Resources for Teaching Writing

 

 

The GW Writing Center’s services are not only for students. We offer specialized support and resources for faculty members including class visits and special consultations to help faculty plan written assignments for the semester.

Visit the University Writing Program's Faculty Resources page for guidance on designing writing courses, utilizing librarian partnerships and hiring student workers for writing-intensive classes.

 

 

 

Resources for Sending Students to the Writing Center

Many students are first introduced to the GW Writing Center through a professor’s suggestion--thank you! Here are some tips for how to increase the likelihood of your students drawing upon the GWWC’s resources and for how to help set your students’ expectations about their writing center visit.

How do you recommend I tell students about the Center?

• Tell your whole class--not just individual students--about the Writing Center: Assure them that this is a resource that strong writers rely on (in fact, 40% of the Writing Center’s appointments are with graduate students). Why tell the whole class?
  • Some students from underrepresented groups may feel targeted if they think you are only recommending the Center to them, which actually makes it less likely they’ll use the GWWC as a resource.

  • Students who consider themselves strong writers might not have thought to visit the GWWC, so an open invitation reminds ALL your students that this resource is available.

• Remind your students that they can come at any point in the writing process:  If they are still trying to understand the assignments, we can help. If they are at the brainstorming stage or want someone to look over an outline, we can help. If they have a polished piece and want a fresh perspective on itt, we can help.

How can I incentivize my students to use the GWWC?

Offering extra credit or other incentives for a first GWWC visit can be a great way to get your students through the GWWC’s doors. And 73% of students who visit the Center return! 

Things to consider when requiring GWWC visits or offering incentives for appointments:

• Proof of Attendance: Students may request proof of attendance at the end of their appointment from their consultant.

• Allow Time: During the regular academic year, the Center offers approximately 250 appointments weekly. If you have a 100-person class, please spread their visits over several weeks or a full semester. Please contact the GWWC Coordinator if you have a class of more than 40 students.

• Encourage Reflection: Consider adding a reflective element to the Writing Center visit, such as asking students to write a paragraph about their experience in the GW Writing Center and how they revised their paper after the visit. This step helps students come to the appointment ready to engage in the collaborative work of having a peer discuss their paper with them. 

How can I prepare them to make the best use of the appointment?

• Help them set their expectations:

  • One 25- or 50-minute appointment may not address everything they want to review. 

  • Please help your students understand that their GWWC consultant can’t possibly be trained in all disciplinary content, all types of writing (from Public Health policy briefs to English Department villanelle poems), to all citation styles. Instead, consultants rely upon the WRITER to provide the disciplinary content and expertise in the type of writing assigned. The consultant will in turn provide a smart, writing-informed outside perspective that can speak to issues of organization, clarity, development, and polish. 

• Help them prioritize: If they can come to the Center with a clear idea of what part of their work they want to focus on (or what part of their work you would recommend they focus on), they will come away with much more useful feedback. They can indicate what they want to focus on via the appointment form when they sign up.

  • Advise that they review the GWWC Consultant Directory to find consultants who have expertise in their disciplines, or with the required citation style.

• Help your students understand the disciplinary genres you are teaching: In writing center sessions, the consultants rely on student writers to have a sense of the expected form, tone, and structure of a piece. Explain this in your course before students come to the Center and/or provide models that they can review with the consultant.

What can a consultant really cover in 25 minutes?

• Decode an assignment prompt: An initial review of the assignment to decode what the assignment focuses on and, if helpful,  come up with a list of questions to ask the professor. 
• Brainstorming outlines: Reviewing--or brainstorming--an outline, with a focus on the overall structure of a paper; the consultant can help the writer consider where ideas might need to be developed.
• 2-3 pages of a draft: If the student has a written draft, a consultant can  probably read and discuss about 2-3 pages of material.

How can I schedule a class visit by a GWWC consultant?

Invite a GW Writing Center consultant to visit your class and to introduce our services to your students (approximately 15 min). Please allow up to seven business days after submitting a class visit request.

Submit a Class Visit Request Form

How do I nominate a student to work as a Writing Center Consultant?

As of Fall 2024, we are launching a simple Writing Center Undergraduate Nomination Form. Please fill this out any time to nominate a First Year, Sophomore, or Junior to be an Undergraduate Writing Center Consultant. This process replaces our old process of sending their names via email.

Students you nominate who choose to apply will complete an application process that involves a cover letter, writing sample and reflection, and resume. They’ll also need two recommendations. We’ve created a separate Google form to make it easier for faculty to complete those recommendations with guiding questions and without need for a formal, crafted letter. The top applicants then interview with the administrative team, with current consultants, and with front-office staff. From there, we select a cohort who are invited to study and train with us through a three-credit pedagogy course and a one-credit practicum in the spring semester.

As you think about whom to nominate, don't think only about students who are themselves excellent writers (though we welcome those). Our strongest Writing Center consultants are students who are able to engage other people in talking about their writing.  You might have noticed them during peer workshops because their comments were astute or -- and this is the challenge, isn't it? -- both sharp and supportive.  You might have noticed them because they found the kernel in a messy draft and helped the writer find their own voice and new idea in that project. You might have noticed them because they brought an enthusiasm to the writing process that encouraged their peers and built confidence.  There are many qualities to a good Writing Consultant, and we invite applicants who display any of them. 

Resources for Faculty Teaching Writing

Professional Consultations about Writing Assignments

We are happy to work with faculty on assignment design. Our directors are available to meet for individual consultations. Alternatively, faculty may also find it helpful to work with our consultants — graduate or undergraduate — to get feedback on how students are likely to read the assignment prompt. 

To schedule an appointment with one of our directors, please email the GW Writing Center Director or Deputy Director, or contact our main office. To schedule an appointment with a consultant, use our online system.

WID/ WAC Handbooks (from UWP page)

Writing in the Disciplines (WID) faculty and WID GAs are among GW’s most innovative teachers, crafting and revising assignments to immerse students in the ways of thinking and writing in their respective fields. These Handbooks by GW Faculty gathers some of their wisdom, along with that of others working with writing across the university curriculum. While these resources are aimed at supporting WID faculty and GAs, they can be useful for teaching writing in any GW course.

University of Manchester Academic Phrasebank

University of Manchester Academic Phrasebank

 

Faculty Guide for Working with Multilingual Writers 

This Guide is intended to empower you to support students in their language acquisition journeys as writers, a journey that can take 6-8 years or longer. The GW Writing Center has developed this Faculty Guide based on the work of language acquisition scholars, the GW Writing Center consultants’ experiences, and writing faculty classroom approaches. 

We have found that working with multilingual writers has made us more aware of the different social and cultural experiences that all of our students bring to our classrooms. You may thus find that many of the tips below will support both multilingual writers and students whose home language is English.  

In addition to this writing guide from the GWWC, we encourage you to explore the extensive pedagogical reflections, tips, and resources developed by GW’s English for Academic Purposes program. 

My student “can’t write.” Do you mean... 

My student doesn't seem to know how to write this type of document.

Students new to a discipline are often not familiar with the types of writing—the genres—common to that discipline. Second language scholar Tardy (2009) argued that writing successfully in a genre requires knowledge of… 

1. expected conventions for that type of writing (such as starting a letter or email with “Dear”); 

2. the intended purpose and audience;  

3. the subject matter; and  

4. that document’s connections to other related written documents (p. 20-22).  

Indeed, even writers who have a solid grasp of grammatical and sentence-level conventions tend to lose some of that control when they are writing in new genres because figuring out the other aspects of a new genre takes a lot of cognitive energy (Kellogg & Whiteford, 2009). Focusing first on the four types of knowledge Tardy lists can offer all students a chance to become more comfortable with these new types of writing.   

 

Particularly for disciplinary faculty who feel you haven’t been trained to teach grammar, shifting your focus to disciplinary genre conventions can be both productive and liberating: you are an expert in the types of writing common to your field and you can thus focus your teaching and grading on whether students are meeting the disciplinary expectations for those types of writing.  

 

STRATEGIES: 

• If at all possible, provide students with multiple samples of the type of writing (the genre), so that the students can better understand the genre expectations (Tardy, 2009, p. 108-9). Multiple samples allow students to see the range of possible ways to respond to the prompt, and also prevent over-reliance on (or over-imitation of) a single student model. One or more annotated genre samples that make explicit the course-level appropriate writing elements expected in that type of writing can also be very helpful. 

• Another approach to providing sample papers is to provide students with papers that received a range of grades, so that students can see what you found most successful, as well as papers that where certain aspects were less successful.  

• Explicitly inform students about the purpose and audience of the type of writing you’re asking for: a strong sense of the target audience can often guide writers to make more appropriate choices in relation to what terminology to use, whether to define discipline-specific terms, what level of background information to include, etc. 

• Guide students through the disciplinary terms or jargon most common in your field, as well as the sentence-level style choices most favored by your discipline (i.e., Does your discipline prefer direct, concise sentences? Or complex vocabulary and sentence structures? Does your discipline have a preference for active or passive voice? Is the first-person use of “I” encouraged or discouraged in your field? Are students allowed to use contractions?). Different disciplines have different stylistic expectations, so make explicit to students the stylistic expectations of your field. 

The logic and organization of the paper are confusing.

Multilingual writers may bring a different conception of paper structure with them, based on past educational experiences in other countries or disciplines (CCCC, 2020). For instance, a student taught to write in a non-American context might omit a thesis statement, or might place it somewhere that an American-acculturated faculty member wouldn’t expect (Matsuda & Cox, 2009). International students may have a different sense of audience expectations in relation to paper structure.  

 

STRATEGIES: 

• If you have a particular structure in mind, share those expectations with all your students.  

• If you expect to see specific sections, provide an outline of that structure, perhaps with a brief description of the target length for that section and the content expected there.  

• Consider providing students with multiple sample papers that show the range of possible ways to shape the paper structure. See Tardy (2009) for a summary of research on the impact of sharing sample papers with students (pp. 49-50).  

• If the type of writing you’re asking students to engage in is one used by professional writers or scholars in your discipline, prompt students to read sample articles not just for content, but also for structure. This guide to how to read an article encourages students to identify structural elements of articles, so students can apply those elements to their own writing. 

• Have students outline their essay ideas. 

• Once students have written a draft, have them reverse outline their paper to check for flow of information. 

• If it’s appropriate to writing in your discipline, you might also ask students to add to the introduction a “roadmap” paragraph that describes the organizational structure of the project. 

• Structural/organizational questions are often related to genre, so also look over the question about types of writing (i.e., genres)! 

I don’t know how to be fair grading essays by home English speakers vs. multilingual writers.

A starting point for thinking about “fairness” in assessment comes from Michelle Cox (2014), a writing studies scholar who focuses on second language (L2) learning: “L2 students are doing something much more difficult than are English L1 students: they are learning and being evaluated on their learning in a second language. To make evaluation truly equitable, faculty would need to ask English L1 students to complete writing assignments in a second language” (p. 313). In other words, “Being equal is not necessarily being fair” (Robertson, 2005).  

 

An example: “Equal” grading would use the same standards for all students, such as the statement, “For any paper in this class, if I find three grammar errors or typos, I’ll give an ‘F’.” However, it is not fair to demand grammatical perfection of a multilingual writer still in the process of language acquisition. The GW Writing Center thus recommends distinguishing between equal and fair—and striving for fairness. For more discussion of “equal” versus “fair” assessment of multilingual writing, see this four-minute video clip from “Writing Across Borders.”  

 

Some of the frequent challenges multilingual writers face are as follows:  

 

• While home English speakers may have a vocabulary of 50,000 - 200,000 words, multilingual writers often draw from a word-bank of 2,000-8,000 words (Maley, 2013, p. 102). This smaller word-bank directly impacts the word choices of multilingual writers.  

• Research also shows that English reading and grammar proficiency can take 6-8 years for second language (L2) learners who come to the U.S. between ages 12-15 to develop (Collier, 1987, p. 617). There is evidence it takes even longer for English learners who arrive later. This research means that multilingual students taking your class will have a written “accent,” perhaps omitting articles or misusing an idiom. But is a written accent really a problem? Cox (2014) wrote, “if we were to go to a conference presentation given by a multilingual speaker, and if we were to comment that the presentation wasn’t very good because the speaker spoke with an accent, we’d be seen as prejudiced. And yet, it’s been seen as acceptable to make a similar kind of statement in relation to differences in writing that are related to written accent” (p. 308).  

 

Given this information, how can you grade assignments from multilingual writers fairly and equitably in relation to other students? 

 

STRATEGIES: 

• Did the student achieve your goals for the essay, such as engaging with course texts, or explaining and applying important concepts? If yes, give a good grade. If no, give the grade you would give based on what’s missing or incorrect in relation to your assignment goals or assignment rubric.  

• Does grammar interfere with your understanding of the essay? If the grammar interferes, consider meeting with the student and asking them to talk through their ideas—to help them find the language to articulate their ideas more clearly—and then have the student revise their draft.  

• If polished sentence-level writing is an important factor in your grading, consider these strategies: 

• If specific passages are difficult to understand, mark them and ask the writer to clarify. If editing/proofreading are important grading elements for you, focus your assessment of the students’ editing based on their revisions of the passages you marked and the 2-3 specific grammar areas you asked them to address (Cox, 2014).  

• Keep in mind that even professional writers often have editors or peer readers who help them polish that prose. Most of us are not completely autonomous in the writing and revision process. Consider requiring multiple drafts for all students so that students can receive feedback, perhaps via peer review or the GW Writing Center. 

• While reading aloud is a proofreading strategy that works well for home speakers of English, this strategy isn’t as useful for multilingual writers. As Matsuda and Cox (2009) noted, “Because ESL [English as a Second Language] writers often have not internalized some of the rules of grammar, they are often not able to identify errors on their own by, for example, reading the text aloud” (p. 44).  

 

Some final thoughts on grading: Students (multilingual students and home speakers of English) are entering your class with different academic English proficiencies. Your task is to grade what you are teaching. If the grammar/punctuation/spelling issues that you’re noticing aren’t what you’ve been teaching, then to deduct points for those issues would be to grade students for the knowledge they have when they enter your course. Equitable assessment practices focus on grading what students are learning in your classroom, not on the differences in your students’ point of entry.  

 

My student doesn’t know how to write in “correct, standard English."

The GWWC understands that clarity is an important part of communicating well, and this Guide offers suggestions for how to support students struggling with grammar by reading "My student is really struggling with grammar. How can I help." In this section, we reframe the question, because sometimes what seems to be a question of clarity is actually a question about accent.

 

When working with multilingual writers, think about their writing as having an “accent”—and that, as with spoken speech, as long as the accent doesn’t interfere with meaning, it shouldn’t impact the grading of the project.  English as a Second Language (ESL) scholars and teachers have long argued, “ESL students can become very fluent writers of English, but they may never become indistinguishable from a native speaker, and it is unclear why they should. A current movement among ESL writing teachers is to argue that, beyond a certain level of proficiency in English writing, it is not the students’ texts that need to change; rather it is the native-speaking readers and evaluators (particularly in educational institutions) that need to learn to read more broadly, with a more cosmopolitan and less parochial eye. The infusion of life brought by these ESL students’ different perspectives on the world can only benefit a pluralistic society” (Leki, 1992, pp. 132-133).   

 

Multilingual writers—and their professors—often ascribe value to “native speakers” and privilege “correct” writing. But what constitutes “native” or “correct” language? “Correct” writing assumes a standard English, when linguists have repeatedly demonstrated that no such standard English exists (Greenfield, 2011). “Native” prioritizes this perceived (imagined) standard English and in doing so diminishes multilingual writing. Think of English as having multiple flavors and varieties. Academia, publishers, and scholarly journals are working to broaden diversity among faculty, editorial boards, and peer review panels in order to advance our appreciation for what “academic” English looks like, and we can join this reconceptualization of multiple Englishes in our classrooms (CCCC, 1974; Anti-Racist Scholarly Reviewing Practices, 2021).  

Common Teaching Struggles 

I was surprised how challenging students found my assignment. What went wrong?

Many writing assignments assume writers share a common knowledge base about U.S. culture and history—an assumption that won’t hold true for international students. Another potential problem is that “topics such as sexuality, criticism of authority, political beliefs, personal experiences, and religious beliefs may be sensitive for students of different cultural and educational backgrounds” (CCCC, 2020).  

 

STRATEGIES:  

• Examine your writing assignments from an international student’s perspective. Are you assuming U.S.-based cultural, religious, or historic knowledge? For instance, Leki (1995) described a student from France who was asked to discuss how southern women in the 1950s were portrayed in a novel (p. 243). This narrow assignment only required reading the novel for American-raised students, but raised obvious problems for the French student. Can you re-envision your assignment to be more inclusive (Cox, 2014, p. 312-313)?  

• Offer students multiple possible paper topics. If possible, assume or cultivate a global (i.e., not country-specific) perspective when outlining the range of possible topics. 

• If it fits your teaching goals, consider allowing students from other countries to respond to prompts with examples from their home cultures or countries. Doing so allows international students to serve as cultural informants about their home cultures and thus takes advantage of the global classroom. For instance, when Prof. Hayes taught a writing course with a course theme of profanity, she knew international students wouldn’t be familiar with the cultural history of American profanity. Her assignment thus allowed students to write about instances of profanity from their home cultures and languages.  

My student is really struggling with grammar. How can I help? 

Research shows, on average, that it takes 6-8 years for students new to the U.S. to acquire English vocabulary and grammar proficiency (Collier, 1987).2 You can, however, help your students along in this language acquisition journey. Keep in mind that for any students wrestling with new ideas or complex concepts, grammar elements or rules (like missing “a / the” articles, or verb tense issues) can fall by the wayside due to cognitive overload while writing in drafts. 

 

STRATEGIES: 

• Focus on no more than 2-3 key grammar issues per major writing assignment (Cox, 2014, p. 311) and guide students on how to recognize those issues and self-correct. Ask students to focus on those in their next piece of writing.  

• Consider having students write a plan for identifying and addressing those grammar edits/corrections. 

• If relevant, ask students to identify grammar or punctuation issues they have struggled with in the past. Do they recognize those grammar concerns in their current assignment? 

• Consider making a list of grammar issues that are higher and lower priority for your class. For example, subject-verb agreement may be more important than semi-colon use (Linville, 2009). 

• At the GW Writing Center, students who request help with final proofreading are asked which grammar or punctuation issues they’d like to focus on. If possible, prepare your students for that question by helping them identify 2-3 key grammar/punctuation/vocabulary issues for an assignment. 

• Recommend that students take time for a final proof-reading step. 

• Students will be more likely to follow your recommendation if you build in class time to have them make corrections before they submit final drafts. 

• Some students benefit from reading their papers aloud to help them “hear” issues. Having a classmate or friend read aloud the essay is another option.  

• The GW Writing Center works with students at all stages of the writing process, including final proofreading.  Papers in the Writing Center are usually read aloud to help students spot typographical errors and learn to self-identify 2-3 patterns of error, which the tutor will support the writer in learning to address.  

• Google Docs, Microsoft Word, and most word processing programs have good grammar and spell-check features. Show students how to turn grammar-check on but remind them that machine software is imperfect. For instance, word processing programs can lose track of complex verb use.  Grammarly is another popular spelling and grammar app that students might want to try; the basic version is free. 

I’ve tried to teach grammar rules, but my student repeats the same errors.

If the student has signaled that they’re interested in learning the grammar or punctuation rules you have specified, keep in mind that ingrained habits may take time to modify: it may take multiple efforts for a student to relearn patterns or to learn new grammatical forms. As Theresa Tseng (2004) argued, “it is possible that (1) the wrong usages have become fossilized or (2) if not, the cognitive change [related to relearning “fossilized” errors] . . . is taking place but is unobservable, or the effect has not yet appeared. . . L2 [second language] learning never proceeds in a linear, smooth manner” (p. 29).  

 

But also consider that some writers might be making deliberate, rhetorical choices to use the conventions of other Englishes in their writing. Since 1972, the Conference on College Composition and Communication has supported “Students’ Right to Their Own Language”: 

We [CCCC’s] affirm the students' right to their own patterns and varieties of language -- the dialects of their nurture or whatever dialects in which they find their own identity and style. Language scholars long ago denied that the myth of a standard American dialect has any validity. The claim that any one dialect is unacceptable amounts to an attempt of one social group to exert its dominance over another. Such a claim leads to false advice for speakers and writers, and immoral advice for humans. A nation proud of its diverse heritage and its cultural and racial variety will preserve its heritage of dialects. We affirm strongly that teachers must have the experiences and training that will enable them to respect diversity and uphold the right of students to their own language 

 

STRATEGIES: 

• Consider having all your students create a journal or log where they track specific grammar or punctuation issues—or choices—across assignments. Then have students write brief reflections on the grammar, punctuation, or terminology suggestions you have made on prior assignments or drafts. Do they agree with those suggestions?  

• If so, where did any of those issues impact their current essay?  

• If they don’t agree with your suggestions, what are they attempting to convey with the language patterns they have chosen? 

 

One of the tenets of universal design is that a practice designed to support a particular population can often serve all groups. Asking for these reflections will not only help your students make more conscious sentence-level choices as writers but can also give you greater insight into the meanings they are attempting to convey.  

• For students interested in learning the grammar and punctuation tips you have provided, be prepared for progress to be incremental, to see improvement across multiple papers, rather than students achieving perfection in a single draft in relation to a specific issue. You may need to revisit the same point with a student through multiple papers. 

• If you’re interested in encouraging students’ rights to their own language, you might share sample texts from scholars in your field whose writing displays different registers or voices (for example, English Creole). Then ask students to include a reflection with the assignments they turn in that explains which register or voice they aspire to and why.  

I’ve recommended my student have a friend help them proofread. Is that ok?

As a faculty member, think about and decide whether to recommend that your students have an outside reader proofread and edit their work. What is/is not allowed in your discipline (and for you)? In your field, are collaboration and peer feedback seen as appropriate forms of writing support, or might some forms of those raise concerns about academic integrity?  

 

STRATEGIES: 

• Set aside time for students to peer review and edit each other’s work. Set up partnerships within your class and give specific instructions on the type of feedback you want students to give each other: 

• If the goal of the peer review is to help students better understand assignment goals like engaging with course materials, applying course concepts or theories, or describing experimental methods clearly, explicitly ask students to focus their feedback on those areas and not to focus on sentence-level editing (students often mistake peer review as grammar review).  

• If the peer review is designed to support final-stage-polishing, remind students that their goal isn’t to copyedit, but rather to point to 2-3 grammar, punctuation, or terminology issues for the writer to focus on, as well as to point to any unclear passage.  

• Recommend that students make appointments at the GW Writing Center. However, please inform your students that the GW Writing Center will not proofread their projects for them. Instead, we help writers identify 2-3 specific patterns of error to focus upon and revise per visit, in addition to targeting potentially unclear sections in the writing for revision. In other words, the Writing Center’s is not on correcting all errors to create a perfectly edited draft, but rather on providing students with targeted support, so that the next time the writers has to draft something, they are one step further in their long-term language acquisition journey. 

I feel I have to focus on grammar because I’m preparing students for future classes/jobs/attempts to publish. 

Faculty want the best for their students and often focus on grammar with multilingual students because they want to do everything in their power to prepare students for the writing expectations of their future classes in the discipline or careers (Zawacki & Habib, 2014, p. 198). The GW Writing Center’s advice for faculty is to remember that language acquisition is a long-term process. Equitable grading accounts for the variety of languages your students speak and write. You can help the writers in your class most by… 

• Explicitly teaching the writing styles and genres of your discipline; 

• Focusing on a handful of grammar, punctuation, or terminology issues per paper in order to support the student in their long-term acquisition of English;  

• Building in feedback opportunities, perhaps via peer review and/or suggesting students visit the GW Writing Center;  

• Grading what you teach. 

Faculty Guide Additional Resources  

English for Academic Purposes Resources

Global Diversity in the Classroom: A Framework for Faculty Empowerment. Below are links to a few of their “Global Diversity” handouts, to provide you with a sampling of EAP’s classroom support materials for faculty: 

• How to socialize international students into your classroom community 

• How to engage international students in classroom activities 

• How to promote academic integrity 

Flow Chart for Grading

To be added

References for Faculty Working with Multilingual Writers

Anti-Racist scholarly reviewing practices: A heuristic for editors, reviewers, and authors (Google Doc) (2021). 

Collier, Virginia P. (1987, December). Age and rate of acquisition of second language for academic purposes (JSTOR). TESOL Quarterly, 21(4), 617-641. 

Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC). (1974). Students’ right to their own language (PDF). College Composition and Communication, 25(3).

Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC). (2020, May revision). CCCC statement on second language writing and multilingual writers (CCCC website). 

Cox, Michelle. (2014). In response to today’s “felt need”: WAC, faculty development, and second language writers (PDF). In T.M. Zawacki & M. Cox (eds.), WAC and second language writers: Research towards linguistically and culturally inclusive programs and practices. WAC Clearinghouse. 

Cummins, Jim. (1984). Bilingualism and special education: Issues in assessment and pedagogy. College Hill Press. 

Greenfield, Laura. (2011). In L. Greenfield & K. Rowan (eds.), The ‘standard English’ fairy tale: A rhetorical analysis of racist pedagogies and commonplace assumptions about language diversity.” Writing centers and the new racism: A call for sustainable dialogue and change. Utah State University Press, 33-60. 

Kellogg, Ronald T. & Whiteford, Alison P. Training advanced writing skills: The case for deliberate practice.” Educational Psychologist 44.4 (2009), 250-266. 

Leki, Ilona. (1992). Understanding ESL writers: A guide for teachers. Heinemann. 

Leki, Ilona. (1995, Summer). Coping strategies of ESL students in writing tasks across the curriculum (JSTOR). TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 235-260.

Linville, Cynthia. (2009). Editing line by line. In S. Bruce & B. Rafoth (eds.), ESL writers: A guide for writing center tutors (pp. 84-93). 2nd ed. Boynton/Cook Publishers.  

Maley, Alan. (2013). Vocabulary. In B. Tomlinson (ed.), Applied linguistics and materials development (Google Books)(pp. 95-112).  Bloomsbury. 

Matsuda, Paul Kei & Cox, Michelle. (2009). Reading an ESL writer’s text. In Shanti Bruce & Ben Rafoth (eds.), ESL writers: A guide for writing center tutors (pp. 42-50). Boynton/Cook Publishers.  

Robertson, W. (Writer and Director). (2005). Writing across borders (Part II) [Video]. Uploaded to YouTube by Nachtjagdgeschwader, May 15, 2010. 

Tardy, Christine. (2009). Building genre knowledge. Parlor Press. 

Tseng, Theresa Jiinling. (2004). Theoretical perspectives on learning a second language. In Shanti Bruce & Ben Rafoth (eds.), ESL writers: A guide for writing center tutors (2nd ed). Boynton/Cook Publishers. 

Zawacki, Terry Myers & Habib, Anna Sophia. (2014). Negotiating ‘errors’ in L2 writing: Faculty dispositions and language difference. In Terry Myers Zawacki & Michelle Cox (eds.), WAC and second language writers: Research towards linguistically and culturally inclusive programs and practices (pp.183-210). doi: 10.37514/PER-B.2014.0551.2.07