Performing the Groundwork - Building a WEC/WAC Writing Program at The College of St. Scholastica - Article Profile

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa

This program profile details the work required to establish a new writing program at a small private college. It explains how rhetorical listening helped the author build relationships with disciplinary faculty, reframing student writing challenges as shared opportunities. The profile then describes the Writing-Enriched Curriculum (WEC) and Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) components, concluding with lessons on program development, college-wide collaboration, and practical precautions for administrators.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages22

Reading Time55 min

AccessFree to download

Performing the Groundwork: Building a WEC/WAC Writing Program at The College of St. Scholastica

Building Relationships and Establishing Connections through Rhetorical Listening

Composition Forum 29, Spring 2014 [http://compositionforum.com/issue/29/](http://compositionforum.com/issue/29/) Performing the Groundwork: Building a WEC/WAC Writing Program at The College of St. Scholastica [[http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&username=compforum](http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&username=compforum)] Heather Bastian Abstract: This program profile describes the efforts needed to develop a new writing program at a small college. The author explores how she cultivated relations with disciplinary faculty to collaboratively redefine a “problem” into an opportunity by adopting Krista Ratcliffe’s technique of rhetorical listening. She then outlines the Writing-Enriched Curriculum (WEC) and Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) components of the writing program. Additionally, the author offers lessons learned about writing program development and building productive college-wide relationships as well as some precautions. Overall, the profile contributes to existing scholarship on small college writing programs by addressing issues of program development and explores the possibilities of rhetorical listening for writing program administrators. In Fall 2010, I began a faculty position in the Department of English at the College of St. Scholastica (CSS)—a small, private, comprehensive regional college—as the only composition and rhetoric specialist. {1} [\#note1] The college historically serves a small residential undergraduate population; however, throughout the 2000s, CSS undertook strategic initiatives to increase graduate, online, and extended sites of education with a focus on professional programs (including nursing, business and technology, physical therapy, occupational therapy, and health information and informatics management). These initiatives proved successful, expanding existing programs and bringing new programs to the college. They also introduced a larger, more diverse student population, especially nontraditional and graduate students, {2} [\#note2]as well as more faculty members, many of whom are part-time and contingent. {3} [\#note3] These programmatic changes, coupled with a rapid growth in student and faculty populations, led to an increase in faculty frustration with student writing and student frustration with faculty writing expectations, especially in the professional and graduate programs. A more diverse student population meant different levels of preparedness for undergraduate-and graduate-level writing; new graduate programs meant different kinds of writing at a higher level; and more part-and full-time faculty meant different levels of preparedness for and commitments to teaching at the college-level. Faculty anecdotally yet frequently reported to administration their frustrations with students’ writing abilities as well as their own lack of preparedness to assist students with writing. While CSS already provided student writing support in the form of a writing center, faculty wanted their own support for addressing student writing. They informally requested, over a period of several years, professional development and institutional support of some kind be provided without a clear idea of what this would look like. My position was created with administrative approval in response to these faculty requests. So, when I started, my position included the standard 3-3 teaching load with the expectation that I would “work with adjuncts, the Director of the Writing Center, and other faculty to promote writing,” as outlined in the job description. Essentially, I was a WPA with no program, no reassignment time, and no guidelines beyond working with others to promote writing. This was an exciting opportunity—with no program in place, I had freedom to develop a program that responded to the current context and faculty needs. This was also a challenge, given that this was my first academic position and there were no permanent or existing structures for faculty writing su

FAQs

What problem motivated the creation of the new writing program?

Rapid growth in student and faculty populations increased frustration around student writing and faculty expectations, especially across professional and graduate programs.

How did the author work with disciplinary faculty to sustain the program?

Through rhetorical listening, the author collaborated with disciplinary faculty to redefine “problems” into opportunities and build faculty ownership of the program.

What are WEC and WAC in the writing program described?

The author outlines the Writing-Enriched Curriculum (WEC) and Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) components as central parts of the new program.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by awa