|
|
Collaborative Practices
|
Course Structure-IntensiveAccording to Lalicker, the intensive model” approach to basic writing can be understood as a more integrated variation of the studio model. The intensive model offers two configurations: standard composition courses and standard composition courses with intensive sections “that include additional instruction time or writing activities tailored for basic writers” (36). The intensive model distinguishes itself from the studio model through the initial placement of students through common placement methods into a special intensive composition section from the very first day of class. “[I]n the intensive model, students usually are part of one five-credit class group, while in the studio model, students from several different sections of standard composition come together at random in the studio lab sections” (36). Under this configuration, “[a]ll sections–intensive and standard–carry general-education credit” (36). Quinnipiac College Quinnipiac College’s “intensive model” is credited to Mary T. Segall, who served as the Director of the Freshman Writing Program. All students must take English 101 and English 102. Students who score low on a placement test are allowed to self place into “English 101-Intensive” instead of English 101 and then all students take English 102. English 101–Intensive is designed to give extra time for the students and professor to work on basic skills. Peer tutoring is also available at the learning center. Students take five hours of instruction, but receive three hours of credit. http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1344.xml http://www.quinnipiac.edu/prebuilt/pdf/catalogs/academics-catalog0607_courses.pdf http://www.quinnipiac.edu Bibliography Lalicker, William B. “A Basic Introduction to Basic Writing Program Structures: A Baseline and Five Alternatives.” BWe: Basic Writing e-Journal 1.2 (1999). 7 Jan. 2007. <www.asu.edu/clas/english/composition/cbw/bwe_fall_1999.htm#bill>.
Lalicker describes a brief survey that was conducted via the Writing Program Administrators listserv, asking respondents to identify their basic writing program as approximating one of five models. Respondents also provided insight into advantages and disadvantages of each model.
Segall, Mary T. “Embracing a Porcupine: Redesigning a Writing Program.” Journal of Basic Writing 14.2 (1995): 38–47.
Segall explains how faculty at Quinnipiac College re-conceptualized developmental English and designed a new program that provides additional instructional time within the regular freshman English course. Segall discusses such issues as motivation, resistance, cognitive opportunity, and fragmentation of reading and writing processes.
|