Center Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) Resources
Seminar Handouts
This page provides links to handouts and resources commonly used during the WAC Introductory Seminars.
Mathematics of Response
Mathematics of response provides data on the actual time it takes to respond to student writing--and how a consideration of this should influence decisions about how to incorporate writing into the classroom.
Response to student writing is a time-intensive activity. Consider the following scenarios.
Scenario 1: 8-10 page papers x 45 minutes for a careful reading and detailed written response.
| Number of Students | Hours of Response Time | Number of Weeks |
|---|---|---|
| 30 students | 22.5 hours of response time | (FT=0.56 weeks; 1/4FT=2.25 weeks)* |
| 60 students | 45 hours of response time | (FT=1.12 weeks; 1/4FT=4.5 weeks) |
| 90 students | 67.5 hours of response time | (FT=1.68 weeks; 1/4FT=6.75 weeks) |
| 120 students | 90 hours of response time | (FT=2.25 weeks; 1/4FT=9 weeks) |
Scenario 2: 1-page papers x 4 minutes for a very quick read and simple evaluation (e.g., check plus, check, check minus).
| Number of Students | Hours of Response Time | Number of Weeks |
|---|---|---|
| 30 students | 2 hours of response time | (FT=0.05 weeks; 1/4FT=0.2 weeks)* |
| 60 students | 4 hours of response time | (FT=0.1 weeks; 1/4FT=0.4 weeks) |
| 90 students | 6 hours of response time | (FT=0.15 weeks; 1/4FT=0.6 weeks) |
| 120 students | 8 hours of response time | (FT=0.2 weeks; 1/4FT=0.8 weeks) |
How you relate trade-offs among length of paper, number of students, and type of response is an important factor in determining the success of writing assignments. Giving assignments that take more time than you have will usually lead either to less-than-ideal response or to overwork. One key for making these decisions is to align your goals, the tasks, and the responses.
* The number of hours in each scenario is also represented in terms of the number of weeks of response for a 40-hour full-time (FT) appointment and a 10-hour, 25% appointment.
Teaching Circle, 2004-2005
The LAS Teaching Circle is held to address how writing can be effectively and reasonably used in large classes. It also provides a report outlining the group's conclusions and suggestions.
Organizers: Gail Hawisher (English/Center for Writing Studies) and Paul Prior (English/Center for Writing Studies
Participants: Lanny Arvan (Economics), Robert Barrett (English), Cleo D’Arcy (Plant Pathology), Alice Deck (English) (English), Gary Ebbs (Philosophy), Janet Keller (Anthropology), Miriam Pittenger (Classics), Vernon Burton (History), Jeanne Connell (Educational Policy Studies).
This teaching circle addressed a long-term question, how writing can be effectively and reasonably used in large classes with relatively high student-teacher ratios. This question has become more pressing as state support for higher education has declined, leading to larger classes and more limited teaching resources. Gail Hawisher (Director, Center for Writing Studies) and Paul Prior (Associate Director, Center for Writing Studies) facilitated this teaching circle, bringing together a number of faculty members who have used writing in large classes, many of whom were also long-time and exemplary participants in Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) initiatives on campus. The teaching circle became a forum for sharing resources and identifying tensions. It also led directly to two workshops for faculty and teaching assistants on using writing in large classes in the Fall of 2004. Its final report is available (Writing in Large Classes) and additional resources may be found at The Center for Writing Studies.