Promoting critical reading and academic writing skills using online blended modules in English medium of instruction environments

Many international students in American universities are required to take writing courses in English as a second language (ESL) before participating in a mainstream first-year composition (FYC) course. Given that the goal of ESL writing course is to prepare students for FYC course, the connection between ESL and FYC courses is significant. This study investigates the correspondence of two such courses in terms of writing tasks based on the analysis of course syllabi, assignment sheets, and interviews with eight ESL course and 10 FYC instructors as well as 26 international students who are from diverse countries and took both composition courses. The findings suggest that students’ assignments from both courses are all essays in terms of genre, but show differences with regard to the text’s purpose, audience, information source, topic, and rhetorical function. Students are also aware of such similarities and differences, but occasionally demonstrate less sophisticated or inaccurate understanding of the assignments. Pedagogical implications for modifying the writing assignments in ESL courses to fit the expectations of FYC courses are discussed.

Analyzing Students’ Perceptions of Their Learning in Online and Hybrid First-Year Composition Courses

This paper describes the development, pilot offering and initial assessment of a first year composition course, Essentials of College Rhetoric, specifically designed to provide students entering engineering programs at Texas Tech University (USA) with the critical reading and writing skills and rhetorical strategies traditionally taught in first year composition. However, this course differs from traditional composition courses in that it shares curriculum and assignments with the introductory electrical engineering course, Introduction to Engineering and Computer Programming, and not only underscores the role of engineers as writers in the workplace by teaching documentation conventions common to engineering practice, but also requires students to think and write critically about ethical, political, and other issues that shape the role of engineering in our culture.

Although the number of nonnative speakers of English in U.S. institutions of higher L education has been increasing continuously during the last four decades, the development of composition studies does not seem to reflect this trend.1 Until fairly recently, discussions of English as a Second Language (ESL) issues in composition studies have been few and far between. Few composition theorists include second-language perspectives in their discussions, and only a handful of empirical studies written and read by composition specialists consider second-language writers in their research design, interpretation of data and discussion of implications. It almost seems as though the presence of over 457,000 international students in colleges and universities across the nation (Davis 2) does not concern writing teachers and scholars.2 The presence of ESL students should be an important consideration for all teachers and scholars of writing because ESL students can be found in many writing courses across the United States. As Jessica Williams' survey of ESL writing program administration suggests, the vast majority of institutions continue to require undergraduate ESL students to enroll in firstyear composition courses, often in addition to special ESL writing courses.

Instructors of First-Year Composition courses are pursuing new ways to help integrate students into collegiate writing. One approach that has been gaining more widespread use is teaching composition through a popular medium. Inspired by these pedagogical movements, I designed a first-year composition course that approached writing through looking at different rhetorical elements of video games. During the course I encouraged students to enter into an I.R.B. approved study in which I recorded certain elements of their progression, discourse, and understanding regarding composition taught through gaming in an effort to document what was pedagogically successful, and what aspects of the course I could go on to change in further renditions. This approach is not a new one, but I wanted to help validate the argument for teaching composition through something students not only had prior knowledge of, but deeply wanted to discuss. My hope is that this study will help future students of first-year composition courses by encouraging their instructors to think critically about their own pedagogy, and help meet students where they begin their collegiate writing journey.

Recent studies indicate that many entering freshmen are not prepared for the demands of college reading, yet most higher education institutions do not require stand alone reading courses. Although critical reading is an often-cited objective of some college composition courses, little research exists that describes how composition instructors teach critical reading strategies. This study examined ways that critical reading is taught in freshman composition courses at one university by generating data from teacher interviews and document analysis. The data suggests that reading pedagogy varies widely among composition instructors and that critical reading was generally not taught explicitly by participants in this study.

An exploratory study of English as a Second Language students’ “citation” patterns in multimodal writing

Given the rise in business and technical writing (BTW) courses in writing programs and English departments, there is a need to develop not only a pedagogy for BTW but one that considers BTW’s institutional context. Context is a problematic focus for pedagogy, as we have seen in recent scholarship on student writing, theory of genre, and transferability of skills to other academic disciplines. That scholarship views the uncertain and unclear contexts of academic composition courses and their genres as preventing the full student understanding of genre that is needed for students to develop transferable writing skills. The continuation of that scholarship into BTW regards the instruction of BTW, as inside academia rather than within the workplace, as suffering from similar concerns with context. Rather than viewing BTW as downstream from or supplemental to composition instruction, this article argues that we should examine the genres of BTW as unique in their contingency to the writing process and yet just as able to pursue the goals of composition instruction and liberal arts education as first-year composition (FYC) courses. By focusing on the reader of BTW genres as determinant in the contingency of the writing situation, we see BTW as less problematic than FYC in its support of key composition goals such as the creation of original arguments and effective management of supporting materials. The awareness of readership and argumentation allows for a pedagogy supportive of contingent and part-time faculty as well as full-time composition faculty regardless of their respective professional experience.

In response to the rapidly growing number of international and multilingual students on U.S. college campuses, many colleges’ first year composition (FYC) courses have expanded to include classes designated for “ESL” or “International” students, with increasing scholarship on the best pedagogical practices for such classes. Despite increasing scholarship on the best pedagogical practices for such classes, the implications of placing students into them remains “the thorniest of issues” (Crusan, 2011), with mounting debate as to how to measure L2 students’ suitability for either “ESL” or “mainstream” writing classes, as well as the role students should play in labelling themselves “ESL” writers. Directed Self-Placement (DSP) is emerging as a more equitable and anti-racist alternative to test-based placement; however, there are concerns about its suitability for L2 writers specifically (Crusan, 2011; Ferris, 2017). This literature review therefore aims to address two questions: (1) what are the unique challenges of placing L2 writers in FYC courses? Specifically, what are the implications of the identity labelling inherent in placing L2 students in courses designated as “ESL” or for “International Students” with regard to student investment and learning outcomes? (2) Might DSP offer a viable alternative to traditional L2 placement testing that addresses such implications?

Recently, scholars in rhetoric and composition (e.g., Bruce McComiskey) have argued that their field has a key role to play in schools’ efforts to fight fake news. This field already engages with questions of how communicators build credibility and persuade audiences, and of how first-year writing courses (which many rhetoric and composition scholars teach) already often focus on skills like source evaluation and critical thinking. Thus, scholars like McComiskey have argued that rhetoric and composition can and should exert an influence on universities’ civic education efforts in the 21st century. However, despite an uptick in scholarly interest in fake news, empirical study of whether first-year writing courses impart civic skills is scarce.An exploratory study examined whether students who take first-year composition courses experience any growth in Civic Online Reasoning (COR) when those courses’ learning outcomes invoke the notions of critical thinking, source evaluation, and digital literacy. It also investigated whether students’ COR gains differed between course sections and identified curricular features that might contribute to those differences. COR assessments developed by the Stanford History Education Group (SHEG) were administered to students before and after completing a first-year writing course. Participating instructors’ course documents (syllabi and major assignment sheets) were also analyzed via a qualitative coding procedure. Students’ scores for the COR component skills of Ad Identification and Lateral Reading increased significantly after one semester of first-year composition instruction. However, students’ scores for the Claim Research and Evidence Analysis skills did not improve. Moreover, no significant differences were observed between sections. These results suggested the possibility that, even absent explicit COR instruction, first-year composition courses can impart some COR skill gains, but that the particular approach the instructor uses does not matter much. However, several methodological problems prevented the study from offering firmer conclusions. In addition to making a case for additional research, this dissertation argues that if scholars in rhetoric and composition wish to have a hand in defining universities’ approaches to civic education in the future, they should strive to generate robust, generalizable evidence of the benefits of their courses. This will require them to embrace empirical and quantitative methodologies and to engage with work in other fields more frequently.

Students in first-year composition (FYC) courses are expected to control the mechanics, vocabulary, style, and grammatical accuracy of their writing. Yet language development support, particularly that of grammar instruction in US FYC courses, has largely disappeared in recent decades, due in part to suppositions that students implicitly know grammar. This assumption is problematic given the increasing number of multilingual writers enrolling in US schools with observed needs for explicit language instruction. The present study explores whether first- and second-language writers of English perceived a need for language instruction and whether they wanted or expected it. Students from 12 sections of FYC were asked in surveys and interviews about their prior language learning experiences and current self-perceived language needs and then were asked to complete one of two self-directed language development projects (LDPs): an online, self-selected grammar and usage study project or journal entries focusing on vocabulary/style in texts they had read. Student work was collected, analyzed, and supplemented with students’ end-of-term observations and preferences about self-directed LDPs. Our findings reveal that students overwhelmingly wanted and expected language instruction and were largely positive about both types of LDPs, but they felt that language instruction should be offered in multiple delivery methods beyond just self-study. With these findings in mind, we offer pedagogical suggestions for addressing the perceived and real needs for language development of linguistically diverse FYC students.

Public Pedagogy in Composition Studies Marissa M. Juárez Ashley J. Holmes CCCC/NCTE Studies in Writing and Rhetoric (SWR) series 2016, 201 pp. As someone who regularly encourages students in my technical writing and first-year composition courses to participate in public writing projects, I have often turned to scholarship based in service learning—often not writing-course specific—to look for pedagogical direction and even evidence that these approaches to teaching are meaningful for students. Fortunately, as more and more rhetoric and composition specialists teach public-oriented writing courses, the emergence of related discipline-specific scholarship, conference presentations, and workshops provides necessary assistance for compositionists whose teaching and work conflate the borders between the institutions and communities in which they teach. Joining the CCCC Studies in Writing and Rhetoric series, Ashley J. Holmes's Public Pedagogy in Composition Studies adds important insights to this body of literature, providing a critical sourcebook for writing program teachers and administrators as they encourage students to "go public" with their work (Mortensen qtd. in Holmes 1). In five chapters, Holmes lays out a comparative case study of three different institutions—Oberlin College, Syracuse University, and the University of Arizona—to offer a definition of public pedagogy specific for writing studies, to illustrate how instructors and writing program administrators at these institutions support this teaching approach in various courses, to demonstrate how our institutional histories might frame our rationales for public engagement, and to theorize ways in which community and institutional stakeholders can negotiate the sometimes difficult emotional reactions to the learning that happens in public spaces. Holmes contends that the teaching and learning that involves and takes place in various publics—that is, outside of conventionally academic locations—not only has transformative potential for students but can also promote opportunities for them to analyze, critique, and respond to the socio-political discourses and policies that shape everyday life. Holmes's research contributes to ongoing conversations about public engagement in the field of composition studies, and she showcases and documents the on-the-ground work that is being done in three institutions. Thus, many composition [End Page 110] instructors and administrators will find it a valuable guide as they consider, plan, and implement teaching approaches located in the public sphere. Holmes situates her study within broader conversations about public pedagogy in curriculum studies while also reviewing the body of work produced in response to Peter Mortensen's appeal for rhetoric and composition scholars to move beyond the ivory tower and into the communities where our democracy is practiced. In chapter one, Holmes begins by addressing disparities in the terms composition teachers use to define their publicly-framed work, ultimately arriving at a convincing, albeit broad, definition that accommodates a variety of contexts: "public pedagogy in composition studies … [is] an approach to the teaching of writing that values the educative potential for public sites, communities, and persons beyond the boundaries of the traditional classroom and/or campus community … relocating composition teaching and learning within increasingly public spheres" (4). Acknowledging critiques of public pedagogy by Henry A. Giroux, who argues that such models can be co-opted by neoliberals who endeavor to indoctrinate students into a corporatized, individualistic, and anti-democratic worldview, Holmes argues that public pedagogies must provide students with opportunities not only to learn outside of typical educational spaces but also to "critique … those locations, as well as the social and political implications of that public work" (18). The first chapter of Public Pedagogy, then, traces the trajectory of the field's public turn; describes Holmes's research sites, selection process, and methods; responds to potential skepticism about public pedagogy's value and effectiveness; and outlines the terms of public pedagogy in composition. Chapters two and three delve into Holmes's field research to elucidate distinct instructional approaches to public pedagogy and the administrative models that support them. In chapter two, Holmes draws upon Elenore Long's teaching methods for student engagement with public stakeholders (interpretive, institutional, tactical, inquiry-driven, and performative), using them as an analytical reference point for understanding her research participants' public teaching (36). Of interest in this chapter is Holmes's ability to show the breadth of circumstances in...

This study examines the effects of a curriculum based on self-regulated strategy instruction in an accelerated developmental education (DE) English course in a community college. Faculty at the college had established a four-week, two-credit compressed course that enabled students to enroll in an eleven-week first-year composition (FYC) course in the same semester, reducing remediation from fifteen weeks to just four weeks. The course focused on writing argumentative essays using sources. The study used a quasi-experimental design with five instructors and sixty-six students to compare the experimental curriculum to a business-as-usual control condition. In the experimental curriculum, students learned strategies for writing using sources, including strategies for critical reading and for planning and revising. In addition to writing and reading strategies, students also learned metacognitive, self-regulation strategies, such as goal setting, task management, and reflection. The study found a large positive effect (ES = .96) of the treatment on quality of an argument essay written using sources. However, no significant effects were found on a summary outline, self-efficacy, or completion of the subsequent FYC course. The study demonstrates the value of strategy instruction in DE English courses; it is the first experimental study of strategy instruction in an accelerated DE course. Further research is needed to evaluate the effects of strategy instruction in corequisite courses and in FYC.

Students enter college composition courses with preconceived ideas about literacy. Literacy myths restrict the ways that students engage in writing activities and limit their development and perceptions of themselves as writers. To overcome these barriers, writers should become active participants in the construction of their literacy development. A composition pedagogy should encourage writers to redefine their literacy as continuously changing and as a fluid concept—a literacy of possibilities. Composition researchers and pedagogues should find ways to re-conceptualize literacy as fluid changing from context to context—or, as Deborah Brandt (1998) suggests, literacy in flux. Jay Robinson (1998) calls for a pedagogy that encourages civic literacy among students: developing agency, engaging in conversations, and drawing on Freire's “praxis,” taking actions that produce change based on critical self-reflection. This study contends that a pedagogy of civic literacy encourages writers to critically reflect on their literacy practices in different genres and contexts. Literacy narratives provide opportunities for writers to engage in necessary critical self-reflection. This qualitative teacher-research study examines the literacy narratives of fifteen writers in a first-year composition course. Student-written narratives were analyzed to determine ways in which continuous self-reflective writing encouraged civic literacy. Discourse analysis of students' narratives was conducted. Descriptions of the category development process and coding system are provided. Three criteria are indicated that suggest awareness of civic literacy in students' narratives in this study. Literacy narratives are valuable genres for writers to reflect on their literacy development. Reflective writing helps students to (1) identify roles and responsibilities as writers; (2) define literacy as continuous rhetorical choices and as a fluid process; and (3) become active participants in their literacy development. As active participants, students are encouraged to engage in civic literacy, to enact change through writing, and to contribute to a broader critical dialogue on literacy issues. A composition pedagogy that asks writers to be self-reflective, re-define their “literacies,” and use writing to enact changes in communities encourages a civic literacy. Conclusions suggest that literacy narratives offer pedagogical benefits and benefits to writers. Further composition research is needed to explore connections between self-reflective discourse and civic literacy.


 This study offers insights on developing poetry writing assignment in first-year composition courses for translingual orientation. Through a close examination of semi-structured interviews and students’ poems, the study aims to evaluatethe effectiveness of the teaching of poetry writing as translingual pedagogy in college English composition courses for both monolingual and multilingual students. Five monolingual and five multilingual students in this project experienced a three-week curriculum design to compose their poetry project in two different sections. The interview data shows that both monolingual and multilingual students acknowledge positive traits about the translingual pedagogy through a poetry writing assignment toward the end of the semester. The data also demonstrates that five monolingual students in this study value this poetry writing assignment with its invitation for being free and self-expressive, while the five multilingual students stress the practical outcomes, such as a personal breakthrough, poetry book as a concrete record of their life, or negotiation experiences. Furthermore, the study provides implications for developing curriculum design to enact translingual pedagogy based on students’ perceived difficulties and struggles.