In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

ACK NOWLEDGMENTS Carla, a dedicated, sharp writing lecturer, and Tim, a smart, mature, generous young man, are the stars of this work. Without them, there would be no lines, no entrance or exit points, no script. And for this writer, no subject matter. For Carla and Tim to expose themselves to a researcher’s scrutiny was an act of trust and graciousness and courage. I hope, for my part, I have been as trustworthy, and in some measure gracious and courageous. But they are the ones who had to take the bigger leaps of courage than I. To them I owe deep thanks for educating us in this messy business of succeeding to master the craft of writing. I would wish that Tim had gotten better writing instruction throughout his university experience. I would wish that Carla was better paid and would have the opportunity for sabbaticals, for time to study further the scholarship on teaching writing, this incredibly complex task that none of us has yet mastered. From my outsider perspective, both continue to succeed admirably in their lives in spite of fewer advantages than I might wish they could have. Tim is a parent, successful engineer, social activist, and spiritual seeker. Carla is parent, successful teacher and writer, and social activist. For the intellectual work done here, I owe a debt to many teachers : Shirley Heath mentored me well in the rigors of ethnographic research. Other fine scholars in composition studies whose work has preceded mine and informs it also must be praised: Lucille McCarthy, David Russell, John Swales, Amy Devitt, Stuart Greene, and David Smit are just a few. Third, those in related fields whose work has particularly helped to frame this study I also thank: Sam Wineburg, Gaea Leinhardt and Kathleen Young, Carl Bereiter and Marlene Scardamalia, Patricia Alexander, David Perkins and Gavriel Salomon, and Robert Sternberg in particular. I am also grateful to those who granted research leaves in order to accomplish the work, while I was at Stony Brook University—James Staros and Kay Losey—and to colleagues at Stony Brook whose disciplinary expertise gave me “insider” perspectives on the data in Chapters 4 and 5: David Ferguson, John Kincaid, Ned Landsman, Helen LeMay, Sara Lipton, and Gary Markus. Thanks to doctoral student Dana Driscoll, who so quickly grasped the vision I had for a curriculum based 2 COLLEGE WRITING AND BEYOND on the work here and collaborated in giving it fuller development in Appendix A. And thanks to my colleagues in the Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences Program at the University of Washington, Tacoma, who have ably demonstrated that it is possible to integrate writing throughout a curriculum if there is a will to do so. And I am indebted to Michael Spooner at Utah State University Press for his strong encouragement during the long process of reviews and publishing; to my husband, Guy Wulfing, who keeps believing in my work; and to Merrill Carrington, a spiritual mentor, who led me to the fine treatise on scholarship as sacred vocation by Jaroslav Pelikan. As months became years in the preparation of this manuscript, Pelikan’s perspective kept me going and gave me a goal to aim for. He says: The standards of the scholar . . . who has also become a mature person . . . include: patience, honesty, industry, a sense of humility, a vision of something beyond the tawdry and the broken . . . It is not the results, be they short term or long term, to which the scholar has a vocation. The scholar is called to a process of research, to an attitude of curiosity. (Pelikan 1984) If this project has pushed me in the directions Pelikan identifies, then I am grateful as well to the work itself. ...

Share