on science, was an
excellent option for skilled students with science majors. The variety
available at University A was much broader than was available at
any of the other three smaller universities.

It was disappointing, nonetheless, to realize that the Students
were not being asked to use or practice their writing Skills in any
Other classes they took. In one class, Bill could write an optional
paper for extra credit. Janet wrote several papers in one of her
classes which were not required to have a " paper format." Some
tests had Short answer questions which might give practice for
writing skills, but most tests given at University A were multiple
choice tests. Freshman writers would improve in the use of their
writing skills if given the opportunity to do so across the curriculum.

Arugulamn

Bill and Janet learned that college writing was different than high
school writing. They learned that it is more focused and that the
writer must keep an audience in mind, something they didn't find
stressed in high school They learned that they had to be specific,
using more details in their writing. Bill learned that he must use

145

original sources to seek those details. Bill also learned about many
non-traditional sources for research. While papers are longer in
college, they are also more focused. Janet says She has to fight
adding extraneous information in order to make a paper longer, but
she also learned much more about the kind of detail and Style that
adds to a paper and appeals to an audience. Bill and Janet could be
said to present a good picture of articulation. They were well
prepared to meet the expectations of University A in high schools
with solid four-year programs of English. They did well in the
classes they took in their freshman year in college and can list
specific skills which they learned. They have confidence in
themselves as college writers. Joe is an example of poor articulation.
His high school had a good program available but did not require Joe
to take four full years nor require him to select a rounded program
of college preparation English. Neither of Joe's college teachers were
able to move him forward in his writing, whether nurturing or

demanding in their motivational style. Joe was resistant to change.

niv i B
laurie
laurie attended a rural high school During her four years of high
school she earned almost a perfect 4.0 (3.974). She earned an A in
every English class she took. Those classes were English 9,
Speech/ English 10, American Literature (in 1 1th grade), and College
English (in 12th grade). All of these classes are full year courses at
her high school. After taking College English, laurie took an

146

Advanced Placement test and earned a 3; thus, she was able to earn
credit for the only English class required of freshmen at University B.

When I had asked Laurie to rate her high school at the end of her
senior year, she had checked "Very Good" for the preparation she
received for college writing. At the end of her freshman year, she
repeated that rating. laurie enjoyed college, and she had no trouble
with assignments which involved writing.

I talked to Laurie twice during her second semester at University

B, once in March, when She was home for spring break, and once in
April. In March, Laurie told me about a speech class she had taken
during the first semester. The speeches had to be written first. The
instructor felt it was important that the Students define an audience
for the Speech and write specifically for that audience. While they
could use only an outline of the paper when delivering the speech,
they were still required to write it as a paper first. The graduate
student who taught the class gave them a booklet which contained a
sample paper. While laurie had used MLA style parenthetical
notation when doing research in high school, her instructor required
a footnote page. The first speech he assigned was called a
motivational sequence. The students had to present a problem and
then present solutions. Her instructor collected the papers during
the drafting stage, then gave them back with comments. laurie's
paper contained comments about her need to adapt her speech to the
chosen audience. The second paper written in the class was not for a
speech. Instead, the students did a videotape analysis. They were
taped in conversation with three other students, then each of the
four students analyzed the verbal and nonverbal skills of the other

147

three. With these three critiques and her own impressions of her
skills, Laurie then had to write a paper analyzing her verbal and
nonverbal skills.

' laurie had two criticisms of this professor. Even though she did
well in the class because of her ability to write, the professor had
told the class that "everything [they] learned in high school was
wrong and [they] had to start allover." laurie felt the comment was
unwarranted and didn't take the advice. She also felt the instructor
could have been clearer as to his expectations. She received B's on
the papers and a B+ in the class, but she was working for an A, and
she is not sure why She earned a B on her papers. She did approach
the professor for an explanation after the first paper, but she did not
find his answer adequate to explain his grading. The answer, as she
understands it, is that she received a B because she did not write an
A paper. It was Laurie's feeling that the professor was looking for
specific attributes which he was not able to make clear to the
students.

laurie also did five papers in a biology class. The professor was
very accepting of the students' Styles of writing as long as the
content was clear. laurie liked doing the papers because she could
pick the topic. They were to write about controversies in biological
science. laurie received an A on each of the papers. She also wrote
a paper in her computer class and received a B.

A ten-page paper and two five-page papers were required for
laurie's class called Introduction to Elementary Teaching. The
professor didn't specify a style or format, only the required length.
The longer paper was autobiographical, relating her educational

148

experience. The shorter paper was to be a research paper on an
educational issue. laurie felt comfortable doing these papers
without specific instruction on format or documentation since She
had done research in high school. She wrote the papers on teenage
suicide and latchkey children, researching in books, journals, and
magazines. Laurie did not know how she had done on these papers
when I talked to her. The professor had indicated that he would not
be returning the papers until after he had given them their final
grades. The papers would be available in the summer. Tests in the
class counted much more than the papers in the final grade. Since
laurie scored in the 905 on each test, which were multiple choice and
true/ false, She was not worried about her grade.

Although Laurie does well on all tests, She prefers essay tests.
laurie's philosophy and computer professors used essay questions
for testing. laurie prefers essay tests because she can choose how
she answers and the words she uses, and She is able to Show what
she knows about the subject.

laurie will take the required writing class offered to SOphomores
at University B, and she feels She has things to learn in that class.
She is glad she had the option of taking the Advanced Placement test,
however, because she does not feel She would have needed the
freshman class from what she knows about it. Many of the students
who lived in her dorm came to laurie for help on papers. Some were
frustrated with their lack of ability. A lot of them did not feel that
their professors gave enough instructions for them to proceed with
their papers. laurie felt these students needed Step by step
instructions to write a paper. None of them blamed high school

149

writing instruction; most blamed the lack of directions or instruction
in the college classes. laurie remembers that one of her high school
classmates who was having trouble with papers in college was a B
student in her College Writing class in 12th grade.

While laurie wrote on her final questionnaire that she felt the
classes at her high school could have taught grammar more
intensively, she said in her interview that her professors did not
mark anything about her grammar, spelling, or punctuation. On her
final questionnaire, she wrote that if she has a problem with writing,
it would be making spelling or grammar errors. laurie felt that she
had grown as a writer during her freshman year even though she did
not take a writing class. She felt she had become very independent
and confident about writing assigned papers on a variety of topics.

Mary

Mary attended a rural high school, one of the smaller schools in
this study. Approximately 50% of the students attend college after
graduation. The school offers six full-year selections for college
preparatory students: a year each for 9th and 10th graders and four
selections for juniors and seniors. Mary selected one class each year,
including American Literature in her junior year and College English
in her senior year. She received an A in each course. On her first
questionnaire, Mary described a variety of writing in those four
classes, and she answered that she felt she wrote "quite a bit." She
rated her preparation for college as " Excellent." After taking the
semester writing course which is required of all freshmen at

150
University B, Mary reaffirmed her evaluation of her preparation,
writing, "My experiences in high school helped me greatly in college."

Mary took the required writing class during her second semester
in college. I talked with Mary twice during that semester, once in
March when she was home for spring break, and once in April.

Mary was taught by a graduate assistant. She liked the routine
of the class. Her instructor had the students break into peer groups
of four. The peer groups were used constantly during the process of
writing a paper, first for help with theme development, then for
editing and proof-reading. There were two times during the process
of writing a paper that the students had to bring a draft to class.
They brought copies for everyone in their groups the second time.
The instructor provided a list of questions to help group members
evaluate papers. The instructor also took a copy of the second draft
which She returned with comments.

Mary said her grade in the class was to be based on three
writings which she would choose from her portfolio of writing at the
end of the semester, a journal, a final exam essay, and class
participation. On her second questionnaire, Mary reported receiving
an A in the class. I

The first time I talked to Mary she said that the class was
working on a paper based on a short story by J. D. Salinger. Mary
felt this paper was harder than any paper She had written SO far.
During the course of this paper, the teacher required that each
Student have a conference with her. Mary also felt free to approach
this teacher any time during class work periods and during her office

151

hours, and indicated that the instructor was even Open to receiving
calls at home if necessary.

When I talked to the director of the freshman writing program
at University B, he gave me a copy of the departmental syllabus for
the course. Seven writing assignments were very clearly described
on this syllabus. From Mary's description of her assignments in the
course, her instructor followed the syllabus.

Mary said that she did not do this kind of process writing in high
school She had experienced peer groups in high school; however,
the focus of the group's work was proofreading. Mary felt that the
peer groups were helpful, but she also felt she was more helpful to
her classmates than they were to her. She said, "I feel like I could
really have someone be more tuned into my writing than some of the
comments I'm getting." The entire class (approximately 20
students) discussed past writing experiences during an early class
session. She concluded that her experience was much stronger than
many she heard described. Some Students had had very little
writing in high school, while others described programs that were
focused heavily on research writing. The members of her peer
group were three students who had not participated in strong
programs of writing in high school

In addition to the seven papers, Mary's class wrote a journal in
which they made three entries a week. The instructor looked at the
journals at the end of the semester as part of the evaluation process
she went through to determine a semester grade. The journal
entries were focused on the theme "What Is Normal, Anyway?"
Mary enjoyed journal writing. She was not anxious about her grade

152

in the class because she had good feed-back from the instructor and
high grades on papers. In addition, she was very thorough in her
journal entries and attended every class session.

Mary was satisfied with her instructor's response to her as a
writer. She said, "I am learning to write for her style." She reported
this positively, as if it were the way to succeed in a writing class.
She felt her success with writing was due to a program of good
writing and language experiences beginning in elementary school
and continuing throughout her schooling. Mary did not feel her
freshman English class in college was as difficult as it could have
been. She felt she was more challenged in high school. She wrote a
lot of literary analysis in high school, so she thought the college
experience should have more reading and response of the type she
was used to.

Unlike laurie, Mary did not have many writing experiences
outside of her English class. She is a business major taking classes in
math and accounting. One course she had second semester, a
psychology class, had essays due on a regular basis. In addition, the
psychology tests were all essay tests. She does well on essay tests
and prefers them to multiple choice tests. She dOes not think she
will use her writing ability much in her major. She also does not
envision herself using a lot of writing in a career as an accountant.

In April I talked to Mary about the progress of her English class.
She felt she had learned to be more specific and detailed in her
writing. The assignments were designed to encourage the use Of
details to back up Opinions. She had written a movie review and a

1 5 3
literary critique. In those papers she was to be as objective as
possible, backing up each statement with evidence.

During a second required conference with her instructor, Mary
was required to bring three papers from her portfolio which She was
considering re-writing for her final portfolio evaluation. During the
conference, the instructor gave her suggestions for rewriting. At
the end of the semester, Mary would submit her portfolio with the
three final drafts, her journal, and a take-home essay which would
serve as the final exam.

Between our two interviews, Mary discovered that she would
have a paper due in her accounting class. She had to write a
company to have three years of annual reports sent to her. Then, in
a written evaluation, she was to analyze the company based on their
annual reports. She was required to read books on business strategy
and refer to them in her paper. The professor stressed that he
expected a polished final product.

Mary also took a course on the use of the library. This course was
only for half a semester. Mary easily earned an A. There was a
paper required to Show mastery of library use, research techniques,
and bibliography format. I

Mary said in our March interview that her required English
course was not challenging. In April, I asked her if she would say
that the class was necessary. She was Strong in her opinion that it
was. She said that she improved as a writer. (On her final
questionnaire, She wrote, "I am definitely more detailed, concise and
write papers I never dreamt I would be writing a year ago. ") She
added, however, that not every section of the course is the same.

154
She knows Students who had been required to submit a final draft of

a paper each week without experiencing any of the writing processes
which her instructor required. She thought the class was easy and
even though she feels her writing has improved, she thinks she could
have easily gone on to the sophomore required class without having
taken the freshman class. She took a CLEP test offered by the
university, but She did not succeed in waiving the freshman
requirement. She felt that "on that test [she] did not get to express
[her] ability to write." One reason she gave to support having a
required freshman English class is that, in her opinion, students take
college more seriously than high school. She felt her high school
program was equally as good and very intensive, but she feels that
many of her high school classmates did not work hard in high school
and didn't take the class seriously. She thinks the motivation is
better in college, an opinion held by at least one researcher (Berlin
Rhetoric and Reality 3).

Mary's instructor filled out a questionnaire. In answer to a
question about the greatest strength of a good student, she answered,
"A willingness to see an initial draft as a piece of writing subject to
change." In contrast, she feels a bad habit is bang "resistant to
revising work. When they break out of the 'one draft is enough'
pattern, their writing improves greatly." Mary's description of the
sections of this course taken by her classmates suggests that some
students are never asked to arrive at this realization which Mary's
instructor deems so important. Another question on the instructor
questionnaire asked about section discrepancy. The instructor
answered, "There is a great deal of variety in approaches to teaching

. 155
[this course] within the department. I try to place a great deal of
emphasis on developing the ability to generate ideas, focus and
organize work and develop critical thinking skills. Many of my
colleagues use a Similar approach, while some are concerned mainly
with the finished product." Neither Mary nor her instructor indicated
whether or not the courses they were describing were taught by '
English department professors, graduate assistants, or both.

Joan

Joan graduated from a suburban high school which sends 65-70%
of its students on to colleges. In addition to offering three levels of
English for four years, Joan's high school offered an additional array
of electives including Business English, Composition I and II, Creative
Writing, and Advanced Placement English. This is an unusual
number of course offerings (twenty different course titles) for a
school with a student body of approximately 650 students.

Joan did not take advantage of any of the unusual offerings in her
school's curriculum. She took four full-year classes: English 9, 10, 1 1,
and 12. She did not qualify for the Honors sections of those classes.
Joan chose not to list the grades She earned in high school She
graduated with a 3.1 grade point average. In her first questionnaire,
Joan indicated that she had to write at least six pieces of writing each
year to meet requirements to pass English in her high school. In
addition, she reported writing in history, Spanish, anatomy, and
band. Joan rated her preparation for college writing as "Excellent."
She reaffirmed that evaluation a year later, after taking the
freshman writing course at University B. She gives credit in

1 5 6
particular to one teacher who taught her for two of her four years in
high school. I asked each student to attach an essay to the first
questionnaire. Joan's was clear and showed a knowledge of writing;
however, a lack of sophistication with wording and other miscues
Show the kinds of problems that Joan said (during our interview) She
was having in college.

Joan is a biology major at University B. She considers her major
pre-medical, since she wants to try to be accepted at one of
Michigan's medical schools. She received a 3.0 for her first semester
of college. At the time of our interview, she estimated the second
semester was running close to 3.3. I interviewed Joan only once,
during the second semester of her freshman year. She had taken
the required freshman English class first semester and had earned a
B+. Joan had written six papers in the class, each three to four pages
typed. She remembered that some of the types they had done were
analytical, narrative, and descriptive. Her descriptions seem to
match the course syllabus I had obtained from the director. There
was a process used for each paper which involved peer groups of
three for help in editing and proofreading, and grading of a draft by
the teacher, which then had to be rewritten. Joan handed the re-
written papers back to the professor. He kept them for final grading.
She said she did not get them back with a final grade. She earned
either an A— or a B+ on the drafts which were graded before her re-
writes.

During the first semester Joan also did a six-page research paper
for biology. She received a B+ on that paper. For that paper, the
students were instructed to buy a book which explained how to

157

document the research and set up the manuscript. She said the book
was for use with scientific writing. She didn't remember the title of
the book or the style of documentation. Joan also wrote a paper on a
psychOlogical issue in her psychology class second semester. At the
time I talked to her she was working on a second psychology paper,
a reaction to information in her textbook. The psychology papers,
three to four pages each, could involve research if the student chose.

Joan explained her grades, less than an A on most papers, but at
least a B, as the result of wording problems. She said that She rarely
received feedback on any of her papers which suggested problems
with the content. Often, however, there would be other comments
which indicated problems with her wording. She said there was
never a specific item marked or a correction so that she could see
exactly what was wrong. Joan said she was strong in punctuation
and grammar. The written comments would more often be ones, such
as "re-read sentence," which suggested that she had worded her
sentences incorrectly or unclearly. Joan tried to correct this wording
problem as she did re—writes, but she was clearly frustrated about it.
She didn't think she could improve. Her statement to me showed
that Joan did not always speak with grammatical correctness. She
said, "It seems like every paper I've wrote(sic) . . .l've wrote has
always had a 're-read this sentence.‘ " Joan concluded, "I'm just not
writing the sentences right." She wasn't sure she would improve.
She said, "It's kind of set in me." It is highly likely that she is not as
aware of syntax and wording as she would need to be to write A
papers on a college level

158

Joan said her English grade was based on the six final papers.
Each counted 1/ 6 of the grade. The final was a rewrite of a paper.
Her teacher did not lecture the class or present lessons in writing,
language, literature, or any language arts subject. The writing
process was the content of the course. Her teacher's format was to
have the students do two papers, have a conference, and then re-
write one of the two; thus, they re—wrote three of their six papers.
Joan said she did no reading of literature or any other reading for the
class except of a magazine which she had chosen for a writing
assignment on identifying audience.

Joan did not know where her re-written papers were. She knew
that her instructor was keeping them in a folder. She thought maybe
he would be giving them to the sophomore writing class teacher
although he did not say this was what he would do. There were
three required conferences’with the instructor during the semester,
which Joan didn't mind, but which she did not find helpful She felt
the teacher seemed positive about her writing. In their conferences
he said that every paper she wrote could be an excellent paper based
on her tOpics and content. She concluded, "He told me if I just
cleaned up the grammaticals, that I'd get an A on every paper."

(Joan defined "grammaticals" as the sentence structure; she gave as
examples fragments or misuse of words or phrases.) Joan said that
one thing She liked about the conferences was that class was
cancelled for each of the three weeks when they had conferences. On
her final questionnaire, Joan wrote that the only change she had
made as a writer is that she checked her sentence structure more

carefully.

1 5 9

On the final questionnaire, Joan praised this teacher and gave him
credit for running an excellent writing course. During the interview,
I asked Joan if she knew his Status in the department of English. She
did not know whether he was a graduate assistant or a member of
the English Department's full-time staff. Because she called him Mr.
__ , and because he came to take the place of their first teacher who
left for another job after the first week, She guessed that he might

have been one of the graduate assistants.

Cpnelusipps ftom Univetsity B Ipterviews
Ibelearhers

The two English teachers who taught Mary and Joan used very
similar formats including peer group work and requiring multiple
drafts. Mary's teacher used more literature and seemed more
involved with her students than Joan's teacher. Mary's teacher was
one of the graduate assistants who teach almost half of the sections
of the freshman English course. It was not clear whether Joan's
teacher was a graduate assistant or a younger member of the faculty.
Both Joan and Mary liked the format of their classes and found their
teachers well-prepared and likable.

W293
Despite liking their teachers, neither Mary nor Joan reported

getting a lot of help or benefit from the class. Mary said she writes
much better now, but did not feel that the class was as challenging as
it could have been. Joan seemed to have problems with writing that
she could not fully understand and, therefore, which she was doomed

to repea

writing a
her," yet
her back]
herself 0:
standard
attention
myself, sf
the misc
would sa
oral diall
student I
the nude
SDEIIdinj
3150 Cam
refleqec‘
high sch
H0n0rs (
had a 3.
fieshma
"Hitting
college.

Writing

highly a
abs“. h.
“Ilium g

or a ‘31)

160

to repeat with every paper. Joan has a positive feeling about her
writing ability. She feels that her problems with wording are " set in
her," yet She does not display the level of understanding to discuss
her background within her family or her neighborhood to reveal to
herself or me whether her problems come from years of non-
standard use of the language in everyday discourse or lack of
attention to detail. I am not capable of making such judgements
myself, since I know nothing about Joan's background. Judging by
the miscues I have seen in her writing and heard in her Speech, I
would say that many of her writing errors stem from patterns of her
oral dialect. These are some of the hardest errors to correct since the
Student cannot merely develop a sophistication with the language or
the understanding of her mistakes by studying a few books or
spending time in a semester of freshman English. I would guess, but
also cannot confirm, that some of Joan's grades in high school
reflected this same problem. Joan did not tell me what she got in
high school courses, but She did tell me that she did not qualify for
Honors or AP English. She was in Regular English in high school and
had a 3.1 GPA, so I can guess She was a B student. Her B+ in
freshman English at University B shows that she did have good _
training in high school English and that her writing is adequate for
college. I did not feel that Joan wanted to work very hard at her
writing skills, however, despite her desire to compete in such a
highly academic field as medicine. She seemed rather noncommittal
about her peer group, her conferences with her instructor, and re—
writing papers. She said She used a word processor in college instead
of a typewriter as she did in high school. When I asked her if she

161

did more re-writing as a result, her answer was "No." It seemed her
favorite weeks were when class was cancelled to give time for
conferences.

Mary is very motivated to do well and has an excellent
background. Despite her disappointment at not being able to waive
the freshman English class, She used the class well to improve her
already good writing. When Mary wrote on her final questionnaire
that she is writing papers she never dreamed she would be able to, I
think a major factor is a year's worth of maturing and new
experiences to write about. It was probably good that Mary took her
freshman English class second semester so that she would have more
maturity to bring to the class.

Laurie is probably the best writer of the three University B
students. Ironically, even though Laurie did not take Freshman
English, she may have done more writing in her freshman year than
either Joan or Mary. Certame she did as much. With no instruction
being provided in the classrooms for most of those papers, laurie
earned an A on almost every one. In fact, she was quite
disappointed with the B+ in her Speech class because She felt the
teacher, while suggesting that their high school instruction "was
wrong," had been unclear about his own expectations.

' se
The departmental syllabus for University B's freshman English
course is very specific and clear. While teachers are not required to
follow the syllabus exactly, it suggests the kinds of writing
assignments they should assign and indicates how many different

162

kinds Should be assigned for the course. The teachers who adhere
closely to the suggested assignments will be providing students a
variety of writing experiences and a good quantity for a semester of
writing. Both of the teachers in the study did follow the syllabus
fairly closely. Mary's teacher, who is a graduate assistant, would be
required to follow the suggested format. If there is a lack of
consistency in content among the sections of freshman English, it
might be because, as several individuals have suggested in this
study, all faculty members, especially tenure-stream faculty, do not
feel an obligation to follow either content suggested by the
department or methods suggested by current theory. Some sections,
therefore, may not have the format found in Mary and Joan's classes.
The use of peer writing groups, multiple drafts, re-writing, and other
such aspects of the writing process are not required of everyone who
teaches freshman English at University B. One student at University
B, who was not an interview subject, wrote on his final questionnaire
about a professor who "was a horrible, boring speaker who went off
on tangents about the good ol [sic] days when everything was
perfect." This student spoke of putting off writing a paper until the
night before it was due. He mentioned a poor attendance record. His
grade in the class, nonetheless, was a B. This suggests that the
student was not put through a multiple-draft writing process, was
not part of a peer group process which would have required better
attendance, and, it appears, was judged only on final products. He
had an experience far different than Joan or Mary's.

One very Strong aspect of the total program at University B is the
quantity of writing that the these three freshmen did in other

163

classes. The difference between their experiences and the
experiences of the students interviewed at University A is startling.
The three University B students wrote papers in almost every class
they had taken, from speech to accounting. Their professors were
also more inclined to use essay tests as Opposed to multiple choice
tests. This back-up from other departments certainly conveys the
message that writing is an important and useful activity in many
fields of study and that there is a purpose for learning how to write
well The widespread use of writing across the curriculum is

commendable.

Mn

laurie was well served by an articulation program in which both
her high school and college participate, the Advanced Placement
Program. Laurie was certainly capable of writing well in her classes
without having to take the freshman English class. She was well
prepared at the high scth level, but if there was any doubt, the use
of the AP exam helps the university have an outside opinion on the
preparation of individual high schools.

Mary also took part in an articulation program provided by
University B, a CLEP test which students take before they take
summer orientation. Mary was not able to waive freshman English
based on the results of the test. She indicated to me that She didn't
think the test provided an adequate indication of her writing ability.
Her writing ability was confirmed by her A in freshman English;
however, and she did not find the class a total waste of time. She
said on her final questionnaire, "I learned quite a bit this semester.

164

It just expanded and was more detailed than my high school
writing." The fact that Mary's instructor was a graduate assistant
shows that the program University B has established to train and
monitor graduate assistants can have very satisfactory results.

Joan had what she considers a very good writing program in high
school She says she does not remember being criticized in high
school for the wording problem which was her major Stumbling block
in college. She did not change much as a writer in freshman English.
The fault could lie in several places. Why didn't Joan have an idea of
this problem with wording when she was in high school? Many high
school teachers do not deal with stylistic considerations when
teaching writing because it seems too judgmental. Judging style does
not lend itself to the concrete, "this is right, this is wrong, ten points
off here, five points off here" method of evaluation used by some
teachers of writing. Trying to correct a student's speech and
wording patterns is often very political as well. Sometimes such
judgements are construed by students as judgements on family and
culture (Daniels 1983, Rose 1989). In the high school community, the
teacher often knows the parents and family, often lives near them,
and is certainly subject to their criticism. As a result, a student may
not only come to college with these wording problems still part of
her or his writing, but may also come with no idea that the problem
exists. Joan's teacher at University B felt Joan had a problem with
wording. College teachers are more often insulated from the feelings
of the Students' communities and families. They can criticize a
student's use of colloquialisms, poor grammar, and awkward
structure without as much concern about ramifications beyond the

165

rhetorical ones as high school teachers have. The reaction of Joan's
teacher, however, was not effective. Joan remembers talking to him
about the problems he found with her writing. She learned she had
to clean up what she called her "grammaticals." The teacher also
commented in writing on Joan's papers. Joan knew something was
wrong because she was being asked to "reread sentence," but what
she didn't learn was exactly what was wrong with the sentences she
was being urged to reread. When she conferenced with the teacher
to hear his explanation, she did not learn how to do something about
her wording problems. Even though he was asking Joan to rewrite
papers, he was not handing back the rewritten papers with new
grades and comments on them, so She wasn't learning as much as
possible from the process of rewriting. Perhaps Joan herself isn't
working hard enough to solve this problem. She admitted that even
with a word processor, she doesn't rewrite any more than she did in
high school If there is a failure here, it may not be considered a
failure of articulation. Joan is a solid B student from high school who
went on to become a solid B student in college. No one would call
this failure. But there is still a writing problem here which no one

has been able or willing to address.

llamas

The freshman writing course at University C is a onesemester
course taught entirely by graduate assistants supervised by the
director of freshman writing. When I talked to the director of
freshman writing, she told me that most of the freshmen take this

one course. She was amazed at the result of my survey which

166

revealed that of the five students in the Study who attended
University C, only one had taken the course. One student had
received credit for the course through the Advanced Placement
Program. One student had chosen to be in the Honors section of the
course, which, although it has the same course name and number, is
taught under the auspices of the Honors College and, therefore, is not
controlled by the English Department at all One student had taken a
course called Technical Communications offered by the Engineering
Department which will fulfill the writing requirement instead of the
English course. The fourth Student had taken part in an

experimental linking of two English Department courses. One was
the required freshman course, but because of its linkage with the
other English course, its content was different. This option might
have been chosen by an English major or a liberal arts major who
would want more English credits than those earned by taking the one
class which all university freshmen must take. As a result of it being
linked to another English class, the course would have had more of
an emphasis on literature and literature-based writing. This
experiment was dropped after only one year, ironically the year
during which the students in the study were freshmen. It was the
director's opinion, therefore, that the experiences I would be
describing in my study would not be the experiences of the typical
freshman except for those of Carol, who took the traditional course.

Carol
Carol may have had the most intensive background in English of
any of the students in the study. Her articulation experience is the

167

reverse of what most people assume will happen when a student
moves from high school to college. In high school, Carol took
Advanced Placement English in her senior year from a teacher with a
Ph. D. who had once taught at the college level. Carol received a B4-
the first semester and an A- the second semester. She had been in
Honors English classes during her first three years in high school and
had received an A, a B+, and an A during the three years. She also
took a speech class during her senior year and earned an A. Carol
attended the largest high school in the study, a suburban school
which sends 70% of its Students on to college. After this intense four
years of high school, Carol went on to University C where she took
the basic freshman composition course from a graduate assistant who
was an English major working on her Masters Degree. In retrospect,
Carol herself realizes how unusual such a transition was. She wishes
she had decided to take the AP test so that she could have waived
the required composition course. She thought the course would offer
a review of grammar and mechanics, instruction she felt she needed,
but it didn't. Not only does Carol think her high school teacher was
more challenging and a more experienced and knowledgeable
teacher, she also thinks that her Advanced Placement class in high
school was made up of much smarter Students who were better
writers and more motivated Students than those in her college class.
She graduated with over three hundred students, many of whom
were much better writers than she was. There were two sections of
AP English offered during her senior year. Only about ten of her
classmates attend University C. Carol did not seem to think that she
had been a good writer in high school because of her B average in a

168

pool of students which contained many excellent writers. In
comparison, she found herself wanting in ability. She did not realize
that at University C she would rank as one of the better writers. This
perception caused her to decline the chance to take the AP test. She
thought she needed freshman English. On her final questionnaire,
Carol reported receiving an A in the course, but in response to the
request, " Describe how you have changed as a writer in the past
year," Cami answered, "I don't think I've changed at all."

In Carol's estimation, the graduate assistant who taught the class
worked hard and did a good job of setting up a classroom where ‘
students could learn. Carol felt "She [the instructor] still made some
improvements with other Students." I interviewed Carol once, in
February, after she had been in the class for one month. The
semester would run until April 20. By the time I interviewed Carol,
she had written two papers. The teacher had a theme for all of the
writing, "Our World." The "worl " in the theme was the student's
personal world. After six or seven papers, all of the writing would
be combined into one large autobiographical paper. There would be
no library research. All of the writing was to be from personal
experience or based on information from non—traditional research
such as interviews.

Carol described the teacher's format. The students were in peer
groups of two or three. The first draft they wrote was evaluated by
- the peer group. There was an evaluation sheet for the students to
use which covered such aspects as content, organization, Style, and
mechanics. After a rewrite based on peer-group feedback, a second
draft was written for the instructor. Each student had a personal

169

conference with the instructor and then wrote a final draft to be
submitted for a grade. When the students were to have their
individual conferences, class was cancelled for one of the three
sessions a week. The departmental guidelines stipulate the process
which Carol described, including a conference with the instructor for
every paper. Carol's instructor had not returned the paper when I
talked to Carol, but in her conference the instructor had already told
Carol she would receive an A. On the first of the two papers the
entire group passed all of the papers around and then discussed all
of them. There were thirty students in the class. Of these
experiences, Carol preferred the individual conference with the
instructor. Carol also preferred larger peer groups. Although three
or four is typical, in high school Carol remembered working with
seven or eight and felt that livelier discussions were the result of
working in a larger group.

The instructor hoped the students would work from models,
papers which She provided for students to read. She felt that if she
provided too many rules about the papers that the students would
be stifled. Carol and her class had received no lessons on aspects of a
paper such as introduction, conclusion, etc. Instead, the class read
and discussed the models which were provided and then each
student worked on a paper.

In addition to the papers, each student kept a journal of
personal experiences as a resource for the papers and additional
practice in writing. The students were to write three pages a week,
preferably a page each on three different days, about "whatever."

At the time of the interview, the instructor had not yet asked to see

170

the journals. Carol said "She'll read them if she wants them. " Carol
said that she was not entirely sure what her instructor wanted in the
journal Since She had given no instruction except "write."

Carol's instructor filled out a questionnaire on which she wrote of
the students, "They are far too interested in the titles or what I
wanted in their papers. I tried to teach them that each paper has its
own internal logic—and that there are some ways that are better

than others . . . most Students are too rigid, want the easy way out. "

 

Carol used a computer to do her college papers. In high school
she wrote by hand and then typed the papers. She did not think She
would like working on a computer, but after having had the
experience, she said she would not switch back to hand writing.
When using a word processor, she definitely felt that she rewrote
more. Carol wished that the writing class were more demanding,
perhaps including reading and literaturebased assignments, since
she enjoyed English and would work harder if necessary.

Carol is an elementary education major. She had not done much
writing in other classes at University C when I talked to her. In a
government/ social studies course She had written a few essays . The
professor was pretty strict about how these essays were to be
written and made a lot of corrections. After Carol questioned some
of his corrections, to her surprise, he agreed with her. It surprised
her that he agreed so quickly. It was Carol's opinion that he had high
standards but was not always very correct himself.

171

Judy

Judy attended a rural high school where she earned a 3.973
grade point average. She had taken seven semester electives during
her four years of high school as well as a full year course in her
senior year to prepare for the Advanced Placement test. She earned
a 3 on the AP test and was given credit for the freshman English
course at University C. It is unusual for a rural high school to offer
as many choices as the English Department at Judy's high school does:
there are fourteen titles, mostly in onesemester units. Such a
diversity of possibilities in writing, literature, and speech requires
the Staff to take a very close look at each student's program. The
staff assists the students in setting up four—year programs to best
prepare each for whatever goals he or she had in mind. This
requires more work with each individual student to make sure the
four-year program is well rounded. It also requires each teacher to
have three or four different classes for which to prepare. Judy rated
her preparation as "Excellent." She had taken Composition,
Introduction to Literature, Speech, Writing for Publication, American
literature, Research Paper, Novels, and the AP English class. She had
earned an A in every class except the speech class, for which She
earned a B.

I talked to Judy during her second semester at University C. She
seemed very confident and at ease about being in college. She did
not take an English course during the first semester, but when I
talked to her in February, she was taking an interesting two—class
cluster for general education elective credits. I received information
about this cluster from both of the professors; each filled out a

1 72
questionnaire about the class he taught. One of the classes was Film
Interpretation, which is a General Education elective although it can
function as an elective for English majors or minors as well The
other course was Christian Tradition, a religion course which can also
be used for a General Education elective. less than half of the
students who select this cluster are freshmen. For the content of the
course the professors chose film and literature which raise religious
questions or portray stories from religious history. Student response
comes through both discussion and writing. Both the midterm and
the final are essay tests. In addition essay quizzes are used to test
reading. A longer paper is assigned which is a comparative analysis
of a film and a book or of two films. The professors do not spend
time in the class teaching writing techniques. It is assumed that the
students who select the cluster have learned how to write well. The
students are asked to purchase a Style book for critical reviews and
analyses which explains terms and techniques they Should use in
their papers, essays, and quizzes, and both professors spend time in
class discussing the comparative analysis and how they wish it to be
done.

Judy felt very confident that she could do the work required by
this two-class cluster. She earned a 4.0 grade point average in her
first semester at University C. She is a bio-medical major and finds
the classes in her major easy, as well. At the time of the interview,
every test Judy had taken at University C had been a multiple choice
test. She would take essay tests the second semester in the cluster
described above and had been told by her bio-med professor that he
would give essay tests. Judy did not think she would do much

173

writing in her four years at college. During her senior year She will
have to do a thesis if she wants to graduate from honors college. She
will have to do a project, write a paper, and present both to a
committee of evaluators.

Near the end of the semester I talked to Judy by telephone. She
told me that She had finished her paper in the religion/ film
interpretation cluster. Each professor had received a COpy of her
finished comparative analysis and had graded it with an A. Judy
remained as confident as She had been when I talked to her earlier
in the term. When I received her final questionnaire, I was not
surprised to see that she had received an A in both classes. She
reaffirmed her rating of "excellent" for her preparation for college
writing. As was the case with several other students who had
experienced a good high school writing program, however, Judy
answered the request to describe how she had changed as a writer
with, "I don't think I have."

Denise

I talked to Denise twice during her freshman year at University C,
in February and in April. Denise struck me as a very determined
and bright young woman. She was interested in the study I was
doing and began the interview by asking questions of her own. AS
we talked, Denise let me know that she intended to earn high grades
in college and that she was ready for a challenge. Her desire for a
challenge, however, had led Denise to what she considered a bad
experience, taking an Honors Freshman English course.

1 74

Denise was a good candidate for an honors course. In high school
She had earned a 3.987 grade point average. Her high school was a
suburban school with an enrollment of 750 students in four classes.
Students are offered a variety of classes which allows a good four-
year program for a collegebound student. After taking English I
and English II in ninth and tenth grades, Students choose semester
electives to round out their English programs. No Advanced
Placement or Honors classes are available. The teacher who filled out
the questionnaire on the school commented, "It's a good basic
program which could be improved."

After earning A's in English I and II, Denise chose Novels, Creative
Writing, American Literature, and a self-study course of novels
arranged as an independent study. She earned A's in all of these
classes. Denise rated her preparation for college writing as "very
good," and predicted she would do well in college. On her final
questionnaire, however, Denise said, "I found out that being top-
notch in a little town high school does not necessarily translate to
being in the same position in college. My essay format has improved
in the past year, but it still needs more. I would change the rating to
'fair.‘ "

Denise took two English classes during her freshman year in
college. The first was to fulfill the English requirement. It was the
honors section of the required English course. AS stated above, when
I talked to the director of freshman English, she informed me that
the honors section is not taught by a member of the English
Department. The Honors College has autonomy. As a result, the

professor who was hired to teach the honors section Denise enrolled

in was
studel

De
final c
how It
much
reteiv
the in
difficr

Du‘
all wt
Jacke
on th
their ;
“flint
unhe‘
DWI I

hadt

175

in was not required to follow the same format which the graduate
students follow in every other section of the same course.

Denise was very unhappy with her teacher. She wrote on her
final questionnaire, "It was a frustrating experience but I learned
how to better deal with a frustrating teacher. I'm not sure how
much my composition has improved—judging from the grades I
received in [the second English class I took] on the written reports-
the improvement was slight if at all or [the second teacher] is a very
difficult grader."

During our interview, Denise explained that the professor focused
all writing on pieces of literature assigned (King Lear and White
Jacket were two). The teacher brought in two articles he had written
on those two books. He led discussions in class on the books and
then assigned critical analyses. Denise found these discussions
uninspiring and felt that the professor's articles were difficult and
unhelpful She seemed to question his purpose for bringing in his
own writings. Denise said she spent a lot of time in the library and
had to Struggle to do well.

I asked Denise to describe the writing process used in the
classroom. Denise said that the teacher never "taught" writing. Each
student was to bring a rough draft to class for peer evaluations. The
teacher did not read that first draft unless asked to. Denise told me,
"When he gives an assignment, he would want one thing, but he
would never really explain so much that that is what he wanted, and
I got a paper back where I only got like 20% on or something
because what I had done was what he hadn't asked for supposedly,
and it was what he had asked for as far as we knew." Denise said

176

that her classmates shared her frustration with the teacher, and they
often talked about him before he arrived or after he left class. Most
felt that the teacher was very elusive about what he was looking for.
Denise got into the habit of going to the professor frequently and

writing as many as five drafts of each paper. In one of these
conferences the teacher suggested that Denise was not reading with
much attention, so she reread each book for a closer look. Denise
kept rewriting and going back to the professor until he was
satisfied, and then she was satisfied. She said She felt every rewrite
was better than the one before. She had not done much rewriting
in high school She developed the habit as a reaction to the
professor's dissatisfaction and her need to achieve a good grade in
the class. Denise used a computer in her college course which aided
the rewriting process. Despite learning from rewriting and
developing what can only be a good habit, the use of multiple drafts,
Denise was upset with all of the drafts required to please her
professor because "he didn't offer his help as such; you had to go and
ask." She added, "He reiterated a couple times that frustration was a
big part of the learning process, and he had said once that he
Structured his assignments around that, and he didn't want to offer
as much help because he thought we learned more through being
frustrated and trying to work our own way through it."

The last paper assigned in the class was different than the others,
a theory analysis. The students were asked to apply the theories of
the present to the novels and plays they were reading. Denise had
never written anything like the professor wanted. She felt she was
being asked to learn how to do it on her own. Denise received an A

lfilhEt
thetld:
work v
in Den
the fit
reason
meant
able t<
the to
to hel
aSUp:
bothe
classr

psych
tours
IIIEra
not it
Heju
DSYd
pfi’cl

DI
(Ours

eduCi

1010“;
and I.

177

in the class and attributes her success to her hard work and constant
checking with the professor. She learned most from the oneto—one
work with the professor. Nonetheless, this was not a pleasant class
in Denise's opinion. When Denise contested the 20% she received on
the first assignment, she said the professor did not agree with her
reasoning but finally offered the points because they obviously
meant so much to her. She said she answered that she wanted to be
able to earn the points. Denise was able to express her feelings to
the teacher without hesitation. He accepted her challenges and tried
to help her. Denise said he told her she was doing well. He was not
as upset with how anxious Denise became as She was, and this
bothered her. She said She and her classmates were glad to see the
class come to an end.

Denise also had to write a paper for her psychology class. The
psychology class was integrated into the cluster of honors college
courses which contained her English class as well. The same
literature was used by each class in the cluster. The professor did
not want the students to use the library for the papers he assigned.
He just wanted them to express their thoughts on certain
psychological ideas. The Students were supposed to apply
psychological theories to the situations in the literature.

During her second semester, Denise took a children's literature
course offered by the English Department. Denise's major is special
education, and this course can be used as part of her program.
Denise enjoyed the class. She found the professor very
knowledgeable and interesting. The professor had taught children
and had written children's literature, so Denise felt she was a good

1 7 8
role model. The class involved reading children's literature and
preparing group projects to demonstrate methods of presenting the
literature to children. Writing in the class included short answer
questions on the midterm and quizzes, a takehome final essay which
was to be seven typed pages, and one written book review in which
nine or ten aspects of children's literature must be discussed in a
four-page paper on a children's book. The group project was the
major focus of the course rather than any of the writing.

When I talked to Denise the second time, she had just turned in
the book report. The teacher had provided the students with a ‘
model report. Denise felt that all aspects of writing would be
important to the professor, not just content. In the model report. the
teacher pointed out an error with tense and indicated that she would
look at grammar and mechanics. Denise thought she would do well in
the class, but at the time I talked to her she had received no major
grade.

On her final questionnaire, Denise reported receiving BA for the
class which would be similar to a 8+. Denise was not happy with that
grade and decided that the professor graded hard. She wrote, "I
don't think my final deserved the grade She gave, but even with my
grade—I still would probably receive a 'BA.’ However, I'm still not
entirely satisfied [with the grade] because I know I should've done
better." Denise suggested on the questionnaire that it was a lack of
effort on her part which resulted in a grade less than her goal of an
A. Denise's conclusion after a year of writing instruction and work at
University C was written on her final questionnaire: "I've learned
that it takes more work than I had previously thought. I need to

179

give the writing projects much more time and at least two or three

drafts are necessary to produce a workable copy."

Conelusions from Universig C Interviews
The Teachets

The students I interviewed at University C clearly had a variety
of opinions about their writing instructors. Nonetheless, what I
concluded from talking to each of them is that the teachers were
expecting the students to do a lot of practice with writing, and in the
literaturebased classes, significant reading in preparation for
writing. The problems encountered by Carol and Denise were not, in
my opinion, the fault of their teachers. Instead, there was a mis-
match between the students' expectations and the teachers'
expectations. Carol's graduate assistant did not expect to have
students with the skill in writing which Carol had attained in high
school It would be assumed that a students who had taken a full-
year AP course as intensive as that which Carol had taken would
follow through by taking the AP test and waiving the freshman
English requirement. Carol's freshman teacher verified that this is
sometimes a problem when she wrote on her questionnaire, "In most
cases, a'few students in the upper and lower ranges slip through, and
they tend to get less out of the class than the average Student."

Denise's instructor expected his students to work harder and to
work with more advanced material That is not unusual for the
teacher of an honors section. Denise, although she qualified to take
the honors course based on her summer orientation writing
examination, found the work very frustrating. She concluded that

1 80
She had not been as well trained in high school as she had thought

she was. Because she received A's in high school, Denise assumed
she could get A's in college and that she was well prepared for an
honors section. She did get an A in the Honors English course, but
she did not like what she was expected to do to earn it. Her
professor gave literary analysis assignments which were typical of
the assignments given to English majors during the era when literary
critique held dominance. According to the director of freshman
English, Denise's professor was a retired English professor and would
have had his primary teaching years during that earlier time.
Literary critique is not expected of the Students in the regular
freshman English courses, if for no other reason than that the
department realizes that the freshmen are not all English majors.
Nonetheless, despite Denise's frustration, her professor gave her a
great amount of personal time to help her with her problems with
his assignments. He saw her frustration as a good Sign and even
Denise admits that she improved as a writer. The other English
teachers who taught courses to Denise and Judy used a variety of
approaches and materials which each of the students reported to be
enjoyable. They had no trouble carrying out the work in the classes.

W

Judy and Carol were two of the better prepared students in the
study. They attended very different high schools, however. Judy's
school was rural and smaller with a graduating class of less than 200
Students. Carol's school was suburban and larger, with a graduating
class of over 300 students. This supports the conclusion that a

181

motivated Student will do well in a good program in any school
regardless of affluence or location.

Both Judy and Carol took a full-year course in their senior year to
prepare them for the AP test. Each earned an A the second semester
(Judy also did the first semester). Only Judy followed through and
took the test, however. She earned a 3 which indicates that her
preparation was adequate. Carol had many classmates who she
considered to be smarter and better prepared than she was. This
affected her confidence when it came to taking the AP course or
waiving the basic writing course at University C. She felt she needed
a freshman English course to improve hergrammar and mechanics
and did not take the AP test.

Denise's experiences in her small suburban school did not seem to
prepare her as well as she had hoped it would. Her school was only
slightly larger than Judy's. The questionnaire supplied by Denise's
teacher in high school best indicates that Denise's preparation might
have been less intense. When the question was "For what kind of
writing would you say your Students have the most and/or the best
instruction?" the answer was "Basic paragraphs and essay writing."
When asked to describe every kind of writing experience offered in
the English Department, the list given included "short Stories, poetry,
research paper, journal, speeches, essay tests, and resumes." When
the question was "What kind of writing methods or procedures are
taught or encouraged?" the answer was "the basics" and when the
question was "Is there a consistent procedure from teacher to
teacher?" the answer was "not really." As stated above, this teacher
concluded, "It's a good basic program which could be improved." It

182

could be concluded that Denise is right in her feeling that being an A
student at this school does not mean that she is well trained for
college writing. It is Denise's hard work and great determination
that carried her through her Honors Freshman English course. Her
willingness to revise her writing over and over is a Sign of maturity
(Coles 1986). It iS her own personality that allowed Denise to
succeed in this class rather than her preparation.

Unive i ' Classes

For the student who will benefit from a semester of writing
process with peer group evaluations and a good amount and variety
of writing, University C offers a good program. The teachers in this
program are no better trained than the high school teachers their
students left behind, and in most cases, less experienced and less
qualified. Those who did not gain certification to teach English would
not be qualified to teach in the high schools. Nonetheless, the
graduate assistants are put through a carefully supervised and
structured program to prepare them for teaching the freshman
English course. While a teacher's experience and knowledge can be
very important in a class where the content is very specific, such as a
mathematics or science course, for instance, or in a specific literature
course such as the children's literature course Denise took, a
classroom where the content is the writing process is more
dependent on a structured format and significant assignments. The
graduate assistant, with the supervision of the freshman writing
instructor, can provide the format which will promote self and peer-
evaluation and subsequent improvement in writing. The difference

183

between a novice and a seasoned instructor will be most evident in
oneto—one conferences.

It would be beneficial to those Students who do qualify for an
honors section of freshman English at University C if the course were
not so drastically different than the other sections and if it did not
focus so highly on literary criticism and analysis. The Department
Chair whom I interviewed at University C indicated that for this to
happen, the course Should become the responsibility of the English
Department, not the Honors College, since the Honors College did not,
in her opinion, exert control over the content of the course. She did
not feel that there was anyone responsible for the course content

who was aware of the latest theory or practice in writing instruction.

Articuletipn
While Carol, Judy, and Denise all did very well in the English

classes they took, the articulation process could have been smoother
for Carol and Denise. Carol should have followed through by taking
the AP test. That system was provided for her and would have
served her well. Denise would have benefitted from better
preparation for college. Also, she might have had a more enjoyable
experience if the Honors College course had been handled differently.
A Student, however, Should not expect to take an Honors College
course and not work harder than average or not be asked to
accomplish more difficult assignments. Despite her frustration,
Denise is the Student who reported she had improved as a writer.
Neither Carol nor Judy felt they had.

1 84
LIME
Paula
Paula is the Student who transferred from University A to
University D. I had asked her to be an interview subject before she
transferred. I decided to interview her after she transferred to
compare one student's impressions of the programs in the two
universities. To my surprise, Paula told me that she had taken no
required freshman writing course at either university. Because she
received a 3 on the Advanced Placement test, she was able to earn
credit for the first term course at University A. When she
transferred to University D, she was told that a nursing major does
not need to take the first course regardless of placement
recommendations (the first course would not have fulfilled the
writing requirement anyway) and that the Advanced Placement
score was accepted in place of the two classes which she would have
had to take to complete her writing requirement.

At University A, Paula did no writing during the term she was a
Student. In Psychology there were no papers, and the tests were all
objective. In her other courses, (math, chemistry, and healthy
lifestyles) She had only objective tests as well. The requirements
were far different at University D. In Social Problems and in a
History of Science and Culture (HSC) course, Paula wrote essay exams.
In Social Problems the first essay test was a takehome exam and the
second was a timed test. Paula received an A on the first and a 8+ on
the second. She said she was able to reveal more of her learning in
the takehome test. She submitted fifteen typed pages. She felt her

185

lower grade on the second test was the result of the limited time
allowed to write it.

, The professor in HSC was very impressed with Paula's writing
ability. He asked to keep copies of her essay tests because they were
so well written. In addition to the essay exams, a paper was
assigned in this class. The students had to choose a topic which fit
the material being discussed. Paula chose to do a biographical
sketch of Elizabeth Garrett Anderson, an English woman noted for
gaining opportunities for women in medicine.

Paula said there weren't lessons on writing skills in the HSC class,
but there were clear expectations given on organization and content.
She used the same routine she had used in high school: research,
take notes, outline, write a messy rough draft, write a neater second
draft, and have her mother type a final draft on her computer at
work. (Paula does not have a computer.) I asked Paula how the
paper was graded and what kind of comments were on it. She
answered, "I got an A on that, and he was impressed with the
writing."

This was the only paper Paula wrote during her freshman year in
college, except the takehome exam in Social Problems. She said, "I
went through the same process [for the exam]. . . ." She did not have
any writing instruction during the year nor did she ever work in
peer groups or have any conferences with professors about her
writing. On her final questionnaire, when I asked Paula how she had
changed as a writer during this year, she wrote, "I don't know
because I haven't really written enough to be able to tell."

186

Even though the HSC class was not a freshman writing course or
even an English course, I asked Paula's professor to fill out a
questionnaire. He responded. He is a history professor with tenure
and a Ph. D. He answered my question about the amount of writing
he asked of his students by saying that the course Paula took was
writing focused. He indicated that 25% of the course grade is derived
from the paper and 75% from essay tests. No part of the grade in
this course is derived from objective answers on tests. He indicated
that he also teaches a supplemental writing skills course in the
History Department. This is a course which fulfills the second level
writing requirement at University D. This is a significant point, I
believe. This professor has responsibility for a writing Skills course
which has been incorporated into his department for majors in his
field, and, perhaps as a result, he assigns more writing in other
courses he teaches.

I asked Paula how she would have responded to the professor's
rhetorical question written on her essay test, "Where did this writing
ability come from?" Paula would give credit to her high school
teachers. She attended a suburban high school from which 65% of
the students go on to some kind of higher education. Her high school
has a very detailed curriculum when it comes to writing. The
amount and kinds of writing are specified for each grade level.

There are honors sections and an Advanced Placement course. Paula
appears to have had an excellent education in this high school,
earning A's in Honors English 9, Honors English 10, American
Literature (a semester course), Composition II (a semester course),
and Advanced Placement English (a full year course). On her first

187

questionnaire, Paula wrote, "I had all excellent English teachers
throughout high school who worked with each other in order to know
what was taught, therefore giving us a continuous flow of new
information." Paula also gives credit for her writing ability to her
parents, who, she said, always stressed writing as an important life
skill

Sue

I talked to Sue twice at University D, once in March and once in
April. When I fust met her she had already completed the first
semester of college. After summer placement exams, Sue was told to
enroll in the basic freshman writing course at University D, which did
not fulfill her writing requirement. I did not get the impression that
this placement bothered Sue as much as it bothered some of the
other Students. She said She expected to be placed in this class, and
She knew that most students were taking it. She indicated that she
enjoyed this class, discussing the routine and the teacher very
positively. She liked the teacher, who, according to Sue talked a lot
but was an enjoyable lecturer. The professor talked about the
material they were reading and the related topics. Sue said, "She just
liked to talk. She could talk about anything."

Papers in the class included a personal experience, a
comparison/contrast paper, and a definition paper. Sue said the
papers were to be three to five pages in length. The students were
able to choose their own topics within these types of papers. Sue
liked being able to choose her own topics. When a paper was
assigned, the teacher helped the Students. She had class discussions

188

and gave ideas. Sue said, "She was really creative and really excited
about, you know, writing, so it was easy to [begin to write]."

Sue said she had trouble in the first couple of papers with detail.
The teacher would write, "Show, don't tell" on her papers. As the
semester progressed, Sue felt she learned to be better about showing
what she was describing. The peer group feedback was helpful to
Sue. She said she received mostly positive comments. She did not
have a lot of marks on her corrected papers to indicate errors in
spelling, punctuation, or grammar. The teacher focused on content
and style. Sue knew the papers needed to be polished, however, and
felt she was good at correctness.

Sue's teacher filled out a questionnaire. She was very thorough in
answering each question and described a well-defined, well—planned
semester of writing. In addition to the 60% of the grade on the
papers assigned, a student earned 40% of his or her grade on a
required journal, participation in class and workshop (peer groups),
and mandatory writing lab attendance. The students are asked to
read several autobiographies and essays. She seemed genuinely

concerned about the Students' writing,

Most Students begin this course frightened and insecure
about their writing skills. Principally, they are not
accustomed to writing in depth or meeting deadlines.
They are shocked that writing involves a complex
process-from free writing to final draft. In time,
however, they appreciate the effort it takes to produce a
worthy paper—one not only the instructor appreciates,
but they themselves do, too.

189

The teacher indicated on her questionnaire that she has been
told she has standards too high for these basic writing students to
meet. She countered that claim: "I do put students through their
paces. As they deveIOp new skills and habits, they are rewarded
generously." Sue received a B+ in this class. On her final
questionnaire she rated the class "Excellent." She was glad the
teacher was strict and hard. She said, "She was so much fun, you
know, everyone liked her, so they didn't complain too much."

During the second interview, I talked with Sue about her second
semester class. During this semester, Sue was enrolled in the
freshman writing course which would fulfill her writing requirement.
This second course at University D must include research. Sue had
no problems using the library and found that the MLA style of
documentation which she used in high school was being used in
college.

The class requirement was to write four threeto-fivepage
research papers on topics which she and her classmates selected.
The students picked animal rights, euthanasia, freedom of speech,
and drugs. Within those broader topics, each student selected a
research topic. The students also learned about various kinds of
papers to write and were expected to write in a different paper
format each time. Sue said three kinds of papers were comparison
and contrast, argumentation, and explaining a theory. She could not
remember a fourth kind even though she had already done all four
papers. She received an A on the animal rights paper and B's on the
other two papers which had been graded so far. She felt that she

190

received the A on the first paper because she Spent a lot of time on
it. She did not have as much time to give to the other two papers.

Sue preferred the research papers in this class to those she did in
high School She felt well prepared by her high school for research,
but the high school papers were longer, and Sue found doing them
more tedious. She indicated that her biggest problem when writing
the short research papers required in college was deciding what
information to include, knowing which quotes were best, and sorting
through information she had researched. In high school she felt she
usually put in everything she found and did not learn to be selective.
The final paper, which she had already submitted at the time of the
interview, was actually the final exam. There was also a grade for
class discussion.

Sue's professor answered a questionnaire in which he indicated
that 80% of the grade is on the papers, 10% is from small tests or
quizzes (which Sue did not mention), and 10% on class discussion.
Sue felt she would get an A- or 8+ in the class. (On her final
questionnaire she reported a B- from the class).

Sue enjoyed the class discussions required by the professor.
These discussions not only help students formulate ideas for topics,
they also helped Sue learn more about the topic on which she would
be writing. The other students had angles and opinions which she
had not considered, and she felt there was more depth to her writing
as a result of the classroom discussions. There were no such
discussions in her high school classes on topics for papers.

Sue enjoyed the people she encountered in her two English
classes. She liked both professors and enjoyed the interaction with

191

the students. Sue did not go to either professor outside of class
although she knew it was acceptable to seek individual
appointments.

Sue attended the smallest high school in this study. She took a
uniform four years of English at that school, which has no Honors
sections or electives. She earned between A and 8+ in high school
classes. She felt the instruction was quite adequate. She had
written some of the same kinds of papers her professors had
assigned and felt knowing these Styles helped her. Sue said she has
learned that she has to use more detail in her writing. She needs to
remember to give examples. That was one thing she doesn't feel was
stressed in high school. In the interview, when I asked Sue what She
would advise her high school teachers to do differently, She said she
would advise them to allow the Students to generate their own
writing topics. She found topic selection difficult in college. She also
thinks shorter, more focused research papers would have helped her
learn how to research better. She does not think there is a lot she
needed to change from how she wrote in high school, she simply had
to work harder and put more time into each paper. Sue now uses a
computer and feels She is more willing to revise a paper. She would
not have written a paper over in high school just to fix a few
sentences or ideas. When she uses a computer, she "cleans up [her]
ideas" more readily.

On her questionnaire done immediately after her Senior year of
high school, Sue rated her preparation for college writing as " fair."
She wrote, "I think I have a lot to learn about writing and am not
anxious to see my first graded papers." On her final questionnaire

192

Sue raised her rating of her high school preparation for writing from
"fair" to "good." She wrote, "I was more prepared than I expected to
be." When asked how she improved the most as a writer, Sue wrote,
"I know a lot more about unfamiliar subjects. As I wrote, I learned."
It seemed to me that Sue had overcome a major stumbling block in
her writing: generating topics and learning about those topics. I
wondered if her high school research was often done "in the dark,"
accounting for her feeling that those papers were longer and more
tedious to write. In reality, when I asked Sue at separate points in
the interview, about the length of papers at each level, her answers
showed that papers at the two educational levels were similar in
length. Sue did not seem to be aware that her answers belied her
Opinion that the high school papers were longer.

Sue's major is psychology. She has not been asked to write in
many other classes. The psychology tests are multiple choice over
two or three chapters at a time. She is frustrated by this form of
testing because it provides her no feedback to evaluate her learning.
She doesn't really know why she answered questions wrong. In her
social issues class she wrote in-class essay tests but was assigned no
papers. There were takehome midterms and finals in her social
problems class. Sue earned a B on the mid-term and was very
pleased. It was her understanding of the content of the course which
was reflected in the test and earned the B. She thinks the course is
hard and is proud to have understood well enough to earn a B. The
writing format of the mid-term test provided more feedback about
her learning, according to Sue.

193

Jane

I interviewed Jane in March and April on the same days I
interviewed Sue. Jane had taken the same two courses Sue had
taken She had been placed in University D's first freshman writing
course, the one which does not fulfill the writing requirement.

Unlike Sue, however, Jane was very upset to have been placed in this
course. She blamed her high school for this placement at first. She
had earned A's and B's in high school English and felt she should
have been prepared will enough to have placed into the second
course. In retrospect, she feels it was the placement that was the
problem, not her preparation. Most of the people She knew had been
placed in the second course. She earned an A in the first semester
and found the course much easier than her English class in high
school during her senior year.

Despite this frustration, Jane had nothing but praise for her first
semester writing instructor. This teacher is well-known to me. He
is a retired high school teacher who had been a very popular creative
writing teacher at his high school. His students' work was known
throughout the state because they often won state contests
sponsored by the Michigan Council of Teachers of English. The
students at University D are enjoying the same enthusiasm and
ability to inspire writing that his high school students did. I did not
receive a written questionnaire from him, but in phone
conversations, I perceived his enjoyment of the part-time college
work and the students he worked with.

Jane said she wrote a lot of papers in his class. They were about
significant places, people, and events in her life. Near the end of the

194

course, she selected material from the entire semesters' writing to
write an autobiography.

There was a lot of reading to accompany the writing. Before each
part of the autobiographical writing, the professor gave the students
writing which could serve as inspiration and models. Included was
work of previous students. After the autobiography was completed,
the course ended with the students writing short essays in reaction
to readings (such as "A Modest Proposal"), or on topics generated by
the readings (such as women's liberation or the class system).

Jane found it a coincidence that her professor used "families" just
as her high school teacher had done. " Families" was their name for
the peer groups which met to discuss their writing-in-progress. In
high school the families had worked much the same way they had in
college. The groups read each other's papers and gave verbal and
written suggestions or reactions. As we discussed Jane's experience
with the families at both educational levels, she talked about how
her high school class was much more rigorous than her college class,
with higher Standards for correctness, and more work. She had done
a research paper in high school and had used the families for
evaluating the work on the research as well 1

Jane felt her college family focused too much on mechanical
errors. The weaknesses in her papers most often pointed out were
commas. Her peers usually didn't comment on her wording,
thinking her writing much better than theirs. She had a friend in the
class and said their papers were often chosen as the class best, the
result of a voting process the professor conducted on peer group
days in order to choose papers to read in front of the class.

195

The professor did not grade with letters. Instead he had a set of
comments which indicated a hierarchy. For instance "Great" was
close to an A. "Really great" was an A. If the word was underlined
twice, it meant that the work was better than if there was only one
underline. This method did not bother Jane because her work was
usually rated " Really great," and she sensed that she was earning an
A in the course. It did, according to Jane, bother some of the other
students, however.

As a student in the first writing course, Jane was required to go to
the tutoring center once a week and meet with a peer group and a
tutor, who was an English major. The tutor then sent a report on the
work of the students to their professors.

At the time of the two interviews, Jane was enrolled in the second
writing course, the one which would fulfill the writing requirement
for her freshman year at University D. The professor had the
students work with literary analysis. First they did narrative writing
in reaction to readings ("A Modest Pr0posal," "The Bride Comes to
Yellowstone," Othello). The professor had introduced themes to tie
together their reading and writing. The themes were paradoxical,
such as "Innocence and Experience" and "Love and Hate." When they
wrote the papers, they did not have to mention the literature. With
each paper the students had to follow a certain format (such as
comparison/contraSt) and make a point. Jane Showed me her first
paper on the topic of "Innocence." The professor praised her topic
selection. Jane wrote about what schools are doing now to teach
children about society's problems and how this robs them of their

innocence.

196

During our second interview, Jane described the research paper
she had done for the class. It had to be related to literature. While
talking to the professor about her career interests, Jane, with her
teacher's help, decided to write about the scientific experiments in
Gulliver's T ravels, a book she had read in high school. The professor
liked the paper because Jane was able to limit her writing to certain
aspects of the novel. Jane showed me the paper. She had received
an A. The teacher had been thorough in her evaluation, making
comments throughout praising the topic and specific parts, and
marking and mentioning errors.

Jane enjoyed coming up with unique topics. She feels her high
school teacher limited their topic selection too much, which did not
prepare her well for topic selection in college, but her own
imagination was her Strength in this area.

One aspect of writing emphasized in her second writing course
which she had not given much consideration to previously was
audience. She has now learned to be much more aware of the
intended audience in her writing.

Jane's second semester's work consisted of three papers, two essay
exams, and a journal. There were specific journal tOpics which
reflected the reading and themes. In addition, peer critiquing sheets
and rough drafts were put into a portfolio with the journal topics.
The essay exams were on the readings. The books could be used,
there was a choice of questions, and the writing was limited by time.
Jane liked the format and earned an A on her first essay exam. As I
would have expected after seeing Jane's work, she reported on her
final questionnaire that she received an A in this class.

197

Jane feels her high school experience was more than adequate to
prepare her for both courses she took in college. The research
papers in high school were longer. She said the final one she did was
required to be 12-18 pages typed. There was more time given in
college to complete a paper than she was given in high school. Unlike
most students in this Study, Jane said she worked more in groups in
high school than in college. She did have some criticism of her high
school teacher, however. When I asked Jane what she had learned in

college writing courses, she told me,

I found I wasn't as bad as I thought I was at it. I hated it
in high school. It is not as bad as I thought it would be. I
heard everyone say, "Oh you have to write so perfect and
Stuff." I got here and it was like, this is much easier than
what Mr. __ did because he used to write "awkwar " all
over our papers. . . . She [college professor] didn't mark
us on it at all, she marked us more on our content, what
was in the paper, than the mechanics. He [high school
teacher] didn't care what was in our papers as long as the
mechanics were . . . .

Jane expected college to be very hard and picky based on what
she learned in her collegeprep class in high school. Nonetheless,
Jane feels that high school did her the favor of teaching her grammar
and mechanics so that she did not have to worry about them in
college. She also feels her broad background in literature helped her
in the second course, which was based on literary analysis, because
she was able to use literature which she had read in high school for
some of her topics.

Jane is a science major. She has not had to do any writing in
biology, chemistry, math, or geology. In geology the professor said

198

there would be one easy essay question on the final exam.

Eventually, in order to fulfill her major requirements, she will have

to write and present a research paper in both biology and geology.

Jane plans to go to college for five years to fulfill these requirements.
Jane's final comment on her final questionnaire was significant, I

felt. "I try not to fear writing as much as I did in high school.

College has helped me get over that fear. "

Kate

I interviewed Kate once, in April, during her freshman year at
University D. Kate had gone to an urban high school, one of several
high schools in the largest school district in the study. She had
taken four full-year English classes in high school Her grades were
mixed. Kate reported everything from an A to a D for the semester
grades she earned during those four years.

I asked Kate to discuss her high school experience. As She talked,
I sensed that the environment of the class plays a major role in
Kate's success. In classes in which she did poorly, she talked about
strict teachers or about sitting in the back of the room and not
focusing on the classroom procedure. In classes where She had done
well she talked about having special friends in the class, sitting in the
front, or teachers who had helped her focus and learn what she
should do. Kate ranked her preparation for college writing as "fair"
both before and after her freshman year.

Unfortunately for Kate, she reports never having done research in
high school As a result, she did not feel prepared for writing in

199

college. She found that she was not as prepared as some of her
classmates.

Kate did not enjoy high school writing. She didn't like the topics
on which She had to write. Her advice to high school teachers is to
have " more mature writing. . . things that have to do with your
everyday life. . . things that are happening right now, and it's really a
lot easier to write on than 'what does this story tell you.’ " She did
not think there was enough writing in her high school, but She would
not have wanted to have done more of the kind of writing which She
did do, which, from her description, sounded like it was writing in
reaction to or analysis of literature. Kate also thinks that high school
writing Should be process writing. On her final questionnaire she
wrote, "Give students a chance to make corrections on papers and
return them before giving a grade. High school is all about learning
and a student's first effort Shouldn't always be the final effort."

Considering her need for a stable class environment, Kate had a
very poor experience her first semester at University D. She had
placed in the first writing class, the class which does not fulfill the
writing requirement. Her first teacher was not in control of the
class. Kate said, "Our class pretty much ran wild. I mean, She didn't
have much control People would talk, people would come in late,
leave early. It was just a really hard class to focus on. . . . It was like
junior high. There was no challenge whatsoever." Kate earned A's
on most of the writing done for this professor. She remembers it as
having been mostly descriptive writing. Midway through the
semester, this teacher left for surgery. Kate's second professor was

much different. She was organized and had rules on behavior and

200

attendance. She more or less told the students that they would
follow these new rules or be eliminated from the class. While she
was the teacher, the students wrote the autobiography written by
most Students in this first course. The students continued a portfolio
which they had started for the first professor. By the end of the
semester, there was to be 100 pages of writing in the portfolio.
There were peer groups throughout the semester. Unfortunately, the
groups fell into the habit of social talking during the first part of the
course, and the second professor had to work hard to change these
bad habits. Kate said she didn't learn much in this course although
she said, "I think I ended up with an A." (I was surprised she didn't
remember a final grade she had received just four months earlier.)
During the second semester, Kate took the course which fulfills
the writing requirement. Her professor for this course was the
retired high school instructor who Jane had had for her first course.
Just as Jane had, Kate found this professor's style very relaxed and
enjoyable. The students wrote regularly, bringing papers-in—
progress to class for work with peer groups. They did a rough draft
and brought it to class for peer editing, then rewrote the paper and
brought it to class again for peer proofreading. The professor looked
at the drafts and final papers to see on what skills the Students
needed to work. He decided they needed work on transitions, for
instance. Kate chose plastic surgery as the topic for her required
research paper. The research paper had been submitted but not yet
returned at the time of the interview. Kate did an opinion paper on
gun control, doing research in the library. She received an A-. As in
Jane's class, this professor used comments like "Good" to evaluate the

201
papers. The last paper, however, had had a grade on it. Kate

remembered the main focus of the professor's instruction as being
"Stick to your thesis." She felt that she learned more about
developing and focusing on a thesis than anything else in college
writing. On the final questionnaire, Kate reported receiving a B in
this class although she thought she deserved an A-.

The research paper had to be eight typed pages. This is twice
the length of papers Kate remembers writing in high school She
said, "I never wrote papers every week like this, as far as typed and
researched." Kate does not use a computer to do her papers. She
does not type, either. She writes her papers in longhand and has her
mother type them at work. If she had a word processor available to
her, she is not sure if she would change her habit of writing one
rough draft and one final draft.

Kate did not write much in other classes. She had an art class in
which she took multiple choice tests. She had a history class which
met for three hours a session in which she took 1 1-15 pages of notes
a class. The tests included multiple choice questions, listing, and a lot

of essay. She earned a C on the midterm.

1 iv t i
Ihe'l‘eachets
University D does not have graduate students to teach its
freshman writing classes. The two classes which are taken by most
of the students are taught by tenurestream faculty or part-time
faculty. Most of the part-time faculty are retired high school

teachers. Most of the professors have masters degrees. Some have

202
Ph. D.'s. Judging by the descriptions given by the three students

who took these freshman writing courses, the teachers used methods
urged by most current philosophy. They employed writing groups,
process writing, personal writing in response to literature or current
prose, and journals. Except for the teacher who had to have surgery,
the students found these teachers competent, helpful, and, to use
their own word, fun. These three students felt they had improved in
their writing Skills due to the instruction of these professors. While
University D has clear guidelines for the content of the two courses,
there is much leeway and some teachers were stricter in their
standards and requirements than others. Based on this limited
study, however, it does not appear that these differences are
significant. I feel that it is important to note that Paula's history
professor, who taught his department's upper level writing
requirement, had incorporated much writing into his history courses
as well. Turning the fulfillment of the writing requirement over to
the major departments at University D has had the effect in at least
one department of promoting and giving methods for writing across

the curriculum.

u e ara 'o Atti u
The preparation for college experienced by these four young
women was varied. Paula, like others who participated in the
Advanced Placement program, was prepared well enough to waive
all freshman writing requirements. The evaluation given by the
Advanced Placement system was supported by the praise accorded
her work by her history professor.

203

Sue's small high school provided a limited choice of classes in
English, one a year for four years. While Sue rated her preparation
as "good" and described many important things she had learned
which had helped her in college, she also revealed certain limitations
to the instruction. Sue had been limited in topic selection and had
not been well guided in research techniques in high school. She had
a lot to learn about topic generation, research, writing with detail,
and revision. Her high school preparation did not introduce her to
the process of writing from brainstorming through multiple copies.
Sue increased in her ability to write when She became more aware of
each Step along the way and was allowed to pick topics to which she
could relate.

Jane was prepared for college writing by a demanding teacher
who conducted error-hunts on students' papers and continually
warned the students to achieve perfection in high school writing in
order to succeed in college. While his instruction gave Jane
confidence in her use of mechanics and grammar, knowledge of the
writing process, and an ability to work with peer groups, he did not
send Jane to college with a positive attitude about writing.

Ironically, his meticulous preparation left Jane nothing to learn in
college except to like writing. Her attitude was made worse by her
placement in University D's first course, one she viewed as remedial
because it did not fulfill the writing requirement. Jane was unaware
that most freshmen are placed into this course.

Kate felt she had Inadequate preparation for college writing. She
had to learn to research since she was not required to do much
research in high school Her high school education was greatly

204

affected by her need for a comfortable learning environment, which
for Kate might mean a class with her best friend. She did not like the
writing tOpics she was required to use in high school Despite Kate's
negative assessment of her preparation and some low high school
grades to support this negative opinion, she received adequate

grades in the two freshman writing classes at University D.

Uptversig D's Cwes

The director of writing instruction at University D is aware that
some students feel they have been placed in a remedial course when
they are placed in the first of two writing courses for freshmen. She
described the class as being a class for students who are not ready
for college English, but she insisted that it is not a remedial course.
She admitted that placement standards may have to be examined
since 70% of the freshmen are placed in the course.

Both this first course and the second course, which actually fulfills
the writing requirement, have an established curriculum issued by
the department. While there is leeway in exactly how each professor
designs the work which fulfills the requirements, the classes taken
by the students in this study seemed consistent in expectations. The
courses introduce students to the writing process and to many kinds
of writing, often inspired by or written in reaction to literature. In
addition, there is an attempt by each professor to increase the
students' ability to write clearly and correctly.

205
Attieulation

Each of the four women in this study of the freshmen writing
classes at University D made a successful transition to college writing.
Paula did not have to take the required freshman writing course, but
she received high praise for her abilities from a history professor
who provides much opportunity for writing in his classrooms. The
Advanced Placement program proved to be an excellent method of
articulation for Paula. She did not describe herself as a changed
writer, but her experiences depict her as a skilled writer.

Sue earned a B+ and a B- in the freshman writing courses. Her
grades probably are a result of a limited experience with writing in
high school Her small high school could not provide her with a
variety of experiences or teachers, nor could it expose her to the kind
of competition which she would encounter in college writing;
nonetheless, Sue was aware of her limitations and was prepared to
overcome them in the writing courses in which she enrolled. Her
assumption was that she would have to work hard to improve as a
writer, so she did. Sue's ability to understand her own limitations
and her desire to work hard to improve were her two most
important aides to a successful transition. .

Jane received an A in each freshman writing course at University
D. Her grades reflect her rigorous preparation in high school Despite
having to learn to like writing, Jane did not have to work to write
well because of her training. And, to University D's credit, I found
myself talking to a young woman who was enjoying her writing
assignments a great deal

206

Kate received an A and a B. Her background and preparation do
not seem to suggest that she would do well in college writing, yet her
college grades reflect more than adequate success. These results
were achieved despite the less-than-perfect atmosphere she
encountered in the first class. Kate appears to have had a successful
transition despite a personality and conditions which could have
hampered her success at both levels. This can be attributed to the
work of her teachers and professors. She describes a high school
teacher who took her aside and encouraged and inspired her after
Kate had earned a D in her first semester of her senior year. The
professor who came to the rescue of her first semester in college had
an uphill battle and earned Kate's respect. Luckily for Kate, she had
a professor during her second semester whose personality and
classroom style fit her learning needs. All three of these writing
teachers had to work to inspire and teach Kate, yet all succeeded.
Kate's experiences suggest that there is no better tool for successful

articulation than a Skilled teacher.

Fin mmen s on th Int rvi ws

Talking to these thirteen students provided me with a plethora of
high school writing experiences and college writing experiences. In a
sense, their experiences are so personal and so different that it might
be surmised that no solid conclusions can be drawn from them.
Nonetheless, I feel that I have developed a sense of the kind of high
school classroom and the kind of college classroom which can help
Students achieve growth in their writing abilities. In Chapter Five I

will draw some conclusions from the disparate experiences of the

207

Students in my study and make some recommendations which I feel
can improve the articulation of writing programs between high

schools and colleges.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

In this Study I have attempted to discover what articulation
exists between high school writing programs and freshman writing
programs at colleges. I chose to observe the experiences of a group
of West Michigan students as they left high school and completed a
year of college. Their experiences would show me what articulation
exists between the high school and college programs in which they
were enrolled, and I hoped to draw some conclusions about
articulation in general from their specific experiences. My Study of
these Students as they transferred from high school to college writing
programs confirmed one significant fact about this transition: It is
different for every student. While this may seem a simple
statement, the reasons for the differences raise important issues in
education, most of which this Study did not address. The size,
location, and economic backing of a school district have an effect
upon the education of the students in that district. The training and
ability of teachers have an effect upon the Students they teach. The
family lives of students impact their education. While these factors
have most influence on a student's high school education, they
continue to influence the student's education beyond high school as
well. A successful transition between high school and college can be

208

209

affected by each of these, although not necessarily in the same way
for every student.

The factors this study did examine, the curriculum in the high
school and the college and the classroom practices of teachers at both
levels, also affected individuals differently. Even Students from the
same high school were not affected equally by a curriculum or
teacher. Nonetheless, the information which I have gathered during
this Study provides a basis for recommendations which may improve
writing programs at both levels as well as allow a smoother
transition for the Students moving between them.

The curriculum at each level will have an impact upon the
student making the transition from high school to college. The
number of classes or courses offered and the nature of those
offerings can be important to a student's development of writing
Skills. The amount of writing assigned or the purpose of that writing
may have an effect on how a student progresses in his or her writing
ability. Nonetheless, my study showed that there can be a great
variation in quantity and purpose of writing without there being a
great effect on the Student's development. While all of these factors
can be significant, my study showed that the most Significant factors
in students' successful transition between high school and college
writing programs were the attributes of the students themselves and
the methods used in the writing classrooms. I found that students
responded positively to certain classroom practices in both high
school and college, and they found other practices unhelpful

2 1 0
An Evalpetion pf High Sehml Coutse Offerings

I designed the questionnaire I sent to the high school teachers to
provide information about curriculum and teaching practices in each
high school. There was a great variety in the curricular offerings
among the twelve schools. The number of courses offered was
affected both by funds available to the school district and the
number of students enrolled in the high school In every high
school, however, students were able to take at least four years of
English. All Students received instruction in reading and writing,
usually through required courses in their ninth and tenth grade
years. In addition, all students received a third year of English
instruction whether through a required year-long course, two
required semester courses, or electives of the student's choice. Most
of the students also had a fourth year of English, usually in an
elective or electives chosen by the student.

The twelve schools required writing of each student on a regular
basis. Applebee, langer, and Mullis (1984) reported a national
trend, which began in the 705, of increased writing instruction, and
they predicted a continued emphasis on writing in decades to come
(3). These twelve schools seem to support that finding. While I did
not study the schools' histories of writing instruction to ascertain
whether they had increased their writing instruction, I can conclude
from the teachers' responses that each of the twelve schools places a
major emphasis on writing instruction. Applebee et al suggest that
such a finding would not have surfaced in a similar study in the 60s.
The twelve schools also reported that writing was a component of
almost every offering in their English departments, whether in a

211

course designed specifically to teach composition, in one focused on
literature, or in a general English course.

Two schools offered only four English courses, the traditional
year-long courses for each of the four grade levels, while other
schools reported a plethora of courses, some providing 15-18 course
titles. The amount of writing a student did in four years was not
dependent on the number of offerings available at his or her school,
however. I concluded that a school with limited resources could
offer as rich a program as a school with a great variety of offerings.
A greater variety of offerings seemed actually to be a detriment to
the transition of one of the students in the Study. While this student
did fulfill the three credits of English required by his school, be
limited himself to only writing courses in his junior and senior years;
moreover, those courses he took did not prepare him to be flexible in
his writing Style. He took creative writing, journalism, and
composition. At the college level he encountered a frustrating
experience in a freshman writing course in which the writing he did
was consistently unacceptable. He was unable to alter his writing
style for the kind of writing being asked by his professor. Another
student who received a very traditional four years Of instruction In
high school earned only A's in college. It appears from this study
that a student with a four-year program of English, even when there
is no choice other than those classes, can be provided a solid basis for
the transition to college writing; whereas, a Student with great choice
in the high school courses and teachers he has can limit both his
writing experience and his writing ability by a narrow choice of
either subject matter or teachers.

212

Despite the number of semesters in which he or she was
enrolled in an English course, the amount of writing a student might
do in four years varied greatly. In some schools, the Student wrote
prolifically over a four-year period, including writing in subjects
other than English. While some students remembered as many as
150 to 200 separate pieces of writing in their four years of high
school, other Students reported less than fifty assignments. The
Students who remembered the fewest assignments were from the
same five high schools. The effectiveness of those assignments,
however, seems to have varied. Three from one of those five high
schools had lower grades in college than the average student in this
Study while students from another of the five high schools reported
aboveaverage grades. While the study appears to suggest that a
student does better who has been exposed to a lot of writing, there
was not a Significant correlation between the amount of writing done
in high school and grades in college.

While a school does well to offer Students a variety of courses
from which to select four years of English, there are factors which
might influence the effectiveness of the curriculum. One factor may
be the amount of writing done in each course, another factor might
be the kinds of writing assigned, while a third factor might be the
kinds of classes selected for the four credits earned.

it use“ 0 rl'l m ‘- Li: 0‘ rm.

 

There is no consistency from high school to high school as to how
the teaching of writing is done. In fact, there is no consistency in
many schools from teacher to teacher. This lack of harmony in

213

methods of instruction clearly seems to be an attribute of high school
English departments subject to criticism. There is no question that
there are many good teachers in all of these schools. Students are
receiving writing instruction and most are able to transfer to a
college writing program and write adequately. Nonetheless, it is
apparent from the questionnaires that not every teacher in each
school is providing good instruction.

At the time of this study, the Kent Intermediate School District,
which serves eight of the twelve schools, launched a project to write
language Arts outcomes for Students K-12. Mth the writing I
outcomes would come specific suggestions for lessons and methods of
instruction. Many of the schools in this Study are involved in
developing the KISD project. If a school decides to adopt the
curriculum, it would be assumed that all teachers. in a building would
begin to use similar methods to teach writing. For some of the
schools in the Study, adopting the KISD outcomes and methods would
be the first time they would make any decision for consistency
among their faculties in the teaching of writing.

According to some of the teachers in my Study, demanding such
conformity will not be easy even if their schools would adopt the
countywide outcomes. Some of the schools in the Study have strict
guidelines, and there seems to be a management hierarchy which can
oversee and prescribe teaching methods. Others do not have such
strong management. While tight control is not seen as the ideal by
many teachers, It is apparent from the comments on the teacher
questionnaires that many schools are in need of some management
from the top. In these schools, some teachers are a doing a good job

214

of teaching writing, using current methods and theories; others are
assigning writing with few guidelines and focusing on grammar and
errors as they evaluate the finished writing; still others are
concentrating on teaching grammar and literature and have little
instruction or practice in writing as part of their instruction. Among
the English teachers on one faculty, there may be those who teach
only expressive writing; those who ask only for writing which is
analytical and impersonal in nature; and those who focus so strongly
on grammar, sentence structure, punctuation, vocabulary, and other
aspects of correctness, that the students rarely have time to write at
all. If my study is any indication, there is a need for more
consistency and cooperation among high school English faculties.
Some departments do not communicate, do not work well together,
and allow such looseness in delivering the curriculum that two
sections of the same course have little similarity. The least
successful schools do not have an established curriculum, depending
upon the common textbook to provide any consistency which exists.
The teachers' answers on the twelve questionnaires which
characterized the English Departments in this Study indicate that
some schools in the study operate in this loose manner. Other
schools appeared very well organized.

Needless to say, it would be better if effective teaching practices
were the result of a faculty working together to better their own
department. A Strong administration is not always ideal if the
administration does not have a sense of what practices and theories
to promote. Since administrators at the high school level are rarely
experts on every subject being taught in their schools, it would be

215

preferable if teaching faculties provided their own evaluations and
supervision. Personalities clashes and an unwillingness to cause
conflict often stop teachers from putting pressure on their colleagues,
however. A better approach to working together to formulate an
effective program and seeing that it is implemented might be an
outside influence which affects each teacher. The work of the
National Writing Program (which will be discussed more fully later in
this chapter) promotes this kind of cooperation. If high school
English faculties could work together in a summer or after-school
workshop to design a strong curriculum and learn how to deliver it,
they would be more likely to achieve an effective department than if
they were dictated to by an administration outside of their
department.

A Student who graduates from a high school with a very loosely
organized department may make a successful transition because he
or She has the personality to reap benefits from any instruction
received. In addition, even in such a loosely organized school, there
are talented faculty members. A good teacher, even within a
disorganized department, can provide a very rich learning
environment. Other students are not as well prepared when
graduating from such departments. One Student in the study felt she
had been short-changed by her high school She described one
course which focused only on grammar, and she criticized her high
school for not offering enough experience in writing papers. Another
student wished her high school had not been so focused on a final
product. She wished she had been given the chance to work on
several drafts of a paper with input into each draft so that she could

216

have had more help before she was graded on a final product. One
student felt that teachers gave writing assignments without teaching
writing. As I read these comments from students who had finished a
year of college, I realized that all of them were saying that their high
school writing could have benefitted from instruction in the writing
process, something each had encountered in college. From
brainstorming through multiple drafts, these Students had learned
skills in college to which they wished they had been introduced in
high school

As I looked at the questionnaires filled out by the teachers who
taught in the schools whose students made the above three
comments, I saw a basis for what the Student is saying in each case.
When asked if there was consistency from teacher to teacher in the
procedure used to teach writing, one answered, "Not really." Another
answered, ". . . the most 'consistent' procedure appears to be the
'error hunt.’ " The third teacher responded, "The writing process is
used by all of us most." The students who attended these high
schools recognized the missing aspects of their high school writing
instruction as they went through a year of college. I feel their
experiences in college could have been better if their high school
teachers had worked together to develop a curriculum, whether it be
over three years or four years, which provided college prep students
with a consistent exposure to the writing process.

The primary reason such harmony does not exist in high schools
has been the many changes in the teaching of writing which have
happened in recent decades. Teachers who received their training to
teach English during the SOS and 605 focused on literature. During

217

their four years of instruction in preparation to teach English, it is
possible that these teachers wrote nothing but literary analysis and
critique. They were not trained in the teaching of writing. It is
possible that these teachers have never taught writing in their
classrooms, although many have assigned papers. They themselves
may write well but are not aware of how to help someone else write
well. The consistent "method," as one teacher verified, is to correct a
final product by marking errors and making marginal notes, hoping
that the student will do better on the next finished product. Some
students do improve over time with such a process, but they develop
their own writing process by trial and error.

Teachers who have graduated in the past twenty years have
been introduced to writing as a subject matter to be taught. The
methods they have been taught have not necessarily been consistent,
however. Many learned to teach the fiveparagraph essay and to
focus on the modes, dividing writing among exposition, narrative,
and persuasion.

Recent graduates have arrived in high schools having learned and
practiced the process approach to writing. The National Writing
Project has influenced the teaching of writing so that student-
centered classrooms which stress writing as a process and
incorporate more personal writing have become commonplace.
Luckily the NWP has provided workshOps so that in-service teachers
can also be trained. Many teachers, however, have never been
exposed to a method for teaching writing. Their schools do not offer
them the Opportunity to seek additional training during the school
year. A lack of time or opportunity for such training is a great

218
impediment to preparing today's high school faculty to teach writing

well.

Textbook companies, which profit by change, were happy to
provide new editions as each new method came along. The kind of
textbook most pOpular for decades was a grammar text which
introduced writing as a fragmented approach which stressed
mastering parts of speech, then sentence structure, then paragraphs,
and finally short essays. Many companies published Similar texts.
In response to changes in writing theory, companies added the
modes of discourse as a handbook section in their grammar texts.
Recently, changes in the writing handbook reflect the popularity of
process writing. As long as a school district could afford to keep up
with each new edition of a textbook, the teachers had a guide for
their writing instruction which could at least help them move
forward and develop some consistency from teacher to teacher. As
these changes happened over a relatively Short period of time, the
result, apparent today, is English faculties consisting of individuals
with very different training and approaches to writing.

The questionnaires show that few of the twelve high schools in
this study have agreement among their faculties when it comes to
methods of teaching writing, how much writing to teach, or the kinds
of writing to assign. Nonetheless, each school reported successful
teachers who were preparing some very able writers. The problem
for each school is how to promote this effective teaching among all of
the members of the department.

219

Recommendations for High School English Departments
The students in this study had many suggestions for their high

schools after having had a year of college. Not all of them wished for
the same background because they had not had similar backgrounds
in the first place. Many of them, however, suggested more writing.
Some, having been assigned long involved research papers in high
school, suggested they would have been better served if they had
written shorter papers more often. Based on the students' feedback
on questionnaires, I recommend that high school students be asked
to write often over a four-year period. The integrated language arts
approach, which advocates reading, writing, speaking, and listening
as elements of every unit, is an approach which Should be promoted
for high school English departments. Students should not have an
entire course of study which does not involve writing whether the
focus be literature, speech, reading, grammar, or any other aspect of
the language arts.

An evaluation of the students who took a onesemester
composition course compared to those who did not does not suggest
that these courses are the only way to learn writing. These students
were not consistent in feeling that they had been well prepared any
more than the students who had taken a more traditional four year
program of high school study (such as English 9, 10, 1 1, and 12).
Schools which offer the semester course must be careful to ensure
that this course does not offer the only writing instruction. Writing
can become a component of literature courses, as well. Teachers also
have to make sure that a variety of kinds of writing is assigned. Too
often those teachers who use writing in the literature classes only

220

assign literary response writing. All other kinds of writing can be
done in a literature class as the readings suggest personal or social
issues to grapple with.

Some students felt their schools had focused too narrowly on just
one kind of writing. Several complained that all of the writing they
had done in high school was focused on literature. These students
suggested more writing of either a personal nature or issue oriented
writing where they learned to express their own opinions. Quite a
few students indicated that they had not been able to select their
own tOpics for writing while in high school or had been so limited in
such experiences that they felt handicapped when asked to select
topics in college. As recommended by several students in this study,
students Should be given a chance to select their own topics. It is
common in both high school and college to ask Students to select
tOpics related to a broad theme or issue; however, opportunities
Should exist for students to generate their own topics without
prompts.

Students who had done writing based on literature as well as
expository writing on topics of their own choices or assigned by the
teacher felt more comfortable with college assignments than students
who were limited in their writing exposure to certain types of
writing, such as creative writing. I feel that a high school that offers
the students a wide variety of electives in their last two years of
high school would do well to develop guidelines for those choices. I
would advise high school English departments to require that
Students' select classes which will give them experience with a
variety of writing styles and purposes, including writing about or in

221

reaction to literature and writing on topics of interest to themselves.
Classes such as journalism or creative writing can be valuable
additions to a Student's high school experience, but care should be
taken that a student has multiple writing experiences throughout the
high school years. Creative writing or journalism Should not be used
to fulfill a writing requirement in a school in which writing is not a
component of every course.

It can be difficult to ask a faculty varying in training and ability
to teach a consistent method of writing, but it would be beneficial to
the students if a more consistent approach to teaching writing were
instituted within English departments. Departments should agree
upon writing outcomes, should develop a theory supporting their
writing instruction, and should be able to expect cooperation from all
faculty members in implementing a course of writing instruction for
their students which develops Specific skills over a three or four-
year period. It is critical that high schools develop writing
guidelines. Administrators can assist by providing the time for
teachers to have training in order to teach any writing program
decided upon. If the school district decides to implement the
countywide writing program, the administration should, again,
provide support, time, and training to see that each teacher
effectively teaches the outcomes.

It was evident from the students' comments on questionnaires
and during interviews that college freshmen respond well to a
classroom which uses a workshop approach. High school English
departments can adopt this strategy when doing writing. If the class
is not devoted solely to writing, then the time need not be devoted

222

solely to writing workshop; nonetheless, when the students are
working on writing papers, the use of peer groups, oneto—one
conferencing, journals, portfolios, and a multipledraft format
appears to be a classroom approach that will have positive results.
Students can be trained to work well within peer groups, and if most
teachers in an English department begin to use peer groups for
brainstorming, feedback, editing, and proofreading, the students will
soon become comfortable within these groups and use them well.
Encouraging students to make use of multiple drafts is best done
with the peer groups. Requiring at least one rewrite of a paper is
also a good practice, as Bill pointed out, rather than leaving it as an
option. These methods were the ones most often singled out by the
students in this Study as effective in helping them improve as
writers.

English faculties could do a better job with some changes in the
conditions under which they work. A major problem for most high
school teachers of English is the class load. Teaching 130-180
students each day, it is difficult, even with a process approach, for
teachers to adequately provide the kind of help and attention
students need to develop into good writers. There is not an effective
method of having personal conferences with Students when there are
25-35 students in a classroom. The teacher usually must use time
before or after the school day for such conferencing, which is not a
plausible option for many Students and teachers. Using the time in
the classroom for conferencing can work only if the rest of the
students are self-motivated and disciplined and if the process does
not stretch over too many class periods. The latter is sure to happen

223

if the class Size exceeds 20 students, more typical than not in most
high schools. Class sizes must be small if any course can be effective,
especially a writing course.

It appears that consistency over the four-year period is the most
important factor in a student being well prepared to move on to
college writing. No matter what size the high school or how many
offerings, writing can be taught well if the students are exposed to
consistent writing practices and instruction over a four year-period
and if that instruction involves some methods, such as the process
approach, which allow the students to explore the various steps
necessary to generate a finished product. If a student is asked to
write often and consistently and is taught a method for generating
various kinds of writing, he or She can be prepared well for college.
For such requirements and consistency to exist, it is crucial that a
high school English faculty work together and communicate regularly
about their curriculum, their requirements, and their methods.
There must be a departmental loyalty and commitment which
ensures that faculty members are following the established
requirements and methods. This is best produced by a faculty which
works together and perhaps studies and trains together to develop
their program. While it is not absolutely necessary that each faculty
member employ the same methods of teaching for teaching to be
effective, a student who gains a familiarity with a writing process
will most likely show more improvement than one who is
consistently asked to change his or her approach. Students need to
learn to be flexible, but more consistency from classroom to
classroom can be an added advantage to learning. The school's

224

administration should COOperate in determining a class size which
can be most effectively taught the curriculum and guaranteeing that
this number is the limit for enrollment. School district
administrators who are pledged to a good writing program will see
that the class sizes are small enough to make these classrooms
effective places of learning. The administration must also provide
opportunity for training or retraining when needed for faculty
members to be effective teachers of writing.

Each high school must establish an English curriculum which
meets the needs of its students. The collegebound students must
have a solid four-year program which lays a basis for good writing
skills and which builds upon those skills each year. There must be
consistency as much as possible in standards for evaluating the
students' writing. The faculty must determine these Standards and
convey them clearly to the Students. There also needs to be an
established minimum number of assignments agreed upon by the
faculty and a determination of what kinds of writing a student
should be exposed to and/or master. These considerations should
drive a reevaluation of the existing curriculum so that a four-year
program of continued skill acquisition is designed. The best curricula
will combine the reading of literature and non-fiction with writing

within specific courses.

i1. _ 1-..; for o 1‘_h'L;. W In Pro - t th Colle

I gathered information about the freshman writing programs at
the four colleges by three methods: the students' questionnaires,
questionnaires from several of the college teachers, and personal

225
interviews with the directors of freshman writing at each of the four
colleges. What I found were programs which differed in many
ways including how many courses were necessary to fulfill the
requirement, the assignments in the courses, the variety of selections
offered a student within a required course, the methods used to
teach the writing, the methods used to evaluate the writing, and the
qualifications of the teachers.

University A required a full year of freshman English at the time
the students in the study were freshmen. Since that year, this
college has changed to requiring one semester in the freshman year
and a semester later, usually in the sophomore year. This new
practice is similar to that of both University B and University C,
which each require one semester in the freshman year and one
semester in a later year to fulfill the writing requirement.

University D has a placement system which currently selects
approximately 70% of its freshman students to take a course which
could be described as a readiness course before they can enroll in the
semester course which fulfills the writing requirement; thus,
approximately 70% of the freshman at University D must take a full
year of freshman writing to fulfill the requirement.

The kinds of writing done at the four universities varied. Some of
the courses focused on personal writing in which the students related
past experiences and personal philosophies. While these courses
might use literature or non-fiction writing as models, the writing was
not in response to the literature Other courses focused heavily on
reader response, using a thematic approach with literature selected
to inspire or promote certain writing topics. Another approach was

226
to focus on kinds of papers (persuasive, comparison/ contrast,
analysis, narrative, descriptive, research, summary/ response, etc.).
Courses in which these kinds of papers were important assignments
often allowed more freedom of choice as to the topic or content of the
writing. University A used literature more than the other three
colleges. While the requirements of the classes varied from teacher
to teacher at University A, in general the professors followed a
syllabus which indicated certain goals for each course and gave a
suggested guideline for the number of teacher-evaluated pages a
student should produce. These guidelines allowed a great amount of
variety to exist. Since it was a larger university, University A was
able to have a diversity of offerings within the same course title,
designed around themes which might attract students with varying
interests.

Sections of University B's course were more Similar in content
when they were taught by the supervised graduate students; when
tenurestream faculty taught the classes, there was not as much
control over the content. The course syllabus suggests a course
outline based upon kinds of papers but allows enough flexibility with
the material to please diverse faculty. Also, there seemed to be a
consistent classroom format when the supervised graduate students
taught. Student in these classes were more apt to work in peer
groups. It was only in the classrooms of tenurestream faculty that
any University B Students wrote of onedraft assignments and
evaluations.

University C classes were more similar because all of them were
taught by graduate students who were supervised and required to

227

follow the same format. Only a few students (those in Honors College
and those who were able to fulfill the writing requirement with an
alternative course) had a different experience.

University D also has a syllabus which specifies the content of its
two freshman writing courses. Professors could introduce literature
of their own choice but were required to assign certain kinds of
writing.

The adherance to similar methods and assignments in each
university depended greatly on the organization exerted by the
Department. University A had a department separate from the
English Department which designed and supervised the teaching of
freshman English. There appeared to be stronger management and
greater participation in decision-making at University A. Thus, while
the sections of the course might differ greatly, there seemed to be
more awareness of the need for a student-focused writing
experience. The greatest variety was due, in fact, to the
personalities of the professors. Some classrooms were loosely run
with a greater tolerance of idiosyncrasies in the students' writings.
Other classrooms were more formal and had a narrower range of
expectations as to style and format of a paper.

University 8 appeared, on the other hand, to have a weaker
management of the course if it was taught by one of the English
Department members rather than by a graduate student.
Departmental collegiality and a less powerful chairman of freshman
writing combined to allow several department members to teach
freshman writing courses which consisted of lectures, reading,
assignments, and teacher evaluation of onedraft writing

228

assignments. Other department members were more attuned to the
writing process and current practices in the teaching of writing. The
graduate Students were expected to urge multiple drafts, peer group
work, and portfolio assessment.

The graduate students teaching at University C were required to
promote an atmosphere in the classroom which was student-
centered, with peer groups for each step of the writing process, and
portfolio assessment. These classrooms and instructors were strictly
supervised by the director of freshman writing.

University D also had a weaker management system. Other than
the mandatory meeting at the beginning of the semester (which
many temporary faculty missed), there was not a consistent
communication among the freshman writing faculty. The course
syllabus was intended to guide each teacher. If a teacher did not
follow the syllabus, there was not a good system of supervision or
evaluation which could remedy the situation. Since most teachers
were not tenurestream faculty, however, it was easier to eliminate
unsatisfactory teaching simply by not rehiring the responsible
faculty member. The course syllabus lists recommendations and
indicates the required pages of writing. The director of freshman
writing says that in general people do what they want loosely based
on the course description. The full-time members of the English
department who teach freshman writing and who meet regularly are
more apt to follow the departmental guidelines, but even they differ
in their opinions on what should be taught or how.

While I did not delve into the methods for arriving at a grade
which were employed by each professor, It appeared that most

229

evaluated final drafts using a rubric, whether personal or mandated,
which indicated certain characteristics for a certain grade.
University A was the only one of the four universities which
included such a rubric in the syllabus for Freshman Writing. The
graduate students at University C were required to evaluate a
portfolio in which the student was to place six specific final products
at the end of the semester, and they were given group instruction in

how to go about that evaluation and the Standards they should use.

An Evgeatipn of Teaching Methods in Freshman Writing Courses

Almost every Student in the study who participated in a
classroom which used a workshop approach enjoyed the experience
and felt it was a valuable method of learning writing. What I mean
by a workshop approach is a classroom in which the Students meet
with peer groups on a regular basis. It is a classroom in which a
paper is developed over a given period of time with due dates for
various drafts and activities assigned within peer groups for working
with and evaluating one another's draft. It is a classroom in which
the student views each assignment as an ongoing process. Usually
the process involves conferencing with the instructor either within
the class time or outside of class. Ultimately, of course, the students
were required to submit a polished version of all or some of the
papers. The only student who was critical of such a classroom was
the student at University C who was advanced in her writing because
of a high school Advanced Placement course, and who wished, too
late, that she had taken the Advanced Placement test so that
Freshman English would not have been required of her. She was not

230

critical of the approach; however, she simply was not having her
needs met. In her final questionnaire she said she thought the
claSsroom provided a good learning atmosphere for the students who
needed writing help.

The workshop approach worked well with each kind of paper
assigned at the four universities, including research papers. Students
were, in most cases, involved in other activities, too. Sometimes
there were class discussions about assigned readings; sometimes
there were lectures about literature, writing, or writers; sometimes
the students Spent class time researching (University D students
routinely met in the library as a class during the research component
of the required course). Some professors assigned group projects
which brought guest speakers to the classroom. There were, then, a
variety of alternatives to peer group meetings. Nonetheless, the
classrooms which regularly had peer groups working on papers in
process were those most often cited as classrooms in which the
Students learned the most about themselves as writers and how to
improve their writing. Of the eight students whose final
questionnaires indicate classrooms which were Strongly teacher
centered, only two made positive comments about teacher help or
classroom style. Four students wrote clearly negative comments
about the classroom atmosphere and/or the professor. Of the eleven
students whose questionnaires could be determined to describe a
student-centered classroom, seven were very positive about
classroom Style, ranking it as the first or second most important
aspect of the class or describing it with adjectives such as "excellent"
or "very good." The other five of this group ranked classroom style

2 3 1
average (3 or 4) or used adjectives such as "good" or commented in
other places, "I enjoyed the class," or made no ranking or comments
at all. There were no decidedly negative comments about classroom
style from these students. The other eight questionnaires were
those of the four students who attended other colleges and four
students whose questionnaires did not give a clear indication of
classroom Style. I feel these results show a clear preference for a
Student-centered classroom or the workshop approach. Nonetheless,
of the four students among the eighteen mentioned above who said
that they did not change as writers, two were Students who had been
in teacher-centered classrooms and two were students who had been
in Student-centered classrooms.

Students did not show a preference for experiencebased writing
as opposed to literaturebased writing, although more negative
comments about assignments were given by the few students who
had been asked to do literary critique papers. Students expected to
do research papers. They did not complain about such an
assignment being given.

Several students found it frustrating to receive a grade which
they did not understand. This was true at both the high school and
college level There were comments on these papers which confused
the students and a grade which they had not anticipated. These
students did not always seek out the professor for additional
information, however. Sometimes the students were not allowed to

rewrite papers, but usually they were.

232
Rgpmmendations fer Freshman Writing Programs

I would make one recommendation for college freshman writing
programs which is similar to one I made for high school programs.
The members of the department must work together to devise a
strong program which meets the needs of the students and is based
on sound theory and methods which have been proven effective by
research in the field. If all the members of a faculty were involved
in developing a curriculum, there might be more ownership and
loyalty to that curriculum. Such cooperation might be more difficult
for larger faculties or for departments in which most of the members
are temporary, but an attempt to provide a consistent program
which is proven to be effective would greatly benefit the students
and faculty alike While a strong administration could help promote
a Strong program, this is not always the case when administrators
have a heavy hand. The ideal Strength comes from a faculty working
together, dedicated to a program which each member has had a voice
in formulating.

The faculty at University A were, in actuality, probably the most
diverse in the content of each class, but a faculty which works
together to establish a curriculum is less apt to stray from the.
Standards, concepts, content, skills, and methods which they together
have deemed important. Most of the teachers at University A held a
doctorate in English or another field. They were knowledgeable,
professional practitioners who wanted a say in their department and
had a sense of purpose I cannot say this is untrue of those teachers
at the other three universities, but in many cases there was neither

the devotion to the department or even a sense of loyalty to the

233

university. If I can base my observations on what the students
described in their interviews, some of the temporary faculty at
University D were very devoted to the students, had been excellent
high school teachers, and were enjoying and doing a good job
teaching at the university level; while others seemed to have no
sense of purpose nor a good ability to work with the Students. There
was not consistency in attitude, methods, content, nor ability. While
this is true anywhere, it seemed more pronounced at University D,
where many of the faculty were temporary faculty.

The contrast between the freshman writing program presented
at University A and those presented by University B and University
D are great. I found some of the comments disturbing. Each director
of Freshman English at University B and University D described
situations in which the manner in which the course was being taught
by some people was not acceptable, yet they seemed to have no
remedy. It is not because Freshman English is under the auspices of
the English Department that this is a problem. One reason could be
the lack of power at the management level This Situation could
possibly exist because the director of Freshman English is not the
English Department Chair nor as powerful as the chair. It was
suggested by the two directors that when tenured English faculty
teach Freshman English, they can teach it any way they wish without
interference. If this is indeed the truth, a remedy should be
considered for changing the methods used by those professors in
whose classrooms the practices are not in keeping with current
theory or proven positive practice.

234

Another reason, however, as suggested above, might be that while
the graduate instructors at University B and University C are
working together to learn a curriculum and delivery which derives
from current theory in the field of composition, some of the other
faculty at all of the universities have not been involved in the
process of deveIOping a curriculum or studying newer methods and
theories. Instead they are teaching much as they have for years
with the result, in some cases, that their classes are not as effective
as their colleagues'. An understanding of what methods best help
Student writers has developed over the years and, as has been stated
in previous chapters, some of the methods used in previous decades
have been found to be, if not ineffective, certainly less effective than
current practices. Those faculty who are not teaching freshman
English effectively might benefit from working on a departmental
curriculum with those faculty who are using current and successful
methods of instruction.

The management at University C is strong, but the reason is that
all of the Instructors of Freshman English at University C are
graduate students seeking Masters degrees who are, of course, easily
managed. One has to question the practice of using Freshman English
as a training ground for graduate students, especially ones whose
education is not, in most cases, equal to the students' high school
teachers. Graduate students can be talented teachers, and well-
supervised graduate students can provide an excellent classroom for '
Student writers. Nonetheless, none of these instructors will have the
experience to be practiced evaluators. They are learning themselves
as they teach. An ideal, but costly, situation for freshman English

235

courses would be to have a faculty of tenurestream teachers who
are well-trained in the field and who are dedicated to the
department and its long-term practices. The positive aspect of the
graduate instructors, however, is that they are being taught effective
teaching methods and are being supervised as they deliver a
carefully developed curriculum.

The status of Freshman English or Freshman Writing has long
been discussed as a political issue in colleges. Susan Miller did an
extensive study of the issue (1991). She describes two scenarios in
her book which I observed in my study: "An autonomous
department, with internal hierarchies that produce the same sorts of
relative levels of Status reported . . . for fields within English
departments" and a "new ghetto, . . . guided by a few people in
secure positions" (194). Despite the harshness of her description for
the latter scenario, Miller's two contrasting programs could describe
the programs (respectively) at University A and at University C.
Miller urges a redefinition of the discipline of composition which
places it within the logical department, the English Department, but
provides an autonomy of features, mechanism, and practices which
gains for it a respect as an area of study valued for itself (195). If
such a view were taken, the status of Freshman Composition within
the English Department would preclude the assigning of graduate
Students, temporary non-tenured faculty, and faculty without the
qualifications of the discipline to teach the course. I do not see a
movement towards such a redefining, but there is no question that
it would be ideal Students entering college should expect to be
taught each course by experts in the field who can carry on the work

236

that their high school teachers began. Students, rightfully, could
question paying full college tuition to be taught in college by Masters
degree candidates with less training than some of the student
teachers who have floated in and out of their lives through their
previous thirteen years of education.

A final recommendation that I would make is based on my
conversations with the students I interviewed and the answers on
the second questionnaire. I feel that the writing workshop approach
is an excellent method with which to further the writing abilities of
students in their freshman year in college. They are ready to work
well with their peers and mature enough to provide good feedback to
one another. An important aspect of writing in college is audience.
This should be an important aspect of all writing courses, but it is my
observation that students are less successful in developing a sense of
audience at the high school level, perhaps because of their ages and
their lack of exposure to various issues and opinions or an inability
to express beliefs other than those held by their parents. Several of
the students in the study mentioned having found a new sense of
audience. Having a peer group as audience was essential to that
discovery. The students also need to learn the value of rewriting.
Again this is more successful at the college level where students
have more time outside of the classroom and are more apt to work
without supervision than at the high school level, where class time is
limited and homework is anathema. The writing workshop
approach with peer groups and process writing are valuable at any
level, of course, and high school teachers Should use this method
whenever possible, but it seems ideally suited to the college

237

classroom: the students learn well from the method, they are eager
to interact with one another, they are open to new ideas, and they
are mature enough to handle the freedom and responsibility
required. Ultimately, however, one benefit of the writing workshop
approach is that there is more time for teacher-student conferencing.
In this oneto-one situation, a teacher's training becomes vital All
teachers should avoid situations which result in some of the
comments I received on the Student questionnaires or in interviews:
" [my weakness was] trying to conform to what the teacher wanted,
instead of focusing on what I wanted," and "I was writing for him . . .
trying to please him, and I did not find that good at all." Instead,
comments to elicit would be these from the final questionnaires: "I
put myself in the reader's position and tried to liven it up so that
they wouldn't fall asleep reading it. Moreover, I read other people's
papers and observed how they used words and style together," and
"The professors actually taught the Students how to write. Most of
this was done by peer evaluation. By showing my writing to my
peers, they are able to pick up the flaws in the writing that I didn't.
I could then work to improve the areas where I had made mistakes.
This method also gave a little boost to my self-confidence level." To
elicit these final comments, I feel that college writing courses should
make extensive use of peer groups and process writing.

Il' -n 0.: 0! 12-9. Hi. 0 a "t ' "Lino... s an! L :I'uol!
Working with these twenty-nine (and finally twenty-seven)

students has been educational, fun, encouraging, frustrating, and

rewarding. I was pleased with the comfort with which the thirteen

238

interviewees settled into their interviews. While the process of
retrieving the questionnaires matched the proverbial task of pulling
teeth, when I did finally receive them, they were full of helpful and
insightful comments, sometimes even biting. I have learned,
however, that a study like mine is the farthest from quantitative that
a study can be The students' comments don't fit nicely into charts
and tables. There is no finding which fits all of the students. There
is little consistency in the data. The reason for that is simple; every
one of these students is an individual with a long history of
experiences to affect his or her education. Some of this history
directly affects the students' writing, some of it affects the students'
ability to work with teachers, and some of it affects the students'
ability to gain from their educational experiences. Sadly, perhaps
some of my best data would have been collected from the two
students with whom I lost contact during their freshman year in
college. They may have been students who had good writing
experiences but found other aspects of college unmanageable;
however, it could have been that the writing was the problem. I will
never know.

Several of the students in the study seemed be natural writers, as
if born with the ability, according to them. They said they always
enjoyed writing, always did well at writing, and always did a lot of
writing. Other students described themselves as students who
never wrote well and didn't like writing. While I do not believe
these students were born with these characteristics, I do believe that
their attitudes towards writing were instilled starting at the
beginning of their lives by family members and other important

239

people in their lives. Denny Taylor's significant study of family
literacy (1983) verifies this: "The conservation of literacy styles and
values occurs almost automatically, and only when the parent is
intent on change is a conscious effort involved" (1 1). After schooling
begins, Taylor concludes, the children begin a lifelong process of
developing their own literacy styles, but the early family
"conditioning" will almost always remain as a basis (77).

Problems that some of the students in my study were having
occurred because of wording patterns and vocabulary use which
were so ingrained a part of their literacy Style that their writing
teachers could neither change these patterns nor, in some cases,
explain why they were wrong. Perhaps this is the writing problem
that has led teachers everywhere to use the ubiquitous "AWK" on
students' papers to identify those awkwardly worded sentences that
defy other descriptions. Many students, like Joan, see it as a
permanent problem: "It's kind of set in me." As teachers of students
with differing literacy backgrounds, both high school and college
teachers need to learn ways to work with Students like Joan. Are
they being treated honestly when they have their sentences marked
"AWK" with little else to help them understand or change? IS a
writing teacher able to change literacy patterns? Are there classes in
the English Department or in other departments on college campuses
that can effect a change in the speech and writing patterns of
Students like Joan? These are questions which have to be addressed
before someone like Joan can have a good experience with writing.
These aren't questions within the scope of this study, however. Joan
has now finished her formal writing training, but she will always

240

have writing problems unless She begins to hear and wants to change
to different wording patterns.

The students also are often uncomfortable with the style required
in academic discourse. Many students have a difficult time writing
differently from their everyday language of discourse, regardless of
how close their language adheres to the standard vernacular. In my
interview with Mary, for instance, we discussed a paper she was to
write in which she was not supposed to give her own opinion. Mary
felt that was a challenge even though she felt she could do it. Mary
is used to writing what she thinks and feels. To step back and be
more objective makes writing more difficult for her. Jane wrote that
one of her greatest weaknesses was that she had "a hard time
writing down what [she] wanted to say." She found it was easier to
"just say it, instead of getting it down on paper." Kate had trouble
with papers in which she could not Show "personal opinion or input."
Students need more help writing because academic discourse is not a
familiar discourse. They cannot interpret what is wrong with a
sentence just because it is pointed out to them that the sentence is
"AWK." Too often they feel they are not receiving enough feedback
to understand how to make the transition from how they would "just
say it" to the wording their professors are encouraging. The use of
peer groups as audience and oneto-one conferencing can be
methods which address these discourse problems.

Denise is an example of a student whose personality has a lot to
do with what she learns and the grades she earns. Denise had the
most demanding of any professor described by the students I

interviewed. He was the Honors College professor at University C

241

who assigned many literary critique papers and was very narrow in
his expectations. Denise, however, was determined to get an A in
this course. She visited him during office hours constantly and
questioned her papers at many stages in the process of writing them.
She asked to rewrite some papers on which he had put what he
considered to be the final grade It was Denise's determination
almost more than her ability which earned her an A. Another
student with equal ability but less perseverance might not have
succeeded in reaching such a goal. I feel Denise truly did earn her A,
however, because she said she learned much about her own writing
from the grueling task of rewriting her papers sometimes three or
four times.

Bill and Jane are other students whose personalities aided their
work. Both were very amiable. They went to college to be taught,
and they were open to all that was presented. They liked each
teacher they had. They did the work to the best of their abilities.
These two students did some of the most creative assignments of
those described to me in the interviews. At University A Bill
described the interview for a careers writing project. Jane wrote a
paper on Scientific experiments in Gulliver's Travels at University D.
Nothing in their backgrounds would single Bill and Jane out as
outstanding students, yet I felt they were two of the most successful
in the study. The reason was their openness to try new things, to
learn about themselves, to want to learn, to trust their professors
and enjoy working with them—in general they were very Open-
minded students.

242

Joe was a student who had a bad experience in one class. The
reason for his great dissatisfaction was that he could not adjust his
writing style He had one method of writing: in a more creative mode.
It had been acceptable to the few high school English teachers he
liked, and he took only the classes those teachers taught for his last
two years of high school He found one professor at University A
who liked his style and one who preferred that he adjust for a
different audience and purpose. Joe was unable to adjust. He
chalked the second class up as a bad experience and sought out the
teacher he had found first term for his third term of writing. Joe
could not and would not change.

While these stories are anecdotal, typical of the stories which
appear in any study in which the research was done using the
experiences of human beings, it is important for writing teachers at
all levels to remember that Students are individuals with unique
personalities and backgrounds. No method or assignment will work
for every Student. This is reason alone for those who handle the
assignments and hiring to assure that each writing class is as small as
possible. Students of writing must be worked with one-on-one for
the instruction to be most effective Until we know the student, we
cannot as easily teach him or her. The experiences Kate had, both in
high school and in college, Show how a teacher can reach out and

save a student from herself, from her own bad habits.

We;

There is a corollary to the previous suggestion. Teachers are also
unique personalities with unique backgrounds. It would be

243

wonderful if all those who train and apply to teach writing were
good at teaching writing, but sometimes the teacher's personality
does not lend itself to a good classroom atmosphere. Students
described teachers who were unorganized, unhelpful, or incapable of
managing a classroom. There are teachers in the classroom who
should not be there. Self-monitoring should take care of this
problem, but it does not. This is another reason why strong
management is crucial in an English Department. Poor teachers
should not continue to receive a paycheck at the expense of their

students.

F iii At h L v Is an Im rove Articulati

A knowledge of the practices at both levels will help teachers
better serve their students whether in high school or college. If high
school teachers knew what their students would encounter at the
college level, they could prepare them better to be effective college
writers. When I undertook a study of the writing programs at the
colleges my students most often attend, it was with the purpose of
revising the college preparatory class that seniors take in my own
high school Several years of feedback has told me that my
knowledge has helped me be a valuable resource for collegebound
seniors in my high school Guidance department records of
interviews and questionnaires from graduates of our high school
confirm that writing experiences have improved significantly. In
fact, an increasing number of our students are entering journalism
careers.

244

Joining professional organizations, such as the Michigan Council of
Teachers of English, and attending the many conferences offered to
English teachers by the MCTE and various Michigan colleges will
provide opportunities for teachers at the two levels to come together,
work together, and learn about one another.

As stated several times in this study, there is not just one method
of teaching writing. Nonetheless, there are practices suggested by
current theory which I have promoted because the students in my
study have found them to be most helpful. If more teachers at both
the high school and the college levels used these practices (peer
groups, conferencing, journals, portfolios, multipledraft writing
processes, required rewrites), students would be moving between
similar programs. Being familiar with the writing process they
encounter in college is one of the greatest aides to a good transition
for Students of writing. Teachers at both levels could become aware
of what current theory and practice are by subscribing to
professional journals, by taking courses through nearby universities,
or by joining a workshop such as those of the National Writing
Project. Many of these workshOps are additional opportunities to
interact with teachers of different educational levels.

An important aide to articulation of writing programs between
high schools and colleges is the development of a mutual respect
between the faculties at the two levels. High school teachers should
am he instilling fear of college writing in their students. College
professors should not Show an attitude of contempt for what the high
school Student has learned. Knowledge can help erase these
attitudes. Coming together and talking together can help erase these

245

attitudes. Better yet, working together in programs which promote

articulation can help erase these attitudes.

Proggms Whieh Can Promote Articulation

T Advanc lacem t Pr ram

The program of articulation most often used by high schools is the
Advanced Placement Program. This program, administered by the
College Board, has been in operation for over thirty years. There
were two reasons behind the decision by some of the nation's elite
prep schools and colleges to begin a program of testing of high school
students for college credit orwaiver of requirements: the first was to
provide an opportunity for advanced high school Students to study
more challenging material, the second was to draw some of the best
students into their own schools. The colleges subscribing to the
program would draw the best students, the prep schools would draw
students by offering them the best AP preparation (Foster 3). In this
way the colleges also gained a way to have a say about high school
curricula. Despite many questions about the premises for the
development of the test and who it is that really benefits from the
process, there have been many positive results from what is now a
widespread program. Students find new motivation to take
challenging courses in their senior year of high school. Colleges have
help in preparing students for the level of work which they hope
students will be able to achieve upon arrival Students themselves
have been benefitted by being able to gain credit for courses which
would cost them much more than the AP test cost. In exchange,
colleges hope there will be lower enrollments in the introductory

246

courses and, perhaps, greater enrollment in the upper-level courses.
At this time there is no test being prepared by the Educational
Testing Service (E'IS) which has a higher level of acceptance than the
AP exams (Foster 5). There have been questions raised as to the
appropriateness of the courses which are designed to prepare
students for the AP exam. Many criticize them for treating literature
too objectively, putting "faith in textual autonomy" (Foster 6).

Others criticize the writing objective as being product-oriented
rather than process oriented. These criticisms are valid. A high
school selecting to offer an AP English Course should review some of
the literature which evaluates the AP program. Nonetheless, the AP
program, because it is accepted by most colleges, has become the
major program of articulation between high schools and colleges.

Six of the high schools in the study offered an Advanced
Placement English class for seniors. There was no clear reason why
some schools offered the course and some did not. (I did not ask on
the questionnaire.) Often the schools which did offer AP courses
were larger schools with a higher percentage of collegebound
students, but this does not describe all of the Six schools which did
offer an AP class, while it does describe some of the six schools which
did not offer an AP class.

Of the twenty-nine Students who answered the first
questionnaire, there were six who had taken an AP English course in
their senior year. Three of those six reported not having to take
part or all of the freshman writing requirement because of having
taken the AP exam. The other three either did not take the exam or
did not score high enough to waive any requirements. One student

247

who did take an AP course but did not take the exam earned an A
easily in the freshman course and reported feeling bored and
wishing she had taken the exam. Another earned an A- and a B+ in
freshman English courses. She was somewhat critical of her high
school preparation for writing, however, calling it only " fair." In
addition, however, two other students who had intensive courses of

study in their senior years, but did not take an AP course, took the

- . 4.131.? 1

AP exam and waived requirements.
There are workshops offered on a regular basis around the US.

 

for high school teaches who wish to set up an AP course and for ._
those who have AP courses established already. These workshops E
are another way to bring together practitioners at both the high

school and college levels to talk about what are the valuable

language arts skills and what are the best methods of conveying

them. These workshops are valuable even for those who are not

teaching AP courses.

W
There are other programs which have been developed to attempt

to go beyond what the AP Program has done One such program is
Project Advance, a program Started in 1973 between Syracuse
University and area high schools. The high school personnel first
came to the university with an idea for teaching courses within the
high school which students could take for college credit. The school
administrators felt that the AP Program was too test driven and,
therefore, was not fair to all Students. The Syracuse University
Project Advance, in which six high schools participated in the pilot

248

year, uses high school faculty coordinated by college faculty, to teach
courses for college credit within the high schools and now has some
eighty schools cooperating with approximately 3,600 students
enrolled (Gaines, Grassi 172). The teachers must have the same
credentials as the instructors who teach the courses on campus. Some
additional training is sometimes required. University faculty train
the teachers in summer workshops and serve as liaisons. Freshman
English is the most popular of the courses offered.

Dr. Franklin Wilbur, Director of Project Advance, cited it as the
"largest program in the United States offering accredited college
courses taught in high schools by high school faculty" (29). Dr.
Wilbur included his program in his National Directory of School-
College Partnerships (1987) along with eighteen other similar
programs. The teachers who are trained for Project Advance not
only provide students an opportunity to gain college credit early, but
they are good examples of the kinds of teachers who best promote
articulation: teachers who are knowledgeable about what happens in
freshman English, teachers who have worked well with and gained a
respect for college faculty, and teachers who have helped college
faculty learn about high school practices and gain respect for

secondary teachers.

N ion lWri in
The National Writing Project is probably the program which has

had the most impact on the articulation of writing programs between
high schools and colleges. The unique attribute of the NWP and the
attribute which probably makes it more significant in its impact on

249
articulation is that all levels of teachers from elementary through
college take part on an equal basis. The'NWP seeks to train teachers
to be better writing teachers. The methods include the workshop
classroom style with peer groups and process writing. As teachers
from both schools and colleges in a given geographic area work
together, they are doing what will probably best help their students
make a smooth transition between the two levels, they are learning
to value one another, to value one another's work, and to develop
teaching strategies which not only improve students' skills with
writing but also help them make a smooth transition from high
school to college because there is a similar method being used at both
levels. The more comfortable the students in my study felt with the
classroom methods and the assignments they encountered at college,
the more motivated they were to work and the more learning that
took place. Certainly, if a program like the NWP were able to
saturate an area, it might help eliminate comments from college
professors like one Student reported, "Forget everything you learned

in high school"

PreCpllege Placement Tests and Evalpations of Freshmen

Most colleges have summer orientation for incoming freshmen.
All of the universities in my study do. At these sessions, students
are asked to write in order to be placed in the appropriate Freshman
Writing course (i.e non-credit remedial, Honors, waiver of credit).
Placement using a onedraft sample has been questioned. Two
instructors at a summer placement program for Carelton College

evaluated their program. While they undertook the evaluation to

250

draw conclusions about student writers, their major conclusion was
about themselves and their methods for generating the essays they
used for placement as opposed to their actual evaluation of the
Students' writing. They found that they talked about writing being a
process but focused too much on the product when evaluating the
students for placement (Appleman, Green 197). There are most
likely many summer placement programs whose processes, if
studied, would yield the same misplaced focus. Several students in
my study were dissatisfied with their placement in college level
writing courses. Those entering University D were especially
concerned if they were placed in the freshman writing course in
which approximately 70% of entering freshmen are placed. Since
this course does not fulfill the writing requirement at University D, it
is perceived as remedial by the students. Jane was one Student
particularly frustrated by being placed in what she perceived as
being a remedial course. Some colleges allow a waiver of freshman
English using the summer writing sample. University C uses the
writing sample as a CLEP. Mary, who entered University C, was
disappointed with what she wrote in the summer. She wished She
had been able to turn in writing which she had worked on, re
written, and polished. In other words, Mary would have liked to
have been judged on a piece of writing done in the way all of the
writing was done In the course which she had to take at University C.
The universities in this study need to do what the Carelton
instructors did and examine their perceptions, their theories about
writing, and the realities behind their evaluation and placement of

students. One state university in Michigan which was not a focus of

2 5 1
my study is now asking students for a portfolio of writing along with
an essay about themselves as a writer. This method of evaluating
freshmen for placement in writing courses may be cumbersome but
may also be more realistic, especially if the university adheres to the
theory that writing is a process and not a product. By using the
portfolio method of evaluating incoming freshmen, universities will
develop another tool of articulation since it will require the schools to
focus on Specific preparation of their students as they develop their

portfolios.

Professional Organizations
Forums for establishing communication and improving

articulation are local, state, and national professional organizations.
The most prominent organization which reaches out to the schools
and universities in this Study is the Michigan Council of Teachers of
English. MCTE Sponsors a yearly conference for teachers of all
levels. In addition, two of the universities in the study Sponsor
conferences for English teachers. At all of these conferences,
presentations are made by teachers of all levels which are open to
the others. These conferences can provide valuable interaction
between faculties which can promote understanding and
collaboration to improve articulation. In addition, many of the
teachers and professors in the study belong to national organizations
like The National Council of Teachers of English and affiliates such as
the Conference for College Communication and Composition.
Publications from these organizations could provide a sense of
collegiality. National Conferences provide another forum for

252

interaction, although in most cases high school teachers are
hampered by lack of funds for such conferences. High school
administrations rarely see it a necessity for teachers to attend
national conferences and might support such a trip only if the
teacher paid her or his own expenses. Colleges more often see the
need to meet on a national level. If more teachers were involved in
these academic organizations and had the means to attend the
conferences, a greater interaction between the levels would exist.
Both high school and college administrations need to promote such

involvement, providing funding when necessary.

Writing Across the Curriculum
While my study focuses on what teachers of high school English

and freshman writing at colleges can do to promote articulation,
some of my questions on the questionnaires and in the interviews
focused on writing done in other high school and college courses.
Some of the students in my study did considerable writing while in
high school in classes other than English. Needless to say, such
practice can only promote better writing. In addition, some of the
students had many writing experiences in college The students at
University B most often mentioned writing papers in other classes.
As noted when I wrote about my interview with laurie, even though
she did not take a freshman English course because of her score on
the AP exam, She did more writing at University B than some of the
students did at other universities even when one of their courses
was freshman English. That is because of the number of classes at

University B which use essay exams and assign papers. Mary had a

253
similar amount of writing at University B. University D was the
other college at which students reported writing in other courses.
Paula was a student, who like Laurie, waived English requirements
with an AP test. Nonetheless, at University D, Paula had many
writing experiences. One of Paula's professors responded to my
request for a questionnaire. On the questionnaire he said that he
also taught a supplemental writing skills course in his department.
It could possibly be deduced that because he is responsible for the
writing skills course in his department, that he has begun to ask for
more writing in the other courses he teaches, such as the one in
which Paula enrolled. The practice of these four universities to
require a writing course to be taught by the other departments to
SOphomores or upper classmen can be an inducement to professors to
add more writing across the curriculum. Writing across the
curriculum, to repeat, is not a focus of my study; nonetheless, some
of the statements I gathered from the students in this study suggest
that writing in other classes was beneficial to them. The recruitment
of colleagues in other departments to share the task of promoting
writing by assigning papers, using essay tests, and promoting good
writing skills in all of the students' work can only aide the Student in

a faster attainment of writing skills.

Qpestipps Fer Future Regret;

Future research should examine some of the issues which arose as
a result of this study. The high schools in this study incorporate
writing into their curricula in different manners. Some high schools

require a certain number of writing assignments as part of the

254

students' regular English curriculum. Other high schools offer
courses devoted solely to the teaching of writing, although these
courses often aim at Specific modes such as research writing,
journalism, or creative writing. Some schools merely assume that
writing is a task that should happen in the regular routine of English
classes and do not prescribe a certain number of pages or
assignments to be done. It seems obvious to me that not all of these
methods of presenting writing are effective. The amount of training
students received, even within the same high school, differed greatly.

The Students I was working with were all college bound. AS I
examined the curricula in their high schools I wondered what kind of
training in writing was being received by students who were not
heading for college.

These observations suggest that further Study is needed to
answer some important questions. First, how much writing Should
high school Students do? Second, what kinds of writing should be
introduced in high school? Third, Should all students have the same
kind of writing training? If not, what kinds of writing are best for
students entering college upon graduation from high school and what
kinds of writing are best for students entering the job market? If
the writing instruction is sequential in a high school, how can the
curriculum be developed so that students receive the entire
sequence. What kind of management is needed to ensure that the
writing program is being presented as developed? What kind of
training is necessary to guarantee that a teacher can deliver the

curriculum effectively?

255

Questions also arose from my study of freshman English. The
question I saw most often in the literature on this basic writing
course was Should it exist. Beyond that basic issue are others. Who
should teach writing to freshmen? Should the English Department
oversee such instruction or would a separate, autonomous
department be preferable? Should all freshmen be enrolled in such
a course? If students are exempted from freshman writing, what are
the best methods to determine who Should be required to take the
course and who has earned a waiver?

Despite all of the questions and concerns I can raise about the
articulation of writing programs between high schools and colleges, It
is clear that students will cope whether the two programs differ
greatly or are very similar. Of the twenty-seven students who
returned the final questionnaires, only a few would say that they did
not have a satisfactory writing experience in their freshman year at
college. It may be that writing instruction as it exists is adequate at
both the high school and college level and that the articulation is
great enough that students can make a successful transition.
Nonetheless, the recommendations I have made could enhance the
articulation between these two levels, perhaps providing an even '

more effective education in writing skills for student at either level.

APPENDICE

APPENDIX A
QUETIONNAIRE AND
COVER LETTERS

Appendix A

Original Letter of Inquiry to High Schools

March 26, 1991
Dear Colleague,

I am a fellow English teacher, employed at Lowell High School, and am a
doctoral student at Michigan State University. I am working on a dissertation
in which I will examine the relationship between area high school writing
programs and the writing programs offered to freshmen by four state
universities (there followed a list of the colleges). My queries to the
university instructors will not only seek to ascertain the content of their
programs, but also the level of skill they expect freshmen to have attained
before college. I am seeking your help in gathering a group of students and
teachers to complete questionnaires which will provide me with information
about the programs in area high schools. In my dissertation, I will be using
this material to make general observations. While I will seek permission to
quote from the questionnaires, I will use no names nor will I identify specific
high schools. '

I am seeking your help to provide me with the names and addresses of
individuals who would help with the survey. 1 am seeking one teacher from
each high school to fill out a questionnaire designed to give me information
about the English curriculum of collegebound students. I will ask how much
and what kind of writing experience the average college-bound graduate from
your high school will have had. I am also seeking three students from your
senior class who will be attending any one of the four colleges I have listed. I
will ask the students to give their impressions of their high school writing
experiences on a questionnaire I will mail in May. In addition, I will ask the
same three students to provide me with home addresses and agree to fill out a
second questionnaire during June of 1992 so that I might gather impressions
of their writing experiences during their freshman year of college.

If there are individuals in your school who will help me gather this
information, I would appreciate your time in filling in their names and
addresses and other information I have requested on the enclosed sheet and
mailing it in the envelope I have provided. I would like to receive these names

by April 26th.
Sincerely,

256

257

Form from High Schools Naming Volunteer Participants

Please return this list of addresses by April 26th to:
Jill VanAntwerp, Lowell HS, 750 Foreman Rd., Lowell, MI 49331

NAME OF YOUR SCHOOL
NAME OF TEACHER WHO WILL FILL OUT A QUETIONNAIRE:

 

POSITION

 

STUDENTS WHO WILL FILL OUT THE QUETIONNAIRES:

1.

 

COLLEGE THIS STUDENT WILL ENTER IN 1991:

 

HOME ADDRES:

 

 

2.

 

COLLEGE THIS STUDENT WILL ENTER IN 1991:

 

HOME ADDRES:

 

 

3.

 

COLLEGE THIS STUDENT WILL ENTER IN 1991:

 

HOME ADDm

 

 

Have all of these students agreed to be mailed a questionnaire in
care of the above high school to fill out during May of 1991?

Have all of these students agreed to be mailed a questionnaire in
care of their home addresses to fill out during June of 1992?

 

 

258

Cover Letter for All Groups' First Questionnaires
June 20, 1991
Dear Research Participant,

Thank-you for agreeing to take part in the research I will be
doing for a dissertation entitled: Articulation Between Schools and
Colleges in the Field of Composition. I will be providing you
questionnaires and, in some cases, conducting personal interviews
with you as your involvement in this research.

If you are a student, I will be interested in your answers to
questions about your high school writing experiences and your
concept of yourself as a writer. All Students will be asked to fill out
questionnaires at the ends of their senior year in high school and
freshman year in college I will ask for your comparison of your high
school writing program and your college freshman writing program.
I will ask you to describe the changes in your concept of yourself as
a writer. Some of you will be asked to communicate with me during
your freshman year in college. I will contact you later in the
summer about this aspect of the research. These communications
will be in the form of telephone or faceto-face conversations. Your
name will never be used in the dissertation or any material seen by
any other person. The name of your school will also not be used.

If your are a teacher or instructor, I will be interested in your
answers to questions about the program your school or college
provides in the area of writing. I will communicate with you
personally and with questionnaires. This communication will cover
the time period between May 1991 and August 1992 and will
involve at the least one contact and at the most four. With your
permission, if necessary, further contacts may be requested. Your
name and the name of your school or college will not be used in this
dissertation and will be identifiable to no one but me when
information is written. While members of my review committee are
aware of what schools and colleges I will be investigating, they will
not know which information refers to which schools. They will not
know the names of high school teachers I have contacted, although
they may be aware of college instructors being approached.

While I foresee no risk or discomfort to you, you are free to
choose not to answer any question on a questionnaire or which I ask

259

Cover Letter for All Groups' First Questionnaires
(continued)

you personally. You may ask to be dropped as a participant at any
time Your consent to participate is voluntary, and the extent to
which you participate is your choice Results of my project will be
provided upon request with all participants remaining anonymous as
stated above

You indicate your voluntary agreement to participate by
completing and returning this questionnaire Those students who
will be contacted during their freshman year in college will be asked
specifically if they wish to participate in that aspect of the Study.
Filling out the questionnaire does not obligate a student to
participate in that phase.

Sincerely,

260

High School Teacher Questionnaire

A Profile of Writing Instruction

School

 

Number of students enrolled in grades 9-12

 

Per Cent of graduating seniors who attend two-year or four-year

colleges
Your Name

 

 

How many years have you taught at the high school listed above? __

List all of the courses offered in your high school which are part of
the curriculum of the English Department: (indicate * which you
teach)

Course Title Grades College Prep, Required
AP or Honors or Elective

261

High School Teacher Questionnaire (continued)

Which of the classes listed on page 1 incorporate writing on a regular
basis?

Are any of the classes devoted entirely to writing?

How does your department recognize differing levels of student
ability in the design of your curriculum? ’

How much writing would the average collegebound student have
been required to do by the time he or she had completed four years
at your high school?

Do you feel the collegebound students graduating from your high
school are prepared to succeed in the writing which they will have to
do in their college courses during their freshman year?

Why or why not?

262

High School Teacher Questionnaire (continued)

Describe every kind of writing experience offered by your English
Department.

Does your English Department curriculum focus on one type of
writing to the exclusion of others? Explain this trend.

For what kind of writing would you say your students have the most
and/ or the best instruction?

263

High School Teacher Questionnaire (continued)

What kind of writing methods or procedures are taught or
encouraged in courses where writing is assigned in your English
Department? Is there a consistent procedure from teacher to
teacher?

What kind of writing assignments are given by other departments in
your school?

Please give an overview of the writing instruction provided by your
English Department, including any aspects not yet mentioned and
your personal evaluation.

264

First Student Questionnaire

A Survey of High School Writing Experience

 

 

 

 

 

Name
Address
College
High School
Birthdate Final Grade Point Average

 

 

Did you attend this high school while in grades 9 through 12 _.
If "no," explain:

List the courses you took in grades 9-1 2 which were considered
part of the curriculum of the English Department:

Course Full Year Grade Required Honors,
or Sem. Earned or Elective AF, or
Col. Prep?

 

In which of the courses listed above would you say you were
required to write pieces of one or more pages on a regular basis?

265

First Student Questionnaire (continued)

As closely as you can remember, put a number after each of the
following kinds of writing to tell approximately how many of each
kind you were assigned in total during your four years of high
school

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Essay Literary Analysis __
Essay Test literary Reaction
Research Paper (Term Paper) __ Short Story
Persuasive Paper Poetry

Expository Paper Personal Narrative
Written Book Review or Report Autobiography

Other Reviews (movie, music, etc. ) __

Character Sketch Other:

 

Explain any of the numbers or categories which you feel need
additional comment.

Which of the papers listed above were written in departments
other than English?

How much choice did you have in the type of writing assignments
you did in high school?

Explain any use made of portfolios or journals in your high school
years. Comment on how often and for what purposes they were
assigned.

266

First Student Questionnaire (continued)

Which word listed below describes your evaluation of your
preparation in the area of writing for the college which you plan

to attend?

Excellent
Very Good __
Fair
Poor
Very Poor
I have no way of evaluating my preparation

 

 

 

 

 

Explain your answer:

What predictions would you make, based on your writing
experiences and abilities as you and your teachers perceive them,
as to your potential for being able to do well with writing during
your freshman year in college?

Describe the process you use to prepare a writing assignment Step
by step. Is your method considered acceptable by your teachers
or have you been encouraged to adapt to other procedures?

Attach a page on which you describe yourself as a writer, your
feelings about writing both in and out of school, and your sense of
the importance of writing skill in your life.

267

Cover Letter to Students With Second Questionnaire

PO Box 35
Lowell, MI 49331
May 11, 1992

Dear Research Respondent,

Congratulations! You have finished your first year of college. I
am eager to hear how the year went and how you coped with writing
assignments at college. I have prepared a questionnaire which I
hope will not take too much of your time. I appreciate your helping
with this study. Your questionnaires from last spring have already
been helpful. This final questionnaire will provide the information I
need to finish my study.

As you may remember, I am looking at the transition students
make from their English instruction in high school, specifically
writing instruction, to their writing classes in their freshman year at
college The questionnaire is designed not only to give information
on the transition, but to give me some idea about how you personally
felt about what you encountered while in college Please use the
backs of these three sheets to add any additional comments. The
envelope I have provided has enough postage to mail the three
sheets.

As I have promised, you will not be identified in any way in the
writing that I do for my dissertation ( I am working on a Ph. D. in
English from MSU). I may quote you, but when I do you will be
identified with a pseudonym (Kelly or Jake or some other name).
Your high school and college also will not be identified by name.

I have asked for your phone number in case something you write
sparks an interest that requires more answers. I would call and ask
such questions over the phone. You may also call me with questions
or clarifications at any time. My phone number is 616-897-5242. I
hope that your freshman year was satisfactory, but if for some
reason it was not, if you are quitting college or if you are switching
colleges, I would appreciate a note to that effect on the back of page
one with as much of an explanation as you care to give me. Your
participation in this project is greatly appreciated. I wish you
success in the rest of your time in college.

268

Second Student Questionnaire

Spring 1992 Questionnaire-Students

 

Permanent Address

 

Phone Birthdate
High School
College

list the courses you took to satisfy the general education
requirement in English (composition, literature, ATL, Freshman
Thought, English, etc.). Please indicate the

professor/ teacher/ instructor; the grade received; and the
semester/ term. (Also, indicate any method used to waive the
requirement).

 

Course Grade Instructor Term

In your questionnaire one year ago you were asked to rate the
instruction you received in high school English, giving your
impression of your preparation for college Here is how you marked
that question:

Excellent___ Would you give the same rating now, one year
Very Good __ later, after your freshman year of college? Why
Good __ or why not? What rating would you choose, if not?
Fair...

Poor

VeryP-o—or ._

269

Second Student Questionnaire (continued)

How would you rate the classes you took in college which taught
literature, composition, etc. (English class), using the ratings above, as
far as the effectiveness and/ or usefulness of the content and
instruction? Why this rating?

Rank the following attributes of a classroom as to the importance of
each in the effectiveness of the class for you personally. Add your
own if an important attribute is not listed.

Professor/ Teacher/ Instructor
Content: lecture, books, film, readings, etc.
Students in the class .
Assignments
Style of classroom .
Student centered w/ groups, etc. or teacher centered w/Iecture, etc.

Other (describe)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Were you satisfied with the grades you received in the English
classes you took in college? Explain:

What factors contributed to your success or failure in these classes?

270

Second Student Questionnaire (continued)

What could your high school have done to better prepare you for the
writing that you had to do in college?

As you wrote papers in college, what did you discover to be your
strengths? From where did these Strengths come?

As you wrote papers in college, what did you discover to be your
weaknesses?

Describe how you have changed as a writer in the past year.

Add any additional comments which you think might contribute to

my understanding of the experience you had as you made the
transition from a high school writer to a college writer. Use the
reverse side

271

Questionnaire Sent to Students' Professors

Questionnaire for Course Instructors

 

 

Dr. ___Mr. __ Ms. __ Mrs. _
Name

College at which you teach

Course

 

What percentage of the Students in this class are freshmen?
Is this a required course?

What options are available to waive this course?

Would you say that this course is writing focused? If not, what
percentage of the course focuses on writing?

What percentage of the grade in this course is derived from the
students' written work done outside of class (reviews, essays, reports,
etc.)?

What percentage of the student's grade in this course is derived from
essay answers on exams or tests?

What percentage of the student's grade in this course is derived from
objective questions such as those on multiple choice tests?

272

Questionnaire Sent to Students' Professors (continued)

What other content is included? (literature, non-fiction, movies, etc.)

Are there prerequisite courses to this course? What are they?
Which of the following are used when the Student is working with
' writing in this course?

Journals __

Peer Group Evaluations_._

Group Critiques

 

Draft Submissions

 

Conferencing as part of class upon teacher's requeSt__
Optional conferencing at Student's request——
Research—

What expectations do you have as to the experience or ability of the
students who take this course?

How would you characterize the ability of the Students who take this
course? Are you generally satisfied with the ability level of the
Students you teach in this course?

273

Questionnaire Sent to Students' Professors (continued)

What attribute or ability is the greatest determiner of success for a
student in this course?

What is the most useful writing habit that students have brought to
your course?

What is the most detrimental writing habit that students have
brought to your course?

What writing habit(s) do you find lacking in the students which you
teach which you wish they had acquired before they arrived in your
classroom?

How similar or different are your student expectations, your
standards, and your course requirements compared to those of your
colleagues who teach the same course?

Would students describe your class as one in which it is easy to earn
a high grade, hard to earn a high grade, or typical of classes in this
course?

APPENDDI B
A SAMPLE OF TYPICAL STUDENT
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

APPENDIX B
A Sample of Typical Student Interview Questions

1. Did you take the AP test, a CLEP test, or any other option in order
to waive the freshman writing requirement? How did you do? How
do you feel about the class you have been placed in? Does it seem
appropriate for your ability?

2. What is the typical routine of your freshman writing course?
What methods of teaching writing or helping students does the
teacher use which are especially effective for you? What methods do

not seem to help you?

3. How many papers are required? How long do they have to be?
What kind of papers are they?

4. What routine do you follow when you write your papers? How
long does it take you? Do you use a computer? '

5. Has there been any use of journals? portfolios? peer groups?

6. What kinds of literature or other writing was used in your class?
How was it used? What part of your grade was based on a
knowledge of or a response to literature?

7. How much research did you do? Were research Skills taught or
were you expected to have them? Did you use the library
extensively, some, little, or not at all?

8. Is your teacher a full professor, a part-time teacher, or a graduate
student?

9. Do you like the approach of the teacher you have? Has he or she
questioned anything you learned in high school?

10. Was the teacher accessible to the students? Did you make use of
the teacher's office hours to get help?

274

275

1 1. What do you like best about your college writing course? What
aspects haven't you liked about your college writing course?

12. What strengths or weaknesses in writing have you perceived in
yourself as you have worked on writing in college? Do you think
you have improved in your writing ability since being in this class?
What do you see as being the biggest difference between college
writing and high school writing?

13. Have you felt that you wished you had been better trained for
writing in high school? How was high school different than college?
What could your high school teachers have done to prepare you
better for your college writing experience? Were there specific
teachers or classes in high school which prepared you better for
college? What aspects of those experiences were significant in your
preparation?

14. How do you feel about the work you have been doing? Are you
satisfied with your grades? How are you evaluated? What goes into
the final grade you will receive for the class?

15. How would you compare yourself to other Students in your class
or other students you have met as far as writing ability? Do you feel
better prepared or worse?

16. What kind of writing are you doing in other classes? Do your
teachers use any form of writing or essay on tests?

APPENDD( C
A SAMPLE STUDENT

INTERVIEW TRANSCRIPT

APPENDIX C

Transcript of Second Interview with Mary

The following is a transcript of my interview with a student who I
have called "Mary" in my dissertation. Mary attended University B.
She comes from a rural community and attended a consolidated high
scth which serves several rural communities and the surrounding
countryside. This interview took place in the campus library of
University B on April 9, 1992. I had already had one interview with
Mary previous to this interview during her Spring break.

Jill: OK, so you have been taking English __ from Mrs. or Ms. . . . Does
she say Ms.? What do you call her?

Mary: We call her (by her first name).

Jill: OK. I noticed her name was _. I want to send her a
questionnaire. Now when I send her a questionnaire, I don't identify
you, I just say, "One of your students in English __." And when I
write this, remember, I don't use your name or your school's name;
it's just more descriptive without naming names. I don't even
mention (University B). OK, in English __ tell me what you've been
doing in there, especially in the way of writing.

Mary: Since spring break?
Jill: Yes.

Mary: OK. Well I finished up a paper during spring break which was
on one of the books from the nine stories from J .D. Salinger, so we
just reworked that. When we got back from spring break we
watched the movie "Rumblefish," and we did what was like a
preparation for our final paper. It was a critical evaluation although
we didn't know we were actually doing that. We just had to get into

276

277

our peer groups and for our mid-term, we got in our peer groups,
and we came up with questions, and we had her other class answer
the questions, and then we graded them.

Jill: Did they do that to you?
Mary: Yes.
Jill: On "Rumblefish" right? So you got a set from them?

Mary: Yes. And that was our mid-term, and then we had another
paper that was-~we could pick one of those questions and ourselves
we would have to analyze one of those questions. It could be a
question that we used or it could be from another group also on the
movie Now the paper that we are working on we just Started
yesterday. It is a critical evaluation. We can choose a story, a movie,
or anything and express in a formal voice something to our reader or
something that we want to make sure that they understand.

Jill: So, any movie, any book, one in class or not in class, so you could
just go see a movie?

Mary: Yes. I am doing it on "Beaches." It could be anything you
want.

Jill: OK. Can you do research on that or is it all supposed to be more
your personal impression?

Mary: Yes, it's supposed to be your personal impression although
you are not supposed to give Opinions in the paper.

Jill: So, if you can't give opinions, then you have to say what is
happening?

Mary: Right, like she might ask us to pick three to five categories
like theme, plot, dialogue characters, actors...

Jill: Did she suggest in any way that really it's all opinion?

Mary: No.

Jill: She Isn't acknowledging at all that what you write obviously is
going to be your Opinion?

Mary: No
Jill: Do you feel that way?

Mary: Well, I mean I kind of think that it is your opinion because
you're picking something you want to write about. It is, because She
wants Specific scenes that back up your statements, and if you are
getting ideas from the scenes, that is your opinion.

Jill: That is your perception anyway that even though you are
backing it up with what you saw, someone else could easily have
seen it differently. It is interesting that She said "No opinions." OK -
no opinions—critical review. To me this seems impossible, how could
you do one without the other. Obviously, it is like seeing a review
from Siskel and Ebert, like that isn't all opinion. But I understand
that what she is trying to say is don't just write Opinions, she wants
everything you say about it for you to have something specific, that
she is trying to teach you to write specifically whether you write
about movies or books. Do you think that's easy or hard?

Mary: It's not too bad. There are times where I can say, "I feel
this..." or "I feel that..." but we seem to have been able to use our
opinions in all the other papers, so it is not very hard to write it in a
formal voice.

Jill: She wants it in third person, no first person, but you were able
to use first person in other things you've done?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: Have you had things graded, like was this paper, the Salinger
paper, graded yet?

Mary: No. What she is going to do is next week we don't have
classes at all and we have conferences with her, and we bring three
papers out of the four that we have written. One of them has to be
the critical evaluation, and we meet with her, and she gives us ideas
to rework our papers for all of them, and then we work on them
and if we need to meet with her again, we can, and then we turn our
portfolio in and that is our grade

Jill: How many papers have to be in your portfolio?

279

Mary: Three.

Jill: Three papers in your portfolio. So it can be anything you have
worked on over the whole semester?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: But one of the three has to be the "Beaches" one that you are
doing?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: OK. What do anticipate you are going to get, an A? You are
going to get an A for this class?

Mary: Yes, I think so.

Jill: Have you met with her already at different times?

Mary: We did once

Jill: And that was another thing where she required it, right?
Mary: Yes.

Jill: Have you gone to her on your own?

Mary: During class sessions . . . like, well, She will say get into your
peer groups and have somebody proofread your paper, or she will
have a list of questions where she wants us to go through and see if
we've met certain criteria for the papers, and I've gone up to her and
gotten different ideas for my papers. This last paper, the one that
we turned in for last week, she gave me a whole bunch of stuff, and I
could even call her at home, so she's been giving me the help.

Jill: Does she have mostly a workshop approach in the class, you
working with your peer groups, or asking her questions, or just
writing on your own?

Mary: Yes.

280
Jill: Did she ever run a session, though, about the literature or

anything?

Mary: No
Jill: No lecture type, always discussion group or workshop?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: OK. Since this critical review is only on one thing and in your
case a movie, you aren't going to be making references to page
numbers or anything. There isn't going to be anything like you
would have in a research paper?

Mary: No.

Jill: In this whole semester was there any research?

Mary: No.

Jill: No research?
Mary: None at all

Jill: OK. Now you will be taking (sophomore English class) next fall
or Spring or whatever.

Mary: Right.
Jill: Now, how about your Speech (requirement)?

Mary: My speech-I'm waiting at this point to hear from one of the
advisors because I've taken the Dale Carnegie course so I'm supposed
to get some compensation for that.

Jill: OK. What about the other classes you are taking this marking
period. You're a business major. Any writing in any of them?

Mary: My accounting class right now. We are having to do research.
It's a very extensive paper on a company, its financial annual
reports-financial Statements and annual reports. We had to write to
a company and have them send us their annual reports for the last
three years. And we have to do all of these ratios and find out what

281

the company has been doing for the last three years and just tons of
information. And he does look for grammar and everything like
that.

Jill: And he's given you any guidelines as far as paper writing?
Mary: Yes.

Jill: Now on that one when you make citations they'll be out of the
reports, right?

Mary: Right.
Jill: You aren't supposed to go into any other kind of research or not?

Mary: Well, we had to use a whole section of the library like
Standard and (inaudible) report and different business indexes and
the computer disclosure that prints out all of the different
information, so. . . .

Jill: And then are you going to refer to them in your paper?

Mary: Actually we don't have to because it would be pages.

Jill So you are just going to write about those three in your report?
Mary: Right.

Jill: And he said that he does want it to be really polished and
checks for grammar, punctuation . . . . you're not worried about that?

Mary: No.
Jill: How long did you say that had to be?

Mary: It doesn't really have to be any certain length; it's just that we
meet all of the criteria. He had certain guidelines like a page for this
and a page for that when he wants us to talk about their company
and what they've done for the last year, he recommends three
fourths ofa page and so on.

Jill: OK, that's accounting, anything else where you're writing?

282

Mary: Let's see. I don't think so. I think we talked last time about
my library class, didn't we?

Jill: I think so.

Mary: I ended up getting an A on that paper. He was really
impressed, so that's good.

Jill: That's good to hear. (Looking through previous notes.) What
course was it did you say?

Mary: It was Library___.

Jill: (Still searching through notes from last interview. ) I don't think
I have that mentioned. Let's talk about that for a little while.

Mary: OK. That was a class that we were taught how to use
everything in the library. CENTRA, where all of the books are That
was an eight-week session. We were required to do a bibliography,
so we had to get all of the information as if it was a term paper, and
then do a paragraph about the book, and we had to do magazines and
get on the microfiche and use reference books and government
documents. ‘

Jill: And then you wrote a paper?

Mary: No, we just had to do ten different paragraphs and then just
like a final summarization.

Jill: And you got an A on that, huh?
Mary: Yes.

Jill: What have your tests been like in all of your classes? lots of
multiple choice, essay, short answer, what have they been like?

Mary: I would say last semester they were more essay, this
semester they seem to be more multiple choice

Jill: Which do you prefer?

Mary: I prefer the essay.

283
Jill: Can you get equally good grades on either one?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: So if it were multiple choice you could still get a good grade.
Now you said that your mid-term was picking a question from
"Rumblefish" and writing a paper on that, so there wasn't a test in
there because that is comp.

Mary: Right.

Jill: And what will the final be like in there, the portfolio is really
the final?

Mary: Ok, no, the midterm is like a takehome thing. Over the
weekend we got the assignment and then it was due like on Monday,
but she allowed us to turn it in up until last Friday. She said our
final is also going to be a takehome final, but I think it is going to be
given to us like the last week of classes so that we just bring it in
with our portfolio.

Jill: So, you'll have a takehome essay and your portfolio to turn in
during finals week?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: You're going to get your portfolio back, do you think, in the
summer?

Mary: Actually she said she thought that if we turn them in like the
week before exams then she would be able to have themfor us the
day of exams.

Jill: Mm—mm, good. Ok, I think that covers about all I wanted to
cover. There was one question I was going to ask you. Do you think
that this English _, you know it is required, everybody has to Show
writing competency, do you think that they're fair about all of the
things they offer, they've got their own CLEP test, or you could have
taken AP English in high school, I mean you could have taken the
test, or take this class. Do you think It is needed or do you think this
is a waste of time?

284

Mary: I don't think it is a waste of time. I just think that some
classes tend to be harder than others and some tend to be easier
than others.

Jill: And you're talking about (freshman English)?

Mary: I know people in classes that they have to write a paper
every week, it's the same routine We never even did anything like
that in high school. It's just like some expect a lot, and some, like
with writing the paper every week, it's basically they're just
analyzing a story every week, and for some, I mean that might be
good after a couple of papers, but like some classes, I don't see where
it is that they're helping peOple

Jill: Did you like the process writing that you did, though, the group
work?

Mary: Yes, because a lot of times when she had us do stuff we didn't
really know what we were doing it for, or She wouldn't make it like
stressful and tell us that we have to do a paper here, she would just
say, I want you to work on this. We did a lot of different things that
you don't normally do in class.

Jill: So you think it is a good idea as long as it is used well Did you
feel that you improved as a writer?

Mary: Oh yes.
Jill: You like peer groups?

Mary: They're OK. I like the girls in my group. We get along. It
seems to be helpful, but like I mentioned the last time, I seem to be
giving them more input than what they're giving me, so I have my
roommate, who is a really good writer, she usually helps me
proofread my papers.

Jill: You're a pretty good writer. Did you consider taking their CLEP
test?

Mary: Yes, I did take it, but I didn't make it.

Jill: Oh, you didn't make it. They're pretty tough on their
standards?

285

Mary: Yes, they're really tough, but I think I did well on all the
grammar. It was the essay. I didn't really know what to write

about.
Jill: And you didn't take AP?

Mary. No, they didn't have it. I think they're getting it at my high
school this year.

Jill: So are you looking forward to (the SOphomore class) or do you
wish you didn't have to take that?

Mary: Well, I'm going to be taking it providing that I can-
scheduling, that I can get English __ Honors, so I'll be doing a little
bit . . . .

Jill: You might like that better, huh?
Mary: Yeh.

Jill: Do you see as you look-from what you've seen around, peOple
in your peer group or your class or in the dorm that there's a real
need for freshman writing programs, do you see a lot of kids that
come that can't write?

Mary: There's a few in my class that I'd say that it's really good for.
I think that I probably could have gone into (SOphomore English)
without a problem. You know that test, I just felt like that test didn't
really, you know, I didn't get to express my ability to write. But if I
could just have turned in papers, shown them something else. . . .

Jill: Done a paper that you could give them?

Mary: Right.

Jill: I suppose they have a hard time controlling that because who
knows who did the paper.

Mary: Yeh, right.

Jill: Are you going to take, like for some of your university program
requirements, any literature?

286

Mary: I might. I was looking at that. I'll probably be in Detroit this
summer, so I'll be taking classes at Schoolcraft.

Jill: Oh, really?

Mary: So I looked at some of the UP's that transfer there.
Jill: You're going here, though, next year, right?

Mary: Yes. ‘

Jill: Do any of your professors, especially the ones like in...., now it
doesn't sound like something MS. _ would say, but do they ever
suggest that . . . . say out loud in class, "Well you guys don't know
anything," or "You didn't learn to write," or "You don't have good
skills"? Do you ever get that impression from any of your teachers
that they think that about the class in general?

Mary: None of my professors, well. . . . Not about writing. Maybe
in some of my other classes, like my math class.

Jill: OK, that the math skills are down. More concern about lack of
math skills than you've seen writing skills as far as verbalizing some
frustration.

Mary: Right.

Jill: How about study skills? any of them ever suggest that you all
don't study well?

Mary: Mmmm, then again I'd probably say my math class.

Jill: OK, anything else you want to add that you think I haven't
asked, but you think is important as you think about what you've
done in writing here?

Mary: I guess I thought it was going to be a lot harder going from
high school to college, but it doesn't seem to me that hard, we're just
doing different things. Through these things I feel like I've become a
better writer.

Jill: OK. Are they things that could have been done in high school?

287

Mary: Yes, but I think there's like a maturity level that has to be
there, so it's different. I don't know. It has to be taken more
seriously. I guess I think it's taken more seriously in college because
either their parents are paying for it or they're paying for it
themselves, so it's a little different.

Jill: When you were (in high school) were there kids in all your
classes that weren't going to college?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: Yes, so in that case, they wouldn't have taken it quite as
seriously.

Mary: Right.

Jill: So, if you had a group like this where everybody was all college
bound and pretty much comparable, maybe it could have been done
better, huh?

Mary: Yes.

Jill: OK, so you do think that the maturity level is a factor in learning
to write, especially if you are working with peers or workshopping.
It's not going to work as well where people aren't motivated?

Mary: Right, and we worked totally with the peer group this time
because I worked with them my senior year. You can know that you
can count on people to be there I think maybe not only have I just
had good luck, but I think the people just tend to be a little bit more
responsible, so that like everybody gets the work done so that
they're not holding someone else up. I know that when we worked
in the peer groups in the high school, it seemed like two people did
all the work. Work seems to be divided.

Jill: Ok, so you predicted you would do well from what you had in

high school, and you have done well, but you've actually thought it
was easier than you anticipated?

Mary: Right!
Jill: 0K. good

APPENDIX D
A SAMPLE OF TYPICAL FREHMAN
WRITING DIRECTOR
INTERVIEW QUETIONS

APPENDIX D

A Sample of Typical Freshman Writing Director Interview
Questions

1. Describe the required writing course(s) for freshmen. What other
courses are required to fulfill the total writing requirement at your
university?

2. How are Students evaluated for placement into the courses
offered to meet the requirement or courses which are required to
make up deficiencies before the required courses can be taken?

3. What methods are available to waive the requirements or earn
credit without taking the required course(s)?

4. Are there courses in other departments which can be substituted
for the freshman writing requirements?

5. What are the qualifications of the teachers of these courses?
What percentage of the teachers are tenurestream faculty, part-
time faculty, or graduate students? What training or in-service is
required of the teachers?

6. Is there a syllabus which teachers must follow? Do you have a
COpy which I can keep?

7. What flexibility does the syllabus allow teachers as to
assignments or supplementary readings? Are there required texts?

8. How much writing is required in each course and what kinds of
writing are assigned?

9. How are Students evaluated?
10. Are specific methods of instruction or classroom styles required?

1 1. Why do some of the students in my study describe greatly
dISparate experiences in classes of the same title?

288

289

12. What control does the department exert over tenurestream
professors, part-time teachers, or graduate students as far as the
content of their classes or their methods of instruction?

13. What are the strengths of your program?

14. What are the weaknesses of your program?

15. Have any changes been considered in the present program?

APPENDIX E

APPROVAL FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS REEARCH

APPENDIX E
APPROVAL FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS REEARCH

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
orncsorvramroamaaca mums-Woman
up on» or no Gama: salons

April 30, 1992

.1111 I. Vannncworp
LO. Box 35
Lowoll. III 69331

RE: ARTICUIA‘HN 3mm SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES IN 11!! FIELD DP ”008111“. in
{91-260

boar Ila. VaMncwosp:

UCRIIIS' rovlow of tho abovo rotoronood projoot has now boon cooplocod. I an
ploaaod to advlao that tho rights and wolfaro of tho human auhjocca appoar to ho
adoquacoly procactod and tho Co-lttoo. thoroforo, haa approvod this projoct.

You ara tonindod that ucarus approval to valid for ono oalondar yoar. If you
plan to oontinuo this projoot boyond ono yoar. ploaao Ialso provisions for
obtaining approprtaco OCRIIIS approval ono oonch prior to April 23. 1993. Thoro
will ho a noxiou- of {our ronowala poaalhlo. If you wish to continua a projoot
hoyond that tho. 1: not again ho sub-loud for conploto tovlow.

Any ohangoo 1n procoduroa Involving huoan oubjoota oust: ho rovlowod by tho ”CRIBS
prior to initiation of tho chango. UCRIIIS out also bo notifiod prooptly of any
problooo (unoxpoccod oldo offocta, oooplalnta. otc.) involving human oubjocca

during tho couroo of tho work.

Thank you for bringing this projoot to our attontion. If we can ho of any futuro
holp. ploooo do no: hooluco to lot u:- brow.

- Slncoroly.

 

Involving I-hnon Suhjooco W)

Dfl/pjo °
co: Dr. Marilyn "noon

W's-“WWW

290

LIST OF REFERENCES

LIST OF REFERENCES

Ambach, Gordon. "The High School/College Connection: A State
Perspective." Change (Jan./ Feb. 1982): 22-25+.

Applebee, Arthur N. Tradition and Reform in the Teaching of English:
A History. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1974.

Applebee, Arthur N., Judith A. [anger, and Ina V. S. Mullis. Writing:
Trends Across the Decade, 1 974-84. Princeton, NJ: NAEP, 1 984.

Appleman, Deborah, and Douglas E. Green. "Mapping the Elusive
Boundary Between High School and College Writing." CCC 44 (May
1993): 191-199.

Bartholomae, David, and Anthony Petrosky, eds. Facts, Artifacts and
Counterfacts: Theory and Method for a Reading and Writing
Course. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1986.

Berlin, James A. Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in
American Colleges, 1 900-1985. Carbondale: 50. Ill. UP, 1987.

---. "Writing Instruction In School and College English 1890-1985."
Murphy 183-220. .

Bloom, Lynn Z. "I Want A Writing Director." CCC 43 (May 1992): 176-
178.

Boyer, Ernest L High School: A Report On Secondary Education In
America. NY: Harper and Row, 1983.

Britton, James, T. Burgess, N. Martin, A. McLeod, and H. Rosen. The

Development of Writing Abilities (1 1 —1 8). London: Macmillan
Education, 1975.

291

292

Brooke, Robert. "Robert Brooke Responds." College English 50 (Nov.
1988): 820-822.

The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Continuity and
Discontinuity. NY: McGraw Hill, 1973.

Coles, Nicholas. "Empowering Revision." Bartholomae and Petrosky
167-198.

Daniels, Harvey. Famous last Words The American language Crisis
Reconsidered. Carbondale: So. 11. UP, 1983.

Daniels, Harvey, and Steven Zemelman. A Writing Project: Training
Teachers of Composition from Kindergarten to College.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1985.

Davis, James E. and Hazel K., eds. FOCUS: Teaching English language
Arts-Calla bora tion Between College English Departmen ts and
Secondary Schools. 14.1, Winter 1988.

De Bevoise, Wynn. "Collaboration: Some Principles of Bridgework."
Education Leadership 43 (Feb. 1986): 9-12.

Emig, Janet. The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders. Urbana,
IL: NCTE, 1971.

Flynn, Thomas. "A Model for High School-College Writing Instruction
In-Service Programs." Davis 26-28.

Foster, David. "The Theory of AP English: A Critique." Olsen et a1. 3
24. .

"Freshman Composition: Is It A Waste of Time?" The Council
Chronicle: NCTE 1.4 (April 1992): 9.

Gaines, Bette, and Rosanna Grassi. "Project Advance: An Alternative
to AP." Olsen et al. 171-179.

Gross, Theodore 1. Partners In Education: How Colleges Can Work
With Schools to Improve Teaching and Learning. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1988.

293

Guthrie, Warren. "The Development of Rhetorical Theory in America,
1635-1850." Speech Monographs. Part I, 13.1 (1946): 1422.
Part H, 14.1 (1947): 38-54. Part III, 15.1 (1948): 61-71. Part
IV, 16.1 (1949): 98-113.

Halloran, S. Michael. "From Rhetoric to Composition: The Teaching of
Writing In America to 1900." Murphy 151-182.

Hiller, Janet, and Barbara Osburg. "A Comment on 'Iacan,
Transferences, and Writing Instruction.‘ " College English 50

(Nov. 1988): 819-820.

Hirsch, E. D., Jr. Cultural literacy: What Every American Needs to
Know. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1987.

Homer, Winifred Bryan, ed. The Present State of Scholarship in
Historical and Con temporary Rhetoric. Columbia: Univ. of
Missouri Press, 1983.

Judy (Tchudi), Stephen. "Composition and Rhetoric In American
Secondary Schools, 1840-1900." The English Journal 68.4 (April
1979): 34-45.

Kitzhaber, Albert R. "Teaching English Composition In College."
Teaching Freshman Composition. Eds. Gary Tate and Edward P. J.
Corbett. New York: Oxford UP, 1967.

Iawton, David 1.. "Composition Courses for College Freshmen Are
Ineffective; They Should Be Abolished." The Chronicle of Higher
Education (21 Sept.1988) : B11-12.

Literature: The British Tradition-Annotated Teacher's Edition.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1994.

Maeroff, Gene 1. School and College: Partnerships In Education.
Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching, 1 983.

Marius, Richard. "The Precarious Opportunity: The University
Writing Program." Phi Kappa Phi Journal (Fall 1985): 16-21.

Martin, Wanda. "Tenure, Status, and the Teaching of Writing." Ronald
and Roskelly 122-136.

294
Mayher, John S. Uncommon Sense: Theoretical Practice In language
Education. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/ Cook Publishers, 1990.

McAndrew, Donald A. "The Co—Teaching Project." CSSEDC Quarterly
11.2 (May 1989): 2-3.

McQuade, Donald. "Who Do You’I‘hink You're Talking To?: Trading
Ideas for Insults in the English Profession." English Journal 65.7
(Nov. 1976): 8-10.

Menacker, Julius. From School to College: Articula tion and Transfer.
Wash. DC: Am. Council on Ed., 1975.

--. "Subject Articulation Between High School and College." The
Clearing House 44 (Dec. 1969): 220-223.

Miller, Susan. Textual Carnivals: The Politics of Composition.
Carbondale: So. 11. UP, 1991.

Moffett, James. Coming On Center: Essays In English Education. 2nd
Edition. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publisher, 1988.

--. Teaching the Universe of Discourse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,
1968.

Murphy, James J., ed. A Short History of Writing Instruction From
Ancient Greece to Twen tieth-Cen tury America. Davis, CA:
Hermagoras Press, 1990.

Myers, Miles, and James Gray, eds. Theory and Practice in the
Teaching of Composition: Processing, Distancing, and Modeling.
Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1983.

"National Writing Project Wins Funding Fight." The Council Chronicle:
NCTE 1.4 (April 1992): 1-2.

Oliver, Eileen. " Promoting Cooperation Between HS. and College
Writing Programs." CSSEDC Quarterly 1 1.2 (May 1989): 4-5.

Olson, Gary A., Elizabeth Metzger, and Evelyn Ashton-Jones, eds.
Advanced Placement English: Theory, Politics, and Pedagogy.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1989.

29S

Reid, Ronald F . "The Bolyston Professorship of Rhetoric and Oratory,
1806-1904: A Case Study in Changing Concepts of Rhetoric and
Pedagogy." The Quarterly Journal of Speech 45 ( 1959): 239-252.

Ritchie, Joy. "Between the Trenches and Ivory Towers: Divisions
Between University Professors and High School Teachers."
Ronald and Roskelly 101-121.

Ronald, Kate, and Hephzebiah Roskelly, eds. Farther Along:
Transforming Dichotomies in Rhetoric and Composition.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1990.

Rose, Mike. Lives On the Boundary: The Struggles and Achievements
of America 's Underprepared. NY: The Free Press, 1 989.

Rosenblatt, Louise M. The Reader, The Text, the Poem: The
Transactional Theory of the Literary Work. Carbondale: So. 11.
UP, 1978.

Schultz, Lucille M., Chester H. Laine, and Mary C. Savage. "Interaction
Among School and College Writing Teachers: Toward Recognizing
and Remaking Old Patterns." CCC 39 (May 1988): 139-153.

Scott, Fred Newton. "What the West Wants in Preparatory English."
The School Review 17 (Jan. 1909): 10-20.

Scott, Fred Newton, and Joseph Villiers Denney. Elementary English
Composition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1908.

Shaughnessy, Mina. Errors and Expectations. New York: Oxford,
1977.

Taylor, Denny. Family Literacy: Young Children Learning to Read and
Write London: Heinemann Educational Books, 1983.

Wilbur, Franklin P. "School-College Partnerships; Building Effective
Models for Collaboration." The Journal of College Admissions.
Summer 1985: 20-28.

Wilbur, Franklin P., Leo Lambert, and M. Jean Young. National
Directory of School-College Partnerships: C urren t Models and
Practices. Syracuse: American Association for Higher Education,
1987.

GENERAL REFERENCES

Aiken, Wilford M. The Story of the Eight-Year Study: Adventures In
American Education, Vol. I. New York: Harper and Brothers,
1942.

Applebee, Arthur N., Judith Langer, Ina V.S. Mullis, and Lynn B.
Jenkins. The Writing Report Card, 1 984-88: Findings From the
Nation '5 Report Card. Washington D. C.: EI‘S, 1990.

Berlin, James A. Writing Instruction In 1 9th Century American
Colleges. Carbondale: So Ill UP, 1984.

Bizzell, Patricia. "What Happens When Basic Writers Come to
College?" CCC 37 (1986): 294—301.

Botts, Roderic. "Writing and Rhetoric in American Secondary Schools,
1918-1935." English Journal 68.4 (April 1979): 54—59.

College Board. Measures In the College Admissions Process. NY:
College Entrance Examination Board, 1986.

Conant, James Bryant. The American High School Today. New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1959.

Corbett, Edward P. J. Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. 2nd I
ed. New York: Oxford UP, 1971.

Delia, Mary Alice. "High School vs. College English: Radical New
Theory Widens the Gap." The Clearing House 62 (April 1988):
333-336.

Dennis, Becky. "Writing Teachers At All Levels Really Do Have
Commonaiities. " FOCUS: Teaching English language Arts-
Collaboration Between College English Departments and
Secondary Schools. Eds. James E. and Hazel K. Davis. 14.1 (1988):
28-2 9.

296

297

Dixon, John. Growth Through English. Oxford: NATE, Oxford UP, 1969.

Eagleson, Robert D., ed. English In the Eighties. Sydney, Aus.: AATE,
1982.

Ehninger, Douglas. "Campbell, Blair, and Whately: Old Friends In A
New Light." Western Speech 19 (1955): 263-269.

---. "Campbell, Blair, and Whately Revisited." Southern Speech
Journal 28 (1963): 169-182.

Elbow, Peter. "Reflections on Academic Discourse: How It Relates to
Freshman and Colleagues." College English 53 (Feb. 1991): 135-
155.

Fay, Robert S. "The Reorganization Movement in Secondary English
Teaching. English Journal 68.4 (April 1979): 46-53.

General Education In School and College. A Committee Report by
Members of the Faculties of Andover, Exeter, iawrenceville,
Harvard, Princeton, and Yale. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1952.

Hartzog, Carol P. Composition and the Academy: A Study of Writing
Program Administration. New York: MLA, 1986.

Hook, J. N., Paul H. Jacobs, and Raymond D..Crisp. Mat Every English
Teacher Should Know. Champaign, ll; NCTE, 1970.

Jacobs, Mary-Ellen, and Jessie A. Roderick. " Diary of a Singular
Season: Reflecting On Dilemmas In Teaching Writing." Language
Arts 65 (Nov. 1988): 642-51.

Judy (Tchudi), Stephen, ed. Teaching English: Reflections on the
State of the Art. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden Book Co., Inc., 1979.

Kirby, Dan, and Tom liner. Inside Out: Developmental Strategies for
Teaching Writing. 2nd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1988.

Kitzhaber, Albert R. Rhetoric In American Colleges, 1 850-1 990.
Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1990.

Klitgaard, Robert. Choosing Elites New York: Basic Books, 1985.

298

Knoblauch, C. H., and Lil Brannon. Rhetorical Traditions and the
Teaching of Writing. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/ Cook PubL,
Inc., 1984.

Lloyd-Jones, Richard. "Division and Synthesis: Implications of the
Aspen Coalition Conference. " Focus: Teaching English language
Arts—Calla bora tion Between College English Departmen ts and
Secondary Schools Eds. James E. and Hazel K. Davis. 14.1 (1988):
4-7.

Lloyd-Jones, Richard, and Andrea A. Lunsford, eds. The English
Coalition Conference: Democracy through language. Urbana, II;
NCTE, 1989.

Mandel, Barrett J., ed. Three language-Arts Curriculum Models.
Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1980.

McCarthy, Lucille Parkinson. "A Stranger in Strange lands: A College
Student Writing Across the Curriculum." Research In the
Teaching of English 21 (Oct. 1987): 233-265.

Moffett, James. A Student-Centered language Arts Curriculum,
Grades K-13: A Handbook for Teachers. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin Co., 1968.

National Council of Teachers of English. "Statement on Teacher Load:
Secondary English." English Journal 68 (1979): 1 5.

O'Hearn, Carolyn. "Recognizing the learning Disabled College Writer."
College English 5 1 (March 1989): 294—304.

Pinkston, Joan W. "Thoreau and Current Trends in the Teaching of
Writing." English Journal 78 (Nov. 1989): 50-52.

Purdy, Dwight. "A Polemical History of Freshman Composition in Our
Time." College English 48 (Dec. 1989): 791-796.

Preer, Jean L Competence, Admissions, and Articulation: Returning
to the Basics In Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Ed.
Research Report No. 6, 1983.

299

Saranson, Seymour B. The Culture of the School and the Problem of
Change. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1971.

Scott, Fred Newton. "College Entrance Requirements In English."
School Review 9 (1901): 365+.

--. "The Report on College Entrance Requirements in English."
Education Review 20 (1900): 289-294.

Scott, Fred Newton, Franklin T. Baker, and George R. Carpenter. The
Teaching of English in the Elementary and the Secondary School.
New York: longmans, Green, and Co., 1913.

Sirotnik, Kenneth A., and John I. Goodlad, eds. School-University
Partnerships In Action: Concepts, Cases, and Concerns. New
York: Teachers College Press, 1988.

Stewart, Donald. "The Barnyard Goose, History, and Fred Newton
Scott." English Journal 67.11 (1979): 14—17.

--. "Fred Newton Scott." Traditions of Inq uiry. Ed. John Brereton.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. 26-49.

--. "Rediscovering Fred Newton Scott." College English. 40 (1979):
539-547.

---. "Two Model Teachers and the Harvardization of English
Departments." The Rhetorical Tradition and Modern Writing. Ed.
James J. Murphy. New York: MLA, 1982. 118-129.

Tate, Gary, and Edward P. J. Corbett, eds. Teaching Freshman
Composition. New York: Oxford UP, 1967.

--. Teaching High School Composition. New York: Oxford UP, 1970.

Thompson, Edgar H. "HS/College Collaboration: All You Have To Do
Is Ask." CSSEDC Quarterly 11.2 (May 1989): 3-4.

Wendell, Barrett. "English at Harvard." The Dial 16 (1894): 131-133.

Wilbur, Franklin P. "High School-College Partnerships Can Work!"
Educational Record Spring 1981: 38-44.