Hi Judy,

I don't think there's an easy anwer to your question.  As far as I can see,
there are advantages and disadvantages to both.  If I remember the substance
of a CATTW roundtable some years ago, the writing centre people at Simon
Fraser argued that being attached to an English Dept. was beneficial because
it helped to promote and give credibility to the academic research aspect of
the centre (which seems to be one of the outstanding features of the Simon
Fraser centre).  On the other hand, at Laurentian, the English Dept is not
explicitly aligned with the writing centre (except that part of my job is to
work with the centre) and in my opinion this has several advantages given the
nature of our university and WAC program:  having the centre report directly
to the V.P. Academic helps present the image (and the reality) that the
centre is for the whole university--both as a service to students and
faculty, and as a research unit.  Politically, this is very important for
helping us to develop a sense of ownership among all units for the WAC
program.   As well, because our program is bilingual, it avoids potential
problems in collaboration between the English and French departments.  Every
now and  then, we hear talk of returning the writing centre to the
Humanities, but I for one oppose this for the reasons above.  As well, I am
the only "full time" rhetoric person in the English Dept, so it doesn't make
much sense to have it attached to the Dept.--a situation that is different, I
believe, from Simon Fraser's.  For me, I think that having the centre not
attached to any discipline opens more doors as far as research in the
disciplines is concerned.  And it avoids the potential problem of making the
English Dept. "responsible" for student writing across the university
(however, other scapegoats emerge!).

I do agree, though, with the Simon Fraser people (Janet Giltrow in
particular, as I recall)  that the academic/research status of a writing
centre may be more difficult to foster when it isn't aligned with an acadmeic
unit.  As well, funding and stability may be more precarious--already, our
budget has been cut by more than 30% over the past few years.  However, I'm
not convinced that this wouldn't have been equally the case were we
associated with one or more acadmeic units.

My feeling is that much depends on UBC's specific situation--e.g., if the
English dept is already in charge of the first year writing program, then I
would venture that it makes sense to keep the writing centre closely allied
with the dept.  Unless, of course, one of your objectives is to transform the
first year writing program somehow,

What do others think?

Philippa

Judy Segal wrote:

> Hi all.
> The University of British Columbia is now deep into a process of
> "visioning" and one of the things being envisioned is a writing
> centre--for research and teaching.  I know I will have many queries to
> this list as we get going, especially since, with my colleague,
> Margery Fee, Director of First Year English, I will be coordinating the
> first year writing program here.  But this is my opening question: do
> writing centres--or writing programs in general--at Canadian universities
> seem to do better (in terms of efficacy, image, job satisfaction and
> security . . . ) when they are attached to and governed by Departments of
> English or when they are separate units of universities or faculties?
>         I'd be grateful for all responses--on or off list.
>
> Judy
>
> Judy Segal
> Department of English
> University of British Columbia
>
> Phone (on leave): 604-739-0869
> Fax: 604-822-6906
> Email: [log in to unmask]