SPRING 2015

WRITE TO LEARN,
LEARN TO WRITE
WRITING INTENSIVE CURRICULUM PROGRAM NEWSLETTER

Welcome

Index
Writing Together, Teaching
Vertically
Tanya K. Rodrigue, PhD 3

Thank you for reading the debut issue of Write

to Learn, Learn to Write, the Writing Intensive
Curriculum (WIC) Program newsletter! This
newsletter is part of the larger university WIC
initiative that supports faculty teaching writing
in the disciplines, especially those teaching W-II
and W-III courses, and provides occasions for
faculty to share ideas about writing pedagogy.

Public Health Nursing

Professional Poster Presentations:
Writing for the Discipline
Barbara A. Poremba, EdD
and Kathleen Keough Adee 7
Less Groaning, Better
Feedback: Get the Scoop
on Productive Peer Review
Kelly Drummey 8
Spotlight on Faculty:
Cindy Vincent, PhD
Kelsey Alcantara

10

Please Mark
Your Calendars!
The Second Annual Salem State
University Writing Pedagogy
Conference, hosted by Professor
Tanya Rodrigue and Professor
Alexandria Peary, will be held
Thursday, May 14 from 8 am2:30 pm. Salem State faculty and
graduate students will discuss
the teaching of writing on panels
and in roundtables, and Keith
Hjortshoj, PhD, from Cornell
University, will give the keynote
talk on writers block. More
details will be available in April.

Since the WIC program was initially created

as a response to the new general education
curriculum, much of the first issue addresses
questions and concerns Ive heard from faculty across campus about the
new vertical model of writing instruction. This issue provides support to
W-II and W-III faculty by offering information, strategies and ideas about
how to propose and develop a course that meets W-II and W-III course
goals and criteria. In Writing Vertically, Teaching Together, I describe
the vertical model of writing instruction and respond to three common
questions: 1) why are we using this model?; 2) what are the similarities and
differences among W-I, W-II, and W-III courses?; and 3) what might a W-II
and W-III course look like? This article combined with Insight from WIC
Seminar Program Participants on what comprises a meaningful writing
assignment may provide guidance in developing and creating effective
assignments in a W-designated course.
Tanya K. Rodrigue, PhD

One similarity among all W-designated courses is the criterionstudents

receive and respond to feedback from peers and instructor during the
drafting and/or revision stages of the writing process. Many Salem State
faculty have expressed concern about the quality of feedback students
give one another during peer review sessions, namely that students often
focus on grammar rather than ideas and content. In Less Groaning, Better
Feedback: Get the Scoop on Productive Peer Review, Kelly Drummey, WIC
graduate assistant and English masters candidate, presents two peer review
models that have been proven successful in Salem State college courses.

continued

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 1

Welcome cont.

Write to Learn, Learn to Write

Public Health Nursing Professional Poster Presentations: Writing for the

Discipline by Barbara Pombera, EdD and Kathleen Keough Adee, is the
featured article in this issue of Write to Learn, Learn to Write. Pombera
and Adee, faculty in the nursing department, discuss the design of an
assignment that prepares nursing students to communicate effectively
in their careers. They emphasize the importance of providing such
opportunities for nursing students.
Our Spotlight on Faculty section features Cindy Vincent, PhD, an assistant
professor in communications. She discusses the value of the teaching
of writing in her discipline as well as the new vertical model of writing
instruction in an interview with English major Kelsey Alcantara, the fall 2014
WIC undergraduate intern. Vincent also talks about her participation in the
WIC seminar program, a yearlong program comprised of seven seminars
on writing pedagogy topics for faculty teaching W-II and W-III courses.
I hope you enjoy reading the first issue of Write to Learn, Learn to Write.
If you are interested in writing an article for the newsletter, please email
me at trodrigue@salemstate.edu. |
Sincerely,
Tanya K. Rodrigue, PhD
WIC Coordinator
Assistant Professor in English

Strategies for Composing W-II

and W-III CIDs
For existing courses, reflect on
what you already do in relation
to the W-II or W-III goals and
criteria.
For new courses, reflect on how
you can both integrate writing
into your courses for purposes of
achieving course learning goals,
and how you can incorporate
instruction into the classroom
via discussion, homework and
in-class work.
Be certain your course achieves
CID goals and criteria.
In course descriptions, be sure
to include W-I and/or W-II as
prerequisites and to identify the
course as a W-II or W-III course.
For W-II courses, carefully
consider how other prerequisites
may prevent students from

across the disciplines from

taking the course.
Use language from the W-II or
W-III CID in the course proposal,
and be very clear as to how
youre seeking to achieve goals
and meet the criteria. The
emphasis in the W-II course
is on providing students with
opportunities to write for various
purposes and audiences, while
the emphasis in the W-III course
is on disciplinary writing. Be sure
this is clear in your proposal, and
be sure to define the purposes
and audiences.
Try to incorporate writing into
the topics and/or subtopics,
course goals, and course
objectives in both the W-II
and W-III course. |

2 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

is a newly launched newsletter

sponsored by the Writing
Intensive Curriculum (WIC)
program. It will be published in the
fall and spring of each academic
year. The newsletter functions as a
site for faculty to both acquire and
share ideas, insights and practical
experiences about the teaching
of writing. In light of this purpose,
we are actively seeking article
submissions for upcoming issues
on various topics related to writing
pedagogy. Some possible topics
are: an effective or challenging
student writing activity or
assignment; the process of
designing a W-designated course;
the benefits and challenges of
teaching a W-designated course;
the function and purpose of
writing in a field or discipline;
and the role of writing in careers
related to a discipline. Articles
should be approximately 750-1,200
words. Please send ideas, drafts,
or polished articles to professor
Tanya Rodrigue at trodrigue@
salemstate.edu. All submissions
will be considered, yet given
space limitations, not everyone
will be asked to further develop
their drafts or ideas. I look forward
to hearing from you!
WIC Programmatic Goals:
To support instructors teaching
Writing-II and Writing-III
courses
To contribute to the successful
implementation of the new
general education curriculum
To promote the use of writing
and the teaching of writing in
all classes at the university
To foster and nourish a
university culture that values
and supports writing and
writing pedagogy
To strengthen the faculty
culture at the university

Writing Vertically, Teaching Together

Tanya K. Rodrigue, PhD, WIC coordinator, assistant professor in English
Salem State University has undertaken significant changes during the past several years. Our core curriculum
(now called the general education curriculum) has been completely revamped, giving way to exciting pedagogical
opportunities for professors and learning experiences for students. One significant change at the university is the
vertical model of writing instruction. The two-course composition sequence (ENL 101 and ENL 102) housed in the
English department has been replaced with a three-course sequence (W-I, W-II and W-III). As the Writing Intensive
Curriculum (WIC) program coordinator, I have engaged in a multitude of meaningful conversations with faculty
about the vertical model. Faculty have voiced different opinions, ranging from excitement to anxiety to uncertainty
about teaching writing in their disciplines. Many have asked questions and expressed concerns related to the writingdesignated courses. In this article, I will address some common questions to provide information about the vertical
model and prompt more conversation about writing and writing pedagogy at Salem State University.

Question #1:
Why Did Salem State University Adopt the Vertical
Model of Writing Instruction?
The vertical model of writing instruction (in various
shapes and forms) is used at many institutions of higher
education, and many consider it to be the most effective
way to help students become stronger writers. The
reason why this model is deemed effective is because it
is informed by research in writing studies, and it reflects
best practices to date in the learning and teaching of
writing.

Students become strong writers when they

have multiple opportunities (in different classes
throughout their college careers) to learn about
writing; to practice and revise writing; and to reflect
on writing and themselves as writers. Contrary to
popular opinion, students cannot master writing
in one or two courses.4, 5, 6

The teaching of writing can foster eight habits

of mind identified as essential for success in
college and beyond including curiosity, openness,
engagement, creativity, persistence, responsibility,
flexibility, and metacognition.7

Students learn and perform better when they are

intrinsically motivated.8 Thus students taking a
writing-intensive course in their major, minor or
simply a course that interests them, will likely
be more engaged, learn more and better retain
knowledge.

Here is a glimpse of some of that research:

Writing promotes learning and critical thinking, thus

the integration of writing in any class provides a rich
educational experience for students.1, 2

Writing is positively associated with high-impact

learning practices. The more professors assign
writing tasks, the more students perceive them to
be emphasizing higher-order learning, and reflective
and integrative learning.3

continued
1
John Bean, Engaging Ideas: The Professors Guide to Integrating Writing,
Critical Thinking and Active Learning in the Classroom (San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass, 2011).

Michelle Cox et al. Statement on WAC Principles and Practices, The WAC
Clearinghouse, February, 2014, http://wac.colostate.edu/principles/.

National Survey of Student Engagement, A Fresh Look at Student

EngagementAnnual Results 2013, (Indiana University Center for
Postsecondary Research, 2013).

Brent, Doug, Transfer, Transformation, and Rhetorical Knowledge: Insights

from Transfer Theory, Journal of Business and Technical Communication 25,
(October 2011): 396-420.
4

Cox, Statement on WAC Principles and Practices.

Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA), National

Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), National Writing Project (NWP),
Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing, Council of Writing
Program Administrators, January, 2011, http://wpacouncil.org/files/
framework-for-success-postsecondary-writing.pdf.

Ibid.

Elizabeth Barkley, Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook for

College Faculty (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010.)
8

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 3

Question #2:
What are the Commonalities and Differences
Among the Three Writing-Designated Courses?
with foundational knowledge about writing and
writing practices. Students will encounter the kinds
of writing experiences common in the vertical
model: writing activities that help students learn,
and writing in different forms for different purposes
and audiences. Students also learn a language to
talk about writingconcepts and terms such as
rhetoric and the writing process. Such vocabulary
is instrumental in helping students understand
the role and function of writing in college, in the
workplace and in their personal lives.

Commonalities in W-Designated Courses

The courses work together to help students accumulate
and enhance transferable knowledge related to writing
and writing practices. As a result, particular content is
consistent in all W-designated courses.
All courses in some form:

Count writing assignments for at least 40 percent

of students grades

Integrate writing for the purpose of learning

Teach students: writing process(es); writing

strategies for different kinds of writing; the
relationship among writing, audience, purpose
and context; feedback practices and revision
strategies; and the value of reflection for writers

The W-II course broadens students experiences

with writing. Students have opportunities to
continue practicing writing in a variety of forms for
different purposes and audiences. Such practice
helps them strengthen their writing abilities and
develop a strong awareness of what they need to
think about and do when approaching a new writing
task.

The W-III class focuses on teaching students how to

write the various kinds of writing that are common
in a discipline. These writing opportunities prepare
students with the skills and abilities they will need
to write in their future careers.

Differences In W-Designated Courses

Although the courses have commonalities, they also
have differences. Each course plays a distinct role in
helping students become effective writers. The most
important differences are:

The W-I course introduces students to our university

writing curriculum and equips them

4 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

Question #3:
What Does a W-II and W-III Course Look Like?
Faculty have taken up the goals and criteria of the
W-II and W-III courses in various ways. Below are
two examples. (If you are interested in viewing more
examples, please email me at trodrigue@salemstate.edu.)

To identify conventions of writing, effective

writing strategies and effective writing processes
To give constructive criticism of others writing
and articulate ways to improve writing

To explain how their writing has improved and why

W-II Course:
The world language and culture departments Italian
Composition through Film class (ITL354) was approved
as a W-II course last year. The description of the course
is as follows:
In this course, students will further develop proficiency
in writing Italian. Selected Italian language films and
literary excerpts will generate topics for composition in
Italian, as well as broadening students understanding
of Italian culture, geography, and history. Focus will be
on developing writing skills acquired at the intermediate
level appropriate for tasks such as: describing, narrating,
summarizing, or expressing an opinion. Three lecture
hours per week, plus required viewing of films outside
of class. Conducted entirely in Italian.
Prerequisite: ITL202 or equivalent and WI course.

In ITL354, faculty will provide students with several

opportunities to practice writing for various purposes
and audiences. Such assignments may include: a book
review; a film review; letter writing; an autobiographical
essay; a short story; and a critical essay.
W-III Course:
The history capstone course Research and Writing in
History (HST 505) was approved as a W-III course last
year. The course description is:
The seminar will involve examination and
analysis of professional materials in journals
and books of primary and secondary sources
that deal with the process of research and
writing a formal history paper. Faculty and
peer discussion will also consider analytical
and methodological points. Required of all
History majors. Three lecture hours per week.
Not open to students who have received
credits for HST 405 or HIS405A. Prerequisites:
W-I, W-I and HIS 290, or HST 200 (WII).

The course goals and outcomes reveal the various ways

faculty in this department will achieve W-II goals and
criteria. The course has several goals:

To write in Italian for informative and creative

purposes with an emphasis on simplicity and clarity

To continue the study of grammatical fundamentals

To further develop skills in reading, composition

and conversation

To explore Italian contemporary themes as

described in Italian films, newspapers, articles,
literature, songs, and art

To foster opportunities for collaborative work

and stimulate students critical thinking process

To encourage students understanding of other

people and other cultures and, by extension,
of their own culture

The course has four outcomes:

To demonstrate improved writing skills in Italian

by completing a portfolio of revised writing
assignments in a range of formal and informal pieces

The department positions the class as one that

introduces students to historical writing and research.
Again, the course goals and outcomes give a good idea
of how faculty will achieve W-III goals and criteria.
The course seeks to accomplish three goals:

To offer a capstone experience for history majors

that engages them in original research that results
in the production of an article length essay

To provide a forum for students to methodologically

formulate, develop and execute historical research
plan

To provide a structured, supportive environment

that engages students in the questions of
methodology, analysis and interpretation that
are central to historical research and writing
continued

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 5

The course has seven outcomes:

To write an article length essay based on original

research

To demonstrate engagement with the historiography

of their subject in their formulation of their research
question, the conduct of their research, and the
writing of their final article

To provide one another with peer review of research

and writing projects, and in doing so become more
reflective about the process of historical research,
the methodologies used, and the viability of
specific claims

To prepare a research plan and specific proposal

for the project

To publicly present their research and outcomes

to an audience of their peers and their professor

To reflect critically on the process, method,

content, analysis, and interpretation of their
project as they conduct it

To engage in the constructive writing practice

of drafting and revising their work

do not have the expertise to teach writing in their

disciplines while others fear W-II and W-III courses will
yield an unbearable workload. Some faculty are also
concerned about balancing content and writing in a
W-designated class. In the WIC Seminar Program, I offer
a series of seven seminars that will support teachers
in designing and teaching W-II and W-III courses and
address the aforementioned concerns. During the
semester, I will email all faculty information on the WIC
Seminar Program and instructions on how to apply to
the program. If you have any general questions about
the program, please visit the WIC website (salemstate.
edu/wic),the informal WIC Seminar Program website
(tanyarodrigue.com/ssuwic), or contact me directly
at trodrigue@salemstate.edu. I am also available
for individual and departmental consultations about
anything related to writing pedagogy. |
Bibliography
Barkley, Elizabeth. Student Engagement Techniques: A Handbook for College
Faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010.
Bean, John. Engaging Ideas: The Professors Guide to Integrating Writing,
Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass, 2011.
Brent, Doug. Transfer, Transformation, and Rhetorical Knowledge: Insights
from Transfer Theory. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. 25
(October 2011): 396-420.

Historians who offer this course will help students gain

an understanding of the writing process of historical
papers as well as what they need to do to effectively
write in historical genres.

Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA), National Council of

Teachers of English (NCTE), National Writing Project (NWP). Framework
for Success in Postsecondary Writing. Council of Writing Program
Administrators. January, 2011. http://wpacouncil.org/files/framework-forsuccess-postsecondary-writing.pdf.

In addition to the above three questions, faculty

have expressed common concerns about teaching
W-designated classes. Some are worried that they

National Survey of Student Engagement. (2013). A Fresh Look at Student

EngagementAnnual Results 2013. Indiana University Center for
Postsecondary Research. 2013. http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2013_Results/pdf/
NSSE_2013_Annual_Results.pdf

6 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

Cox, Michelle et al. Statement on WAC Principles and Practices. The WAC
Clearinghouse. February, 2014. http://wac.colostate.edu/principles/.

Public Health Nursing Professional Poster

Presentations: Writing for the Discipline
Barbara A. Poremba, EdD, professor of nursing and
Kathleen Keough Adee, assistant professor of nursing
For a practice-focused discipline like nursing,
what exactly does writing in and for the discipline mean?
For years, NUR415 Public Health Nursing was the writingdesignated course for the major. Since its placement in
the curriculum was the last semester of the senior year,
the writing assignment was referred to as the Capstone
Paper. To meet this objective, students wrote a 35-page
paper that required them to collect, analyze and synthesize
data for the purpose of assessing and diagnosing a
community for its health needs/problems. Students
then identified solutions that a public health nurse could
provide. Over time, as the field of public health nursing
expanded, more content was added to the course to meet
the Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria. The large amount
of new material made the required public health writing
assignment more difficult to complete within the time
constraints of a 7-week course; faculty and students both
found the 35 page paper requirement unmanageable.
Since the assignment accounted for 60% of the total grade,
a disproportionate emphasis was focused on producing
the paper rather than on mastering the application of
concepts required to practice public health nursing.
Although the paper was unwieldy, the process involved in
completing it was crucial for student learning. Students
learned how to review literature; assess, analyze and
synthesize data; and create solutions for a problem.
While the process was instrumental, the producta
35 page paperwas not. Thus faculty were faced with
the challenge of creating a new assignmentone that
retained the core objectives of the former assignment and
enabled students to learn and practice written and verbal
communication that nurses use in the profession. Such
communication skills include clear, accurate and concise
presentation of salient points that reflect an understanding
of scientific evidence and application to practice. Taking
all of this into consideration, Poremba created the
Professional Public Health Poster Presentation. Like
the former assignment, the poster presentation calls for
students to synthesize complex concepts yet asks them
to do so in a creative presentation. This professional
form more accurately reflects how practicing public
health nurses present evidence-based information.
Students present a visually-engaging final poster of their
findings using graphs and charts in small groups to their
classmates. Afterwards, some of the posters are shared

with outside agencies that put them

on display. The project demonstrates
students ability to gather, critique,
and analyze data, as well as verbally
and visually present data in a manner
consistent with the professional nursing role, specifically
in forums or at conferences.
Feedback from both students and faculty on this
assignment has been overwhelmingly positive. Students
leave the course with greater self-confidence in the
communication skills they will need as professional
nurses. Although the course no longer retains the W
classification, it continues to meet many of the overall
objectives of writing for the discipline of nursing in the
form of a meaningful discipline-specific assignment
that demonstrates critical thinking in written and verbal
communication skills.
Yet there are a number of challenges for the ongoing
prospect of this assignment. The presentations,
averaging 20 minutes each, require a number of
additional faculty for evaluation and take up valuable
class time, forcing further squeezing of the necessary
course content. The course requirements also include
a clinical practice component as well as a midterm and
final exam, a community assessment Powerpoint project
and on-line graded discussions. Of greatest concern is
the workload imposed on the faculty; the time necessary
for faculty to provide guidance and feedback to students,
each of whom have a different public health topic, is
extremely laborious in such a short period of time. The
project works well when class size can be limited to
25. However, as class size continues to incrementally
increase (up to nearly 50 students per quarter for
only 2 full-time faculty), the viability of this activity is
threatened. Hopefully, if writing for the discipline is truly
valued, solutions will be addressed. |
Bibliography
American Nurses Association (ANA). Public health nursing: Scope and standards
of practice. Silver Springs, MD: Nursesbooks.org, 2007.
Callen, Bonnie et al. Essentials of Baccalaureate Nursing Education for Entrylevel Community/Public Health Nursing. Public Health Nursing. 27 (4) (2010):
371382.
Committee on Educating Public Health Professionals for the 21st Century
Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies. Who will keep the
public healthy? Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2003.

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 7

Less Groaning, Better Feedback:

Get the Scoop on Productive Peer Review
Kelly Drummey, Salem State University English masters candidate
If youve heard your students
groan, moan, and sigh at
the mere mention of peer
review, only to realize youre
feeling the same way, dont
worry, youre not alone.
Orchestrating productive
peer review sessions
are a challenge for most
professors. Salem State
Kelly Drummey
University English assistant
professor and WIC coordinator Tanya Rodrigue, who has
taught college writing for more than ten years, explains
some of her challenges:
Ive tried and designed all different kinds of
peer review but Ive never really been satisfied
with the kind of feedback students give each
other until very recently. The majority of
students have always found a way to bring
their comments back to the sentence-level
despite my repeated attempts to get them
to focus on big-picture things like idea
development.10
Despite these challenges, many professors know that
peer review has potential to be tremendously valuable for
students. Yet the question remains: how can instructors
facilitate sessions that yield good revision advice?
Amy Minett, an assistant professor in the Salem State
University English department who specializes in
multilingual writing and writers, uses a method that she
describes as traditional, yet her guidelines for composing
and sharing feedback fortify her method. Her workshop
model begins with the writer, or a volunteer designated
by the writer, reading the paper aloud. The class reflects
and prepares four written comments based on guided
criteria and then shares their feedback with the writer.
The writer listens silently to all of the comments and
is allowed to ask clarifying questions only after all
feedback has been shared. Minett notes that engaging
in structured peer review not only sharpens writingrelated literacies, but also helps students develop their
intercultural literacies. She explains:
For multilingual writers, we can infuse
language as well as content objectives into
a [peer review] workshop model like this.
Students not only learn about giving feedback,

8 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

collaboration, reading, and writing, but

they also focus on grammatical forms of
statements, questions, hedging, etc. This focus
on form also leads to important discussion of
cultural conventions related to pragmatics:
praise, hedging, politeness, etc.11
Minett emphasizes the importance of modeling the
workshop process with the whole class before the
students workshop in groups.
Like Minett, Rodrigue has discovered the writer/reader/
listener dialogic model is effective. She has recently
adopted Professor Peter Kittles gossipy reading
technique for peer review as described in his National
Writing Project article Reading Practices as Revision
Strategies: The Gossipy Reading Model. The activity,
which she refers to as gossipy peer review, calls for
students to get in groups of three. One student writer
silently observes while peers read and discuss his/
her work. At the end of the session, the writer joins
the conversation, asking for clarification, advice or
posing questions. Kittle, who is a professor at California
State University, Chico, describes his experience
executing this activity: What happened in practice was
remarkable Gone was the burden, so often foisted
upon members of peer revision groups, of suggesting
ways to fix the paper. Instead, group members simply
had to read the piece aloud, interrupt whenever they
had comments, and talk about the ways that they made
sense of the paper's ideas.12
Kittle describes one gossipy session where two students
immediately expressed confusion about their peers
essay. The dialogue that followed helped the writer
revise his essay. Kittle writes: As a result of this
interchange, Louis was able to focus on the way he
began his paper. He not only knew that the introduction
needed work, but he also knew what effect its original
form had on readers. The process had shown him what
he had to do to meet his readers' needs.13

Footnotes
Tanya Rodrigue (Assistant Professor and WIC Coordinator) in discussion with
the author, November 2014.

10

Amy Minett, email message to author, January 20, 2015.

11

Peter Kittle, Reading Practices as Revision Strategies: The Gossipy Reading

Model, The Quarterly 25, no. 3 (2003), http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/
resource/871.

12

13

Ibid.

Rodrigue found similar success when she used it in

her own classroom, so much so that she shared the
activity with faculty in the WIC Seminar Program. One
of these faculty members, Salem State University
political science professor Elizabeth Coughlan, has used
it in several of her classes and her satisfaction with
the outcome parallels Rodrigues. During my recent
visit to Coughlans undergraduate European politics
class, her students enthusiasm about the activity
was plainly evident and their feedback on the activity
supports Rodrigues sentiments. Emory Paine, a senior
communications major, says, It was very helpful. I
always try to imagine how others would read my paper,
but here I was able to experience the readers process
for myself. It allowed me important insight thats
difficult for me to think through on my own.14 Paine also
found value in discussing his peers work. He continues:
[The activity] gave me an interesting chance to read
another classmates paper in depth. I gained interesting
insight on how other people interpret assignments
and write papers differently from myself.15 Another of
Coughlan's students points to a different reason why
the gossipy peer review was successful. Ayan Green
says, I thought it was less judgment, but more
conversation like.16
Coughlans students confirm Rodrigues theories that
the peer review activity is successful in part due to
its social nature. It relies on a conversational style of
communication, which many college students feel
comfortable with. Rodrigue says: [gossipy peer review]
helps students understand writing as a social act.
They dont have to worry about things like complete
sentences or grammar or sounding academic.17
It is worth noting that the reliance on spontaneous
conversation between students about their writing as
they read is the clearest distinction between the gossipy
peer review and Minetts method, whereas peers do not
share feedback with the writer spontaneously, but rather
take time to reflect and compose thoughtful, guided
reactions. This calls attention to the fact that different
peer review methods will be more or less appropriate
and comfortable for each student based on various
factors such as learning styles, cultural backgrounds,
and personality. Taking this into consideration is another
way of increasing the chances that peer review will be
successful. Minett accommodates and respects student
preferences in her classroom by having students
choose the peer review method that works best for

them: I use differing peer review workshop formats for

the first half of the semester, reflecting on effectiveness
with students after each one. By the second half of the
semester, I let students in groups negotiate the model
to use based on their experiences.18
Possessing audience awareness is critical for students
to gain good writing skills that will serve them well
not just in the academic setting but throughout their
lives. Suggesting a potential audience when assigning
a writing assignment is helpful, but giving students
the chance to share their writing with an actual
audience is likely to be more impactful, and this can be
accomplished with effective peer review. Gossipy peer
review brings students face to face with their audience.
Rodrigue notes: It gives the writer the opportunity to
hear exactly how the audience is engaging with his/
her writing, how theyre making sense of it, and how
or if theyre understanding it. In literally hearing how
an audience receives ones writing, the writer is able to
determine whether or not they made good rhetorical
choices and were successful in achieving their goals.19
The gossipy peer review is one peer review strategy
that has been used successfully in undergraduate
classrooms here at Salem State University. With this
method, students witness their writing being read,
comprehended and appreciated by a genuine audience:
their peers. Through these strategic, productive
communication sessions with their classmates, they
gain a clearer understanding of how an audience
is responding to their writing and a more tangible
motivation to write effectively. |
Bibliography
Kittle, Peter. Reading Practices as Revision Strategies: The Gossipy
Reading Model. The Quarterly 25, no. 3 (2003). http://www.nwp.org/cs/
public/print/resource/871.

Footnotes
14

Emory Paine (student) in discussion with the author, January 2015.

15

Ibid.

16

Ayan Green (student) in discussion with the author, January 2015.

17

Tanya Rodrigue, discussion.

18

Amy Minett, email.

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 9

Spotlight on Faculty: Cindy Vincent, PhD

Cindy Vincent, PhD is an
assistant professor in the
communications department
and has been teaching at
Salem State University for
two years. Most recently, she
has taught Introduction to
Communications (COM 201);
Mass Media and Society
(COM 206); Principles of
Cindy Vincent, PhD
Public Relations (COM 349);
and Public Relations Writing (COM 351). Vincent is also
a public relations consultant and currently works with
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In the past, she has
worked for the California State Department of General
Services.
Vincents most recent publications include: Change.
org in the Encyclopedia of Social Media and Politics;
POOR Magazine and Civic Engagement through
Community Media in Race/Gender/Media: Considering
Diversity Across Audience, Content and Producers and
MACBETH: Development of a Training Game for the
Mitigation of Cognitive Bias in International Journal
of Game-Based Learning. Kelsey Alcantara, the intern
for the Writing Intensive Curriculum program, sat down
with Vincent in mid-September (2014) to discuss the
vertical model, her burgeoning W-II course, and her
experience in the WIC Seminar Program.
KA: What do you think of the new vertical model at
Salem State University, specifically the W-II and
W-III courses?
CV: Im not that familiar with the old model since last
year was my only year working in it, but the new model
seems to be an improvement, especially in my field. I
teach public relations for the university. My students
have to be good writers. Its imperative for them to get
a good job. The vertical model will help them become
better writers because theyll have more opportunities
to focus on their writing. To be honest, we were
already doing this in our department anyway. I think it
makes sense that all university students should have
opportunities to strengthen their writing skills.
KA: What course will you be transforming into a
writing intensive course?
CV: So we have already applied for and been approved
for two courses. Our basic public relations writing
course (COM 351) will be a W-II course and our
advanced public relations writing course (COM 450)
will be a W-III course.

10 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

KA: How do you think the redesign of this work will

benefit your students?
CV: In filling out the paperwork (Course Information
Document (CID)) for the W-II course, you have to
identify how your course fits the writing criteria
designated by the university. I like how this forced me
as a professor to think in terms of writing processes,
writing assignments, and writing activities. To be
honest, prior to last semester, I never thought of myself
as a writing instructor. So redesigning the course forced
me to rethink how I approach the class entirely. I would
have to say that my first semester teaching PR writing
probably didnt go as well as it could have, which is why
Im participating in the WIC Seminar program. Im really
excited to learn strategies that I can use to get at the
W-II CID goals and criteria. From my own professional
experience, I never spent much time doing a metaanalysis of the writing process. Its more, do your
job and do this within this deadline. Its more about
writing in a fast paced world rather than meeting certain
expectations and requirements. But I never stopped to
think about, okay so whats the process involved in this?
How does the draft phase and revision process really
affect the outcome of what Im sending out into the
world? I really like how the goals and criteria of the W-II
course have forced me to rethink the classroom design.
And now my students this semester are really working
on the revision process, talking about it, talking about
their writing, and talking about themselves as writers.
In PR, we dont think of ourselves as writers, but we are.
And so I think the W-II course will benefit our students
in that way.
KA: What kinds of struggles or obstacles might you
face in teaching the course?
CV: The obstacles Ive been facing are really my own
personal struggles. Like I said before, I never really
thought of myself as a writing instructor, so Ive had to
overcome that. Ive had to think to myself, what do I
think of when I think of a writing instructor? Personally,
I think of my high school English teacher. She taught in
a very specific way, but it was very effective. I look at
her as a model and try to emulate her. I ask myself: how
can I embody that? I sort of have to get over my own
maybe inadequacies or self-consciousness with regards
to that.
I also have to think of ways to effectively apply those
practices. I spent my whole summer researching, and
its funny because some of the resources Tanya has
given us so far I ran into over the summer when I was
doing my own research about best practices. I was

looking for resources from not just a PR perspective but

from a writing perspective. I dont know these practices
because I never had to learn them before. So those are my
obstacles right now. Its just how to best teach the course.
KA: How do you think the WIC Seminar program will
help you with the course?
CV: So far, it has really helped me sort of think of myself
in terms of that rolehow to be a good professor of
writing. Tanyas really forced me to look at the way I
respond to and give feedback to my students. I really have
an obligation to encourage and support them and ignite
passion for writing. As opposed to some professors they
may have had in the past who did anything but that, who

have sort of slammed them down and told them theyre

terrible and that theyll never be a writer. Thats terrible.
Shes doing a great job of teaching us how to really
support our students, to really take care with them, to
make sure that they feel confident, because theyre new
at this. The question becomes: how can we help instill
confidence in them to go into this profession or use
these writing skills in the future and feel like they can
succeed? Were just at the beginning of the program,
but Im hoping we are going to get more into techniques
and strategies to use in the classroom.
KA: Great. Thank you for your time.
CV: Thank you. |

Insight from WIC Seminar Program Participants

In the WIC Seminar Program, participants engaged in discussion about effective writing assignments. They were
tasked with reflecting on past writing experiences in an effort to think about what makes for a strong assignment.
They responded to the following writing prompt: describe your most meaningful writing experience during your
education or in your professional life. Discuss why you thought it was meaningful.1 Professors identified meaningful
writing assignments as those that: fostered personal growth; related to personal interest; offered opportunities
for feedback; fostered a new learning experience; provided preparation for the future; and were flexible. Selected
reflections are below:
Personal Growth
This was meaningful as it led me to reflect on those who inspired me and those I might have had a hand in inspiring.
It prompted a sense of gratitude for the small and large gestures that have shaped the woman I have become.
We spent the semester doing research on campus sub-groups and presented our findings in a final paper.
My research was used to help make changes to improve race relations on campus the following year. It felt good
contributing to positive changes on campus.
What is most meaningful to me is not a single writing assignment but the manner in which I have playfully used it
throughout my lifeI wrote a research paper as a play; a set of poetry as a science paper; and 5 pages of faux-art
criticism that said nothing while mimicking the language of the field. Words are play, they are design, they are fun.
Opportunities for Feedback / Revision
[Writing multiple drafts of a paper] taught me that writing was not an innate skill but something that could be
acquired through applied effort.
The feedback I received from my group was very helpful for clarifying my argument.
A professor helped me edit and revise my draft multiple timesthis was the first time I went through many
drafts of a piece of writing.
Preparation for the Future
Not only did the project open up a particular field of inquiry that I pursued (in my career), it changed my sense of
self and my possibilities. Entering academia was not an obvious choice given my class background and a thesis
made it clear that I nevertheless could aspire to this.
Flexibility
It was meaningful because we as students chose to collaborate and the professor had complete confidence
in our ability to produce something good (which made us work harder).
I appreciated the opportunity to write on an issue that affected me. |
This writing activity was inspired by Neal Lerner, Anne Geller and Michelle Eodices research project, The Meaningful Writing Project.

Spring 2015 | WIC Program Newsletter | 11

Eighteen Faculty Complete the WIC Seminar

Program and Participate in Salem State
Universitys First Annual Writing Pedagogy
Conference, Writing Vertically
The first cohort of WIC participants completed the
WIC seminar program last May. All participants
participated in seven seminars on writing-related
topics including the purpose and function of
w-designated courses; using writing to support
learning; teaching genre conventions; using digital
and multimodal writing in the classroom; responding
to student writing; and evaluating student writing.
WIC faculty also helped kick off Salem State
Universitys first annual writing pedagogy conference
in May, Writing Vertically. Conference participants
gave presentations or participated in roundtable
discussions on topics including: Teaching Writing
from a Genre Perspective; Teaching Writing from
a Rhetorical Perspective; Teaching the Writing
Process; Incorporating Low-Stakes Writing in the
Classroom; Proposing, Designing and Teaching

12 | WIC Program Newsletter | Spring 2015

a W-Designated Course in the New Gen Ed; and

Teaching Digital Writing.
WIC participants were: Pamela Leong (sociology),
Michele Louro (history), Krishna Mallick (philosophy),
Francesca Pomerantz (literacy, counseling and
learner development), Eric Yitzchak Metchik (criminal
justice), Elizabeth Coughlan (political science),
Joseph Kasprzyk (computer science), Jennifer
Jackman (criminal justice), Margo Shea (history),
Li Li (history), KC Bloom (sports and movement
science), Guorong Zhu (business), Peter Kevtko
(music), Christopher Schoen (sport and movement
science), Kimberly Poitevin (interdisciplinary studies),
Sami Ansari (criminal justice), George Abbound
(sport and movement science), Jennifer Robinson
(criminal justice). |