“We Are Nothing More Than Stories”: An Interview with Natchee Barnd

By Marisa Yerace, WIC Intern

Natchee Barnd is an Associate Professor in the School of Language, Culture, and Society. A 2017 WIC Seminar alum, he taught the Ethnic Studies WIC course, Public Discourse and Writing on Race, last Winter term. He also recently published a book, Native Space: Geographic Strategies to Unsettle Settler Colonialism, last year. In this interview, WIC Intern Marisa Yerace chats with Natchee about his research, his book, teaching a WIC course, and his writing process in general.

Q: How long have you been at OSU? What is your research specialty?

I’m newly-tenured, so it’s like a whole new world now. I’ve been here seven years, I’m a comparative ethnic studies scholar. I also have expertise in indigenous studies and I do cultural geography, race and space, and indigenous geography work, more specifically.

Q: Let’s talk about your new book! What do you want people to know about it?

I would say it’s an interdisciplinary book. It reflects my training (ethnic studies) and my approach to questions or problems.

I had a question about what indigenous geographies look like, and how do they continue? What sort of practices are used to maintain them? The question wasn’t so much whether they did continue—I knew they did—but more of, “How do they do this?” What are the ways in which they’ve done this, from sort of infrastructural questions—like streets and street-naming—to artistic versions of that to cultural practices and performance?

This is all rooted in a notion of geography and space as always in production. It doesn’t just exist out there. We only understand it as we exist and engage with it and make sense of it. That, in turn, shapes how we see ourselves—by the way we engage with it and the structures we’ve created. I wanted to see how that works with native communities in the more mundane ways. What about those more nuanced ways we make meaning and sense of the world? When we see a forest, do we just see trees? Do we see them as potential resources? Do we see it as relatives, as part of the stories of our creation? Those are all very different questions which create different kinds of space, and then we reflect and create different kinds of identity based on the answers to those.

Some people say we are nothing more than words. I agree with that. On my syllabi, I say “We are nothing more than stories.” That’s the way we convey our understanding of the world, is through our words, through our languages. Without that we can’t actually produce or reproduce or sustain. We can’t make sense of the world. We’re just kind of bumbling around with no ability to process anything.

Q: What was your writing process like for your book?

It’s a project that sort of stretched over time, a small piece started in a dissertation, and a lot of that dissertation was written—actually, I think I kind of paralleled this as I wrote the book—at some point I hunkered down and was practicing writing every single day. Literally, every day I had to write, so when I was finishing—I had been working on it for years as an ABD—I had a deadline and I thought, now it’s a 9-5 job. I was writing every day.

I think all writing instruction or guidance tells you that you need to practice it like anything else. You need to practice that craft every day. Writing, for me, has always been a means of thinking. Like many people, I wrote to think. I edit a lot—I try really hard to not edit as I go. I definitely get into these modes where I’m writing every day as much as I can, in spurts. I allow myself to go where the writing or the thinking’s taking me, and sometimes I go elsewhere and come back. I trust that is always, in some way, going to be beneficial.

I did the same with the book, I spent a lot of time every day—just carving out a little bit of time, whenever I had a little bit of spare time. Sometimes I had a word count, just trying to get to 300 words. I think it was more word count than time, ‘cause you can say you’re going to write for three hours but if you only write 300 words you’re not very productive. I thought, if I aim for a small amount, and it went from there—it was great, it felt more productive. I think the psychology is really important, you have to feel like you’re making moves, it’s so easy to stop yourself or make excuses, or undercut your writing, and as a faculty person there are so many things that take you away from your writing. You have to carve it out. My process was always about trying to protect that time, and then letting it flow as loosely as I possibly could.

My schedule was different every single week, but I would try to block it for a morning time—I’m a morning writer, I’m a morning person and morning thinker. Somehow, if I could both work out and write at the same time, like really early in the morning, that would be amazing, but for some reason I can’t figure out how to do that. I feel like exercise and writing are the same in my mind: you have to make the choice to get that done in the beginning, before other things sort of overtake your day.

Q: Do you still try to write every day?

I try… I have other things I’m working on and those kind of keep me going.

Q: What other kinds of writing do you do?

I write for different audiences. I do stories for speculative nonfiction stuff. I have a course that’s a methods class which is an archival research and writing course that then also delivers, as a spoken tour, an actual tour of the community. I’ve written a few pieces for those with my students.

I was writing a conference presentation, which I write for oral delivery, but I’m finding my written and my oral styles are actually coming closer together. I tend not to actually change a lot, depending on what the argument was at different points. In my book, I started off with narrative beginnings, and then I go into a more formal and academic analyses and discussion. I usually start with a story and then I use that as an illustration or encapsulation of the analysis they’ll see later.

Q: Do you find that there are specific Native American genres in writing, or specific aspects of Native American genres?

Yes. Story is always a sort of major writing and telling mechanism—speaking, conveyance, communication mechanism. I think everyone tells stories, but in this case, there’s a difference between stories that are explicitly understood as stories and stories that are more than stories.

This is in my brain right now. I have a Native American Activism and Assimilation class, and throughout the term every week they are assigned—in addition to the usual scholarly pieces and poems here and there—they are assigned stories from graphic novels based on either trickster stories or native sci-fi-slash-fictional stories, and I give them to them for a couple reasons: one, because there’s a lot of information in them, and two, they’re enjoyable and accessible and easy-to-read. I think people will think of them like fables, like sort of Aesop’s fables or something like that. This is something I kind of realized this term more than I have before—they were just kind of looking at the moralistic outcomes, like what is the lesson? And those were definitely part of the stories, but what they would miss was actual traditional knowledge also embedded in them.

Let’s say I would have a story that’s eight-to-ten graphic novel pages. That’s just a little bit of dialogue, but also a lot of imagery. There are little indicators. They describe a location or they mention something about an animal doing something with another animal. If you’re looking at just the moral of the story, there’s a lot of information—biological, geological, geographic, botanical, zoological—all these pieces of information are actually being conveyed. If that story then gets meshed-up with some other stories in the network of stories, then that story is going to be read differently.

The one we talked about in class, for example, was a story about a racoon who sees a rock that kind of looks like a person, pushes it down, and after running under it, getting squished. There was this moral lesson around the treatment of elders and mischievous behavior, but what was being missed was the anatomy of the raccoon, why it looks the way it does. The story ends up talking about the shape of the racoon and why it moves the way it does and the body form. The rock itself was a very distinctive rock, so if you’re from a particular area, you’re locating the story to a very specific place in the world. It’s not an abstracted, generated story about just a rock that could be anywhere—no, it’s a very specific rock in a very specific place, so if you’re from there, you’ll know what that is. Then that story is attached to that place, and there are other elements of the landscape.

Actual knowledge that’s embedded in that may seem like context or decoration. I think those are really important in native stories—they are not abstracted. Usually they are very specific about place and relationships. Maybe there’s a relationship between two animals that hunt together, and Western science has always told us that they’re both predators—why would they cooperate? Then, in recent years, they find out, Oh, they actually do that. I think that’s something unique about those stories. They aren’t always writing, per se, but now they’re in writing form a lot.

It’s opening up students’ awareness of what’s there and what they may not be able to access and being okay with that. I’ve told them, sometimes you can’t access this, you don’t know all the things, but you should be able to see the possibility that this is connected to something more and realize these stories are not just fictionalized accounts and the reason they have the detail. In a novel, you have detail to try to craft a reality or what seems like a reasonable, tangible, kinesthetic experience. In this case, details are not created for that effect—they’re conveying certain information and knowledge that’s been passed along from direct experience, basically through a scientific process—engagement, learning, observation—so it’s in the form of a story, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t hold that knowledge.

For students, it’s a matter of recognizing you’re just reading this in a really simplistic way, but what if these are all real things (which, I argue, they are)? The value of the story becomes so much more intensified if you’re losing those stories. In order to sustain a culture, it becomes harder if all of that knowledge is embedded in those stories. One story is not going to be enough: you need all those stories. I think that’s where I tend to leave them.

Q: What was the topic of your Winter WIC course? How did you design it?

The WIC course I taught last winter is called Public Discourse and Writing on Race. A lot of times what I try to do is connect an external motivator to courses, so in this case the timing was such that Oregon had just passed a requirement for K-12 to teach ethnic studies in the curriculum. There’s a task force that is working through that curriculum, trying to lay out what those curriculum guidelines will be, so I asked my students to target high school, and to write to this task force or to teachers to explain to them why discourse around race in particular was a really important thing for them to consider while constructing these classes.

It was a persuasive set of essays. They had to use the material and draft this over the term and pitch it to these educators and their administrators—who will be thinking about how we implement this in 2020, so this was a real thing. I had one of the task force members Skype in and talk to them about what they’re doing so the students saw that this was something that can go outside of the classroom. It’s not just me as an audience, it’s different teachers.

It shaped their writing: how do you pitch this to someone who, maybe, is nervous about doing this, they don’t know how to incorporate this, they don’t understand this element of discourse, how a racial discourse works in a way that is not just “Let’s add another story besides Martin Luther King, Jr.?” How do we think about the larger discourse, which is not just adding stories or adding historical events, but thinking about how we understand race through discourse as a whole? It’s something that’s more fundamental.

So that was their charge. I find that when there’s something really concrete, they do really, really well with it, having to craft a voice, figuring out what to expect, what their audience will know and they don’t know, how to provide examples to help them make their argument—and they had to think about what that person would be concerned with. Part of that was because Ethnic Studies doesn’t have a single sort of audience. Some disciplines they have a single audience, or a fairly narrow set of audiences. Ethnic studies can apply to any audience, so it’s a matter of in which capacity you want to write. You’re dealing with the fact that most folks think they understand race and racism, but they do not very well, so you have to undo some of those commonsense understandings which are not really right.

In this case it was very specific, it was helpful to have educators and administrators who would be funding those classes, to point to those folks and think about how you need to talk to them opposed to the general public. Some students were thinking about their high school teacher–“Oh! I have this one teacher who this would really resonate with.” I need to circle back to see how they did with that.

Q: How would your course change when you change the external motivator?

I always shape courses specifically to the kind of tasks they deal with, or I would change the materials, but there are certain ones I think I gravitate towards because they make sense to me. I would definitely adjust things based on what I thought my goal was.

Q: How do you incorporate informal writing into the WIC course?

Informal writing matches my practice of just wanting to let myself write without the editing voice as much as possible. When you have informal writing, people need to be aware it’s okay to just write—don’t edit, don’t worry about spelling, get those ideas out, get moving. I think students tend to want to be efficient, get it done once, get it done right, validate themselves, they did it right, got it done the first time—and I have to remind them, “That will never happen, you will never get the perfect thing down.” I tell them I want them to fail, and fail as early as they can, and I say “failure” loosely—they hate that though. They don’t like process-oriented as much as they like outcome-oriented. It’s hard to sell that.

In [my WIC] class, and I need to do more of this, I had them project, like pre-flection of what they expect to see, what sort of questions they need to be thinking about, before getting into a reading, as a sort of guidance. I have these great pieces I’ll give to students, but they won’t always know what to do with it or why I’m assigning it. It’s not necessarily that I’m looking for a main point, it’s thinking about certain things to look for.

I had them writing each time we met—sort of pre-thinking, post-thinking, as a way to generate thinking on the spot, getting used to the idea, all those things. We were going to read this piece that was a critique around tourism culture and the power dynamics that were at play, specifically in the Caribbean. I asked them to think—before they read, before they knew anything about what the piece was about—to imagine they were going to the Caribbean on a trip. Why are they going there, what are they doing, what do they see? Just sort of thinking through the normative visions of what it means to go to the Caribbean. A lot of the thoughts were about vacation stuff: the ocean, sunshine, they were having fun. And then they get this piece that has a pretty dark turn to it—while folks are here as tourists, here’s the other side of what’s happening in this community, how people are locked in by economic disparity, by race, by the history of this particular island. It sort of really flips that and makes people rethink how they imagine themselves in relation to the Caribbean. But they wouldn’t have thought about it quite as strongly as if they hadn’t envisioned it, it would’ve been easy to pretend as if—but I already had the evidence of what they’d been thinking, and they have to reconcile that.

With things that are pre-reading, they usually have some ideas and thoughts that they can utilize. Sometimes it’s just questions. It’s just a way to really up the amount of processing they do. And they have something to write about later! “I thought this, and now—” How do you feel embarrassed? Not that my goal was to embarrass them… in that case it kind of was.

Q: What are your primary goals for writing assignments in your WIC course?

They’re the goals that were laid out for us in some ways. I think a lot of the students came away from this knowing who you write to matters—your audience. It’s helpful to understand there are different ways of writing, different modes of writing. I have them do that exercise of thinking about, “What are the different kinds of things you write? What are the kinds of things professional you could write? What are the different kinds of audiences that are out there?” With Ethnic Studies, because it doesn’t have a specific kind of audience—it’s not a science audience, it’s not a policy audience, it could be any and all of those things—being clear about what that audience is, at first, and then crafting writing to match is critical.

There’s the idea of revision. It seems to be a novelty to students. Everything I’ve written in my book, I’ve probably edited, like, a hundred or two hundred times. I have draft after draft after draft of those things. The idea that revision is making it better, is making your thinking better, is obviously important to WIC, so that’s one of my purposes.

Then, for me to see which ways their writing is applicable to current, real things. I think those are my goals for them.

Q: How did the WIC faculty seminar help you teach your WIC course?

I was doing it [the seminar] right before I was doing the class. I was a lot more thoughtful about how to make it most productive for students—how to actually develop their writing and thinking. I was a lot more encouraged to use the kind of creative prompts I normally like to use.

I like to be a little more flexible, and that can be frustrating to students, and I think in this case I had to have that stuff prepared, with a purpose and why I was going to do those things. I think, if nothing else, it gave me a space to kind of plan out that class a little more thoroughly. I don’t always like to plan that detailed, but I think those were some of the best things about it.

We used a lot of techniques from the seminar—write and pass, process memos. I was just talking about process memos the other day in (my non-WIC) class. It’s a kind of way for me to get a sense of what they think they need help with, and it’s a way to minimize the labor. It can be an all-encompassing thing if you’re doing a Writing Intensive and unlimited feedback. It’s a way to narrow down what they think they’re having trouble with, or that they really want attention to, and then I can maybe do one more thing in addition to that, so they have three things to deal with rather than 55. It really refines your thinking and your labor, which is crucial!

Q: Has your WIC training affected your teaching outside of the WIC course?

Yes! I mean, I say yes, and here I am this term thinking “Aah! I should’ve used more of those strategies!”

I definitely am still using some of the assessment time-saving techniques of not pointing out every little thing, and thinking, What are the three important things? I guided my TA to do the same, and I think those are important strategies because this is a class of forty, so I can’t spend the attention that I could on a WIC class. I think that works better, not just for me, but also for students. They feel it’s more accessible, more successful—they can actually meet those goals.

I remember using a lot more of [the WIC techniques] even the term after, ‘cause they’re so successful, they’re so helpful as engagement tools.

Q: What advice do you have for other people teaching or designing WIC courses?

I think if you take the seminar it’s helpful. It gives you a good frame for getting out of the idea that, no matter what the discipline is, the writing and the writing intense model is somehow external to the content, and that it’s one more thing you have to do, rather than using it as the tool by which to do the thing you want to do. That was a good thing for me to be reminded of, the thinking through writing. I can’t ask them to perform this final writing without having given them the chance to practice that, and have those revision processes, and understand what writing is and use it as a way to move along thinking. It’s a simple reframing, and it’s common sense, on some level. You have your content and you’re like, Oh, I have to make them write multiple things, and this is actually a really great way to get them to think through this material.

Pre/Views: WIC Turns Twenty-Five

By Vicki Tolar Burton, WIC Director

WIC Turns Twenty-Five

The class of 1994 were the first Oregon State students required to have taken a Writing Intensive (WIC) course in order to graduate. That first class of WIC grads had 2,534 students who took WIC classes from a curriculum that offered 98 sections of about 85 different WIC courses. The OSU class of 2019 will be about 5,800 students strong, having satisfied WIC from a curriculum of 309 WIC sections of 157 discrete WIC courses across the disciplines. The growth in WIC reflects not only enrollment increase but also numerous new undergraduate majors and concentrations.

This 25th WIC anniversary marks OSU’s Writing Intensive Curriculum Program as one of the longest-established Writing Across the Curriculum programs in the nation. This is something to celebrate!

In spring we will mark that achievement of sustained university and faculty support for student writing in the majors with a Twenty-Fifth Anniversary Celebration—details to come winter term.

In this issue of Teaching with Writing, you see evidence of both the people and the programs that have sustained the Writing Intensive Curriculum for 25 years, as the university grew from 11,261 undergraduates in 1994 to 25,699 undergraduates today.

  • Read an interview with Natchee Barnd, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies, as he talks about his own writing process, student writing process, and to how he brings WIC approaches to his courses, which include his specialization of Indigenous Studies.
  • Read about energetic WIC faculty engaged with student writing in the WIC Fall Seminar. Thanks to this lively group of scholar-teachers for a fun five weeks focused on improving student writing.
  • See a reminder to faculty to identify exceptional fall term student that might be nominated in spring for the WIC Culture of Writing Award in your discipline.
  • Save the date of Monday, Feb. 4, 2-3:30, for our WIC Winter Event, where you can workshop your writing assignments with other faculty.

Have a great winter break, OSU! Let’s all keep writing!

Interviews with WIC Seminar Alumni: Deanna Lloyd

By Mohana Das, WIC GTA

Deanna Lloyd, a WIC Seminar 2017 alumna, teaches for the Sustainability Double-Degree Program and the Crop & Soil Science Department. She delights in exploring and teaching about the complex interconnections between environmental, social justice and economic issues. Additionally, she coordinates service-learning and experiential education for her department, each term soliciting and managing projects for approximately 300 students.

In this interview, Mohana Das chats with Deanna about her experience of teaching a WIC course at OSU and how the seminar has helped her pedagogy.

Q: When did you come to OSU? What were you working on before you came to OSU?

A: I have had a few different “positions” within OSU.  My time at OSU started in December 2012 as a classified staff person managing service-learning projects for the Crop and Soil Science Department.  I then became involved with the Small Farms Program in 2014 and was able to complete a Masters working with that program.  After receiving my MS in Crop Science, I was hired as an instructor for the Sustainability Double-Degree Program. Throughout my time here, I have continued to manage service-learning projects and experiential education opportunities and have expanded those opportunities into our SUS courses.

Getting students out to engage and learn in their community is important to my pedagogy so I resonate with the service-learning/experiential education coordinator role. In my five and half years at OSU, I have helped place over 3,000 students in over 500 projects with 50 unique organizations/events. This equates to over 12,000 hours of service provided to the community and that many hours of learning in the “real-world.”

Prior to being hired at OSU, I was the manager at the Corvallis Environmental Center’s SAGE Garden, a local non-profit farm that grows food for local hunger relief agencies and offers educational programs.  In this role, I was managing service-learning students as a community partner who benefited from their service.  It was easy to transition to then help manage the projects for the CSS department as I understood what it meant to be on the community partner’s side of the relationship.

I was in Bellingham, WA for about 9 years prior to moving to Corvallis.  Up there I completed my undergraduate work including a post-baccalaureate teaching certificate for secondary science education and then helped launch a school garden non-profit.


Q: What made you interested in teaching a WIC class? What, in your opinion, feels different when teaching a WIC course compared to teaching another course in your discipline? What sets it apart? 

A: I loved the idea of having a small, in-person class to get to know!  As mentioned, after a couple undergraduate degrees, I studied education and discovered how much I love teaching.  As a kid and young adult I had a fear of speaking in front of people and was incredibly shy so I never saw myself becoming a teacher. What I realized though is that teaching for me isn’t standing and talking in front of people, but rather it’s an art in creative engagement.

With a WIC class, I’m not focused on teaching discipline-specific content, but rather creatively exploring new material with students as they practice writing.  Students still learn discipline-specific content but engage with it in a deeper way as they evaluate evidence, discuss, explore perspectives, write for different audiences, review the work of others, etc.

Additionally, since we are examining “agricultural predicaments” in my course, there are no easy right or wrong answers. These type of questions and issues make for the best discussions! Students have to grapple with the ideas and practice “systems thinking” which is pivotal to sustainability. The “ah ha” moments I witnessed were so wonderful to see and they weren’t because I was up lecturing, but rather because students were engaging with one another on meaningful, and sometimes intense, topics. The cap on WIC enrollment ensures not only quality assessment on students’ written work but also the ability to facilitate discussions and learning opportunities that challenge students’ perspectives and encourage growth. Here is what a student expressed in their final reflection:

“I took quite a lot away from this class this term. The material influenced my perceptions on a couple topics but overall, I got more out this class on a personal level.  I am generally pretty shy and don’t like to talk in classes, but because of the causal nature of the conversations, it made it easier to share my thoughts on things.  As the term progressed I was less nervous about sharing, and on the last day the poster talks were easy.”


Q: How did the WIC seminar influence your WIC course?

A: I was encouraged by the WIC seminar to not underestimate the power of informal writing and assessment.  This opened up my creativity as I utilized techniques shared in the seminar and blended them with techniques I had learned through my time educating in grades Pre-K through high school, both in the classroom and outside.

As I reflected on the WIC seminar and conversations, I noticed restrictions on what some people consider discipline-specific writing. It wasn’t the WIC programs expressing these limits, but rather the underlying, and sometimes unconscious, bias of us participants.

For the sciences, a classic scientific paper in the format of a journal article is often considered “discipline-specific.” Yet when polled, only 10% of my students expressed a desire to go to graduate school or into research.  I planned accordingly and had a “scientific paper” as a project, but also had students write Extension publications, article reviews, place-based essays, and letters to the editors. These different genres of writings were also encouraged by a faculty member who had previously taught the WIC course and had success with different writing styles.


Q: What advice would you give to instructors who are working on proposing new WIC courses?

A: I would encourage instructors proposing new WIC courses to consider the full spectrum of careers available in their discipline and then create writing assignments, engage in activities, and invite guest speakers that reflect the variety.

For example, I teamed up with Natalia Fernandez at the Multicultural Archives to co-lead an activity examining photographs from the Bracero Farmworker program in Oregon in the 1940s. The activity was so different than their usual science courses that I was uncertain how students would feel about the activity. Student feedback about the experience and resource ended up being incredibly positive!  There are so many amazing resources on-campus that we can incorporate into our classrooms with a little planning and creativity!

In a way, my WIC course was also a reading course because reading different types of writing helped students better understand the target audience, voice, persuasion, good organization, etc.  This also allowed me to bring in voices and perspectives that were not represented by the students in the room and thus helped expand our conversations.

Q: And finally, if you had to share one anecdote from your WIC class, what would that be?

A: For this question I’ll just share some quotes from my student’s final reflections:

“My job occasionally involves me meeting with legislators or lobbyists and the majority of the discussions involves knowing how to work with people who have completely different political beliefs than you. Getting the different perspectives and learning the best ways to communicate and receive information and opinions is what I will take away the most.”

“It is rare in this day and age that citizens of the U.S. with such different backgrounds and political beliefs can get together and share opinions and try to pinpoint problems that need to be addressed. I say this in all honesty, it is too bad that our government isn’t a little more like this class.”

“This approach brought a new idea to sustainability as not just the idea that we need to save the world as individuals but rather that if we build a culture of teamwork, we can make a much bigger impact.”


Fall 2013 

Intersections of Student Writing: A Conversation with Tim Jensen, Director of Writing, Getting Curious in the Research Classroom, Teaching with Zotero: Citation Management for Feedback and Peer Review, Collaborative Composition with Google Drive, 2013-14 Baccalaureate Core WIC Review, WIC in Action–Updates from the Fall WIC Seminar


Spring 2013

Peer Review in Renewable Materials Courses, Building Upon Teaching: An Interview with Sarah Henderson, Accessibility as Professional Responsibility, A Book Review of Teaching and Learning Creatively: Inspirations and Reflections, Writing and Research Assistants for International Students, Culture of Writing Award Winners, Fall 2013 WIC Faculty Seminar Call for Participants



Winter 2013

Helping Students Make Sense of Fair Use, Working with L2 Students, Spring 2013 Lunch Schedule, Call for Culture of Writing Awards




Fall 2012

Interview with Jon Dorbolo, Fall Seminar Recap, Taking Notes on Mobile Devices, Departmental Writing Guides, New Bacc Core Website





Spring 2012

Culture of Writing Award Winners, Challenging Writing Assignments, Departmental Writing Guide Overview, Know Your Library




Winter 2012

Interview with Mark Edwards, Reflective Writing Assignments, WIC Spring Lunch Schedule, New Culture of Writing Awards Protocol



Fall 2011

Interview with Janet Tate, Fall Seminar Recap, Deploying the Writer’s Personal Profile on Blackboard, Introducing the WIC Blackboard Resource Site





Spring 2011

New WIC Outcomes, Collaborative Writing and Learning, Responding to Students Electronically, WIC Culture of Writing Awards


Winter 2011 – Interview with Lisa Ede, Three Approaches to Peer Review

No Fall 2010 Newsletter


Spring 2009 – Interview with David Russell, Bring Writing to Art and Design

Fall 2008 – Responding to Student Writing


Spring 2008 – Women Studies, Trendspotting: Common Student Errors (Pt 2)

Winter 2008 – Information Literacy, Trendspotting: Common Student Errors (Pt 1)

Fall 2007 – The Writer’s Personal Profile, Building Visually Fluent Texts


Spring 2007 – Kathleen Blake Yancy Visits OSU

Winter 2007 – Using Images in Student Writing

Fall 2006 – Educating Academic Writers, Introducing “They Say, I Say”


Spring 2006 – Departments Assessing Writing

Winter 2006 – Announcing: WIC Culture of Writing

Fall 2005 – Writing and Thinking about Ethics


Spring 2005 – OSU Heritage Language Learners Program

Winter 2005 – Putting WIC on Stage

Fall 2004 – Technology Across the Curriculum


Spring 2004 – Developing Writing Outcomes for WIC Classes

Winter 2004 – The Sequenced Assignment

No Fall 2003 Newsletter


Spring 2003 – New Grammar Tools for WIC Classrooms, Biology Haikus

Winter 2003 – Critical Thinking: Multiple Models for Teaching and Learning

Fall 2002 – 2001-02 WIC Grant Updates


No Spring 2002 Newsletter

Winter 2001 – Thesis Writing in Community, Interview with Brad Cardinal

Fall 2000 – Discovering Common Ground in the WIC Classroom


Spring 2001 – A Report on the State of Writing at OSU

Winter 2001 – Thesis Writing in Community

Fall 2000 – Arguing for Complexity


Spring 2000 – Writing for Change: Raising Awareness of Difference, Power, and Discrimination

Winter 2000 – A Capacity for Connectedness

Fall 1999 – Pair-A-Dice Regained: Multi-Writing as Imaginative Reality


Spring 1999 – WIC Celebrates its Tenth Year

Winter 1999 – A Modest Proposal

Fall 1998 – Student Writing at OSU


Spring 1998 – One Writer’s Story

Winter 1998 – Teaching Students to Revise

Fall 1997 – Responding to Student Papers


Spring 1997 – Jumping into Writing-to-Learn

Winter 1997 – High Tech, Low Tech, Fast Tech, Slow Tech

Fall 1996 – Successful Peer Review


Spring 1996 – Writing Philosophy Papers: A Student Guide

Winter 1996 – Writing in Marketing

Fall 1995 – WIC On-Line


Spring 1995 – Writing-to-Lead

Winter 1995 – Writing-to-Learn for the Sciences

Fall 1994 – Dispelling Grammar Myths in WIC


Spring 1994 – Curriculum Revision

Winter 1994 – WIC and the Baccalaureate Core

Fall 1993 – WIC Roots


Spring 1992 – An Interview with Stephen Chovanec

Winter 1992 #2 – An Interview with Sally Davenport

Winter 1992 #1 – An Interview with Michael Mix

Fall 1991 – Making Formal Writing Assignments


Spring 1991 – The Vaccination Theory of Writing

Winter 1991 #2 – Writing = Problem Solving?

Winter 1991 #1 – Integrating Informal Writing

Fall 1990 #2 – WIC Courses: Common Questions

Fall 1990 #1 – Active Learning?