Pairing Courses Across the Disciplines

Julie Watts University of Wisconsin–Stout ; Rebecca E. Burnett Georgia Institute of Technology

Abstract

Writing performance of a complex recommendation report produced by student teams for an actual client during a 15-week semester was compared in a writing-intensive Agronomy 356 course and in paired Agronomy 356/ English 309 courses. The longitudinal study investigated differences that existed between reports produced for each learning environment in terms of argument effectiveness, document usability, and professionalism. Three agronomy and three professional communication raters ranked the 12 lengthy reports in the sample. The study found that all top-rated reports were generated in the paired courses and all lowest-rated reports were generated in the stand-alone agronomy course. Four pedagogical factors appear influential in this result: working in dual problem-solving spaces, pushing the boundaries on problem solving, incorporating workplace realities, and using just-in-time teaching.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2012-04-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088312438525
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (16)

  1. College Composition and Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Research in the Teaching of English
  4. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  5. Written Communication
Show all 16 →
  1. Research in the Teaching of English
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Written Communication
  4. College Composition and Communication
  5. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  6. Written Communication
  7. Technical Communication Quarterly
  8. Written Communication
  9. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  10. Technical Communication Quarterly
  11. Written Communication
Also cites 20 works outside this index ↓
  1. Bayer T., Curto K., Kriley C. (2005). Acquiring expertise in discipline-specific discourse: An interdisciplin…
  2. Brammer C., Amare N., Campbell K. S. (2008). Culture shock: Teaching writing within interdisciplinary contact…
  3. 10.1353/jge.2007.0017
  4. 10.37514/WAC-J.2008.19.1.02
    WAC Journal  
  5. 10.1109/TPC.2008.2001253
  6. Cross G. A., Wills K. V. (2005). Bridging disciplinary divides in writing across the curriculum. Across the D…
  7. 10.37514/LLD-J.2003.6.3.10
    Language and Learning Across the Disciplines  
  8. 10.1002/1098-2736(200009)37:7<691::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-G
  9. 10.2307/358895
  10. 10.1109/TPC.2005.853937
  11. 10.37514/LLD-J.1994.1.2.03
    Language and Learning Across the Disciplines  
  12. 10.37514/WAC-J.2002.13.1.06
    WAC Journal  
  13. 10.37514/LLD-J.1999.3.2.04
    Language and Learning across the Disciplines  
  14. 10.1109/TPC.2006.875083
  15. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00995.x
  16. 10.1007/BF02299761
  17. Samuels R. (2004). Re-inventing the modern university with WAC: Postmodern composition as cultural and intell…
  18. 10.1109/47.749363
  19. Wardle E. A. (2004). Can cross-disciplinary links help us teach “academic discourse” in FYC? Across the Disci…
  20. 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00922.x
CrossRef global citation count: 9 View in citation network →