A Narratological Analysis of WAC Authorship

Abstract

he following analysis of graduate students' writing in a seminar entitled Topics in Design Theory: Archetypes of Cultural Landscape reveals a complex discursive scene where multiple discourses vied with one another. This seminar was affiliated with a Writing Across Curriculum program, and several of these discourses were introduced through WAC procedures. Drawing upon a range of sources-narratology's concept of implied authors and readers (Booth; Prince, Dictionary); WAC's uses of theories of disciplinary rhetoric (Bazerman), of social constructionism (Myers), and of expressive and transactional writing (Britton et al.); and my research on teaching writing in an architecture course (Henry; Brodkey and Henry)-this narratological analysis of student authorship raises questions about WAC theory and suggests new possibilities for research and teaching. To research discursive work in this seminar, I used ethnographic methods in tandem with text analysis. I observed all class sessions, transcribing much discussion verbatim. In addition, I interviewed not only professor and teaching assistant once formally and several times informally over course of semester, but also all of students informally, and most of them formally, using standardized questionnaires as well as open-ended questions based on their work.' I catalogued copies of all writing assignments, students' drafts, responses from TA and professor, and students' revisions, with final commentary from professor. Initially, I was trying to read each student's implied reader-defined by Prince as the audience presupposed by a text; a real reader's second self (shaped in accordance with implied author's values and cultural norms) (Dictionary 43)-as reflective of disciplinary conventions and hence of a student's