 |
 |
Thanks for the clarification, Phillipa. I see your problem. WAC was never supposed to be associated with remediation, but if there is a test that creates a separate category of "WAC student," who must take certain "WAC courses," the association seems inevitable. I have always thought of a WAC program as a program that encourages writing in as many courses as possible everywhere for all students. The idea is that _all_ students need exposure to a certain amount of writing, both because of its learning potential and because even good writers need to keep on writing in order to mature their skill. They also need to master the writing conventions of their discipline. So WAC or WI courses occur at all levels, up to the most senior courses--in fact they're more likely to be senior courses because of smaller class sizes--and students are expected to take X number of them in order to graduate. This was the model that was suggested at U of C (though rejected as unwieldy), and is commonly used in the U.S. I think there's sounthing like this at Southwestern as well (have you any info on their program?) The suggested U of C model had WAC as a quite separate component from the test. The test is supposed to scoop up the illiterates at the gates and bandage their worst wounds. The WAC program was supposed to ensure that the EFWR system was _not_ the last writing instruction they ever saw. My mission is to see if I can get something like this into play at a grass-roots level, since the administration rejected (probably rightly) a top-down approach. Is there any way that you can get these two ideas, evidently commingled at Laurentian, at least somewhat separated? It would require, I imagine, putting in some kind of quasi-remedial writing courses to "take care of" the low-scorers on the test and then a separate graduation requirement to ensure that students had taken a reasonable number of WI courses after that. Probably once WAC has gotten itself entangled with remediation, it can never be untangled. Pity. The problem seems to me to be lodged in the whole idea of "WAC student" and "WAC faculty." It seems that all students are WAC students if WAC is to mean what I think it should mean. By the way--you mentioned "WAC faculty." Who are these? Are they instructors specially hired or trained to teach writing, or does the term simply refer to any instructor who teaches a designated WAC course? How do students get their graduation requirement of 1? Do they get it on coursework or do they have to keep retaking the test? If the latter, what do you do with students who have met all requirements for graduation and still can't get that motherblessed 1? Does the institution have the wherewithall to block their graduation? Laurence--what is your view on this? It sounds as if the intentions you had for WAC at Laurentian have at least to some extent glang agley. What does it look like from where you sit?