College Composition and Communication

140 articles
Year: Topic: Clear
Export:
first-year composition ×

February 2001

  1. The First-Year Composition Requirement Revisited: A Survey
    Abstract

    Preview this article: The First-Year Composition Requirement Revisited: A Survey, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/52/3/collegecompositioncommunication1429-1.gif

    doi:10.58680/ccc20011429

February 1999

  1. Reframing the Great Debate on First-Year Writing
    Abstract

    Marjorie Roemer, Lucille M. Schultz, Russel K. Durst, Reframing the Great Debate on First-Year Writing, College Composition and Communication, Vol. 50, No. 3, A Usable Past: CCC at 50: Part 1 (Feb., 1999), pp. 377-392

    doi:10.2307/358857

February 1998

  1. Pedagogy of the Pissed: Punk Pedagogy in the First-Year Writing Classroom
    doi:10.2307/358563

October 1989

  1. A Bridge to Academic Discourse: Social Science Research Strategies in the Freshman Composition Course
    Abstract

    learning, one that will bring about changes in teaching as well as in student writing. We also need to establish quite clearly that WAC programs certainly do not exclude examinations and more coursework in writing as a means of establishing proficiency, but that WAC is not to be identified solely with writing proficiency. Finally, there is an issue not dealt with directly by my survey, but which has come up in anecdotal comments at the meetings of the National Network of Writing Across the Curriculum Programs and which deserves further study-the matter of change and faculty resistance to it. The idea and the practice of writing to learn goes against the predominant paradigm of education in the university, which valorizes the teacher-centered lecture class. In this paradigm, students are passive rather than active learners; they learn from the expert, not from each other. WAC programs challenge this notion of education, and those of us involved in such programs like to point to the successes we have had in changing faculty attitudes towards writing and learning (See Robert Weiss and Michael Peich, Attitude Change in a Cross-Disciplinary Writing Program, CCC 31 [Feb. 1980): 33-41). But changing attitudes and changing actual classroom practice may be two different things. Faculty resistance to change can be profound, as Deborah Swanson-Owens found in Identifying Natural Sources of Resistance (Research in the Teaching of English 20 [Feb. 1986): 69-97). Such resistance could, over a number of years, gradually wear away even the most firmly established institutional program. But I do not want to end on a negative note. While we need to be aware of the dangers that face the WAC movement in general and second-stage programs in particular, the survey results indicate cause for some cautious celebration. WAC as a movement is strong and is continuing to grow. It is up to all of us involved in such programs to be alert to the dangers, but also to be pleased that we have come this far.

    doi:10.2307/357779

February 1989

  1. The Abstraction Ladder in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/358186
  2. Directing Freshman Composition: The Limits of Authority
    doi:10.58680/ccc198911141
  3. Directing Freshman Composition: The Limits of Authority
    Abstract

    Preview this article: Directing Freshman Composition: The Limits of Authority, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/40/1/collegecompositionandcommunication11140-1.gif

    doi:10.58680/ccc198911140

February 1988

  1. Stressing Figures of Speech in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/357821

February 1987

  1. Amongst the Awful Subtexts: Scholes, The Daily Planet, and Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/357590

May 1984

  1. Freshman Composition. Junior Composition: Does Co-Ordination Mean Sub-Ordination?
    doi:10.2307/358098
  2. Freshman Composition-Junior Composition: Does Co-ordination Mean Sub-ordination?
    doi:10.58680/ccc198414884

October 1982

  1. Working 1-002: A Theme Course for Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/357497

May 1981

  1. The Recognition of Usage Errors by Instructors of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc198115909
  2. The Recognition of Usage Errors by Instructors of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/356690

February 1981

  1. Options for the Teaching of English: Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/356363

May 1979

  1. Speech-Act and Text-Act Theory: “Theme-Ing” in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc197916242
  2. Speech-Act and Text-Act Theory: "Theme-ing" in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/356324
  3. The English Grapholect and the Introductory Composition Class
    doi:10.58680/ccc197916233

October 1978

  1. Departmental Standards in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc197816309

December 1977

  1. On Freshman Composition and Logical Thinking
    doi:10.2307/356732

May 1977

  1. Placement Procedures for Freshman Composition: A Survey
    doi:10.58680/ccc197716386

December 1976

  1. Freshman Composition: The Right Texts but the Wrong Students Walk in the Door
    doi:10.58680/ccc197616547

October 1976

  1. The Sense of Nonsense: An Approach to Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc197616572

December 1975

  1. Freshman Composition in the Junior Year
    doi:10.58680/ccc197517085

February 1973

  1. Piaget, Problem-Solving, and Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc197317680
  2. Freshman Composition Texts
    doi:10.2307/357267

November 1972

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc197218180

February 1972

  1. Achieving Relevance in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/356227

December 1971

  1. Freshman Composition: The 1970’s
    doi:10.58680/ccc197119126
  2. Freshman Composition: The 1970's
    doi:10.2307/356204

November 1971

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition: Four-Year Colleges and Universities
    doi:10.58680/ccc197119143

November 1970

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition: Four-Year Colleges and Universities
    doi:10.58680/ccc197019194

December 1969

  1. Some Premises of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196920181

November 1969

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition: Four-year Colleges and Universities/Two-year Colleges
    doi:10.58680/ccc196920192

October 1969

  1. Logic: A Plea for a New Methodology in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196920199

November 1968

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition: Four-year Colleges and Universities
    doi:10.58680/ccc196820923
  2. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition: Two-year Colleges
    doi:10.58680/ccc196820924

October 1968

  1. Trends in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/356056

May 1968

  1. Teaching Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/355407

February 1968

  1. The Status of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196820881

December 1967

  1. Freshman Composition: When Do We Say We’ve Done the Job?
    doi:10.58680/ccc196720978
  2. Freshman Composition: When Do We Say We've Done the Job?
    doi:10.2307/354514
  3. Marist College Experiment in Interdepartmental Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196720987

November 1967

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196720958

October 1967

  1. New Ideas in Freshman Composition: Elimination, Reduction, Extension?
    doi:10.2307/355696

November 1966

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition in Four-Year Colleges and Universities
    doi:10.58680/ccc196621049
  2. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition in Two-Year Colleges
    doi:10.58680/ccc196621048

November 1965

  1. Directory of Chairmen of Freshman Composition
    doi:10.58680/ccc196521104

October 1965

  1. The Final Examination in Freshman Composition
    doi:10.2307/355768
  2. Content of the Freshman Composition Course
    doi:10.2307/355754