1
Learningto write in agronomy
2Thomas B. Brumback, Jr.,
Michael Squires,
ABSTRACT
and David J. Parrish
we maintain that the teaching of writing is the sole
property of English teachers. Instead, agronomiceducators should capitalize on classroom opportunities to
improvetheir students’ writing and learning, for writing
is a developmental process that both improves with
guided practice and enhances learning (Emig, 1977;
Parrish et al., 1985). Our discipline offers us an opportunity that technical writing courses do not: the opportunity to teach both subject material and writing. In
truth, writing can be effectively incorporated into
agronomy for the mutual benefit of both. Although a
few agronomists and editors have voiced their concerns
about writing and its improvement (Fuccillo, 1978,
1980; Smith and Scifres, 1972; Teare and Hoeflin,
1976), many more agronomists should incorporate writing into their classrooms in order to help students communicate effectively.
This paper discusses writing as a process, offers practical steps for incorporating writing into agronomy
classes, and tests the effectiveness of these steps by
surveying students’ attitudes.
Writingis a skill all agronomists
needfor successful
careers. Althoughstudentsandfaculty alike recognize
the importance
of writing, moreneedsto be doneto incorporatewriting into the classroom.This paperdiscusseswritingas a three-partprocess:prewriting,writing, andrewriting.In prewriting,studentsdiscoverwhat
to writeby choosinga topic, askingquestions,envisioning an audience,gatheringthe literature, andcreating
ideas. In writing,the mostcreativephaseof the process,
studentsmakediscoveriesas they converttheir ideas to
wordsin the first draft. Rewriting,
the last phaseof the
process,is a reshaping
andrethinking
of the first draft.
Agronomy
teachers can implementwriting in their
classes by drawingon their knowledgeof the writing
process,andby followingseveral practicalsteps: teach
writing as a process; encourageandrewardprewriting;
encouragediscoveryin writing; use peer responsesin
evaluation; and emphasizerewriting. A survey of 92
students in junior- andsenior-level agronomy
courses
(agricultural climatology,cropphysiologyandmetabolism, agronomic research, and cropping systems)
showedthat 880/0 of the students agreedthat writing
skills werenecessary
for their careers.Moststudentsfelt
that writinghelpedthemlearnthe subjectmatter(86070),
that writinghelpedthemwrite better (70070), andthat
the benefits of writingwereworthwhile
(79°70). Students
viewedpeer responseas a mechanism
to help themsee
weaknessesin their ownwriting (74%),andvaluedconstructivecriticismfromtheir peers(81070).
THE WRITING PROCESS
Writing is like germination. During germination the
inputs are generally known--water, oxygen, suitable
temperatures--and so is the output--a complex, living
plant. But what goes on inside the germinating seed remains in part a mystery. Because intermediate
mechanisms remain unknown, our understanding of
metabolic pathways is incomplete. Similarly, although
we knowthat words, references, and data enter the writing process to yield a written product, the actual process
is difficult to understand. Ideas from both reading and
experience interact in unsuspected ways. Yet, since recent writing research shows that the process determines
the final product, teachers need a fuller understanding
of that process (Emig, 1971; Perl, 1978). Muchsimplified, the process can be described as having three parts
--prewriting, writing, and rewriting--although in each
part unexpected discoveries occur.
Consisting of whatever is done before the first draft,
prewriting occupies much writing time--gathering the
literature, abstracting articles, creating outlines, envisioning an audience, focusing on a subject, and discovering what to write. One does not have to assemble
all the pieces that will comprise the final product, but
one must discover some ideas, however vague, that can
Additional index words:Technicalwriting, Teaching
writing, Writingprocess, Writingtechniques,Prewriting, Peerevaluation,Rewriting.
A
S AGRONOMY
teachers, we take pride in teaching the technical information and skills that make
our students better agronomists. But in our classrooms
we tend to neglect one of the most basic skills that
students will need: writing. Should we not help prepare
our students for careers in which they will write a great
manyletters, reports, policies, and instructions (Davis,
1978; Erickson, 1975, Haynes, 1978)? Are we shortchanging our students by not helping them develop a
skill required for success in agronomy--the ability to
write effectively?
Within the last decade manycolleges and universities
have begun to foster writing across the curriculum in a
wide range of fields--from architecture and mathematics to finance and physics (Bean et al., 1982; Drenk,
1982; King, 1982; Maimon, 1982). This movementhas
clear implications for agronomyteachers. No longer can
’ Contributionfromthe Deps.of Agronomy
andEnglish,Virginia
Tech,Blacksburg,VA24061.
~ Members
of the faculty of agronomy,
English,and agronomy,
respectively.
31
32
JOURNALOF AGRONOMIC
EDUCATION,Vol. 14, Spring 1985
be explored in the writing phase. Effective prewriting
promotes good organization, development, and style.
The first draft is part of the actual writing, the most
creative phase in the writing process. Goodwriters ask
questions; they discover. Ideas that emerge may compel
new directions; discovery and learning are natural consequencesand essential characteristics of writing.
Last is rewriting. More than editing and correcting
errors, rewriting is a reshaping, redesigning, and rethinking of the first draft. At this point writers make
their prose clear, concise, correct, and readable. They
try to see their paper from the point of view of their
intended audience.
It is useful for teachers to understand how complex
the writing process is in order to help their students
write. Writing may appear to be a sequential process
that unfolds from beginning to end. Recent research has
shown, however, that writing is not a linear, "cookbook" process (Perl, 1978; Sommers, 1978). Studies
college students show composingto be a recursive process in which students frequently shift from one phase
to another (Perl, 1978; Sommers,1978). For example,
writer composing a paragraph on multiple cropping
may find that he needs more material on plant competition, stops to prewrite, completes the paragraph,
then revises his sentences before continuing.
TEACHING THE PROCESS
In agronomy, many types of writing can be incorporated successfully, as Parrish et al. (1985) show.
Nonetheless, agronomy teachers have traditionally
relied on the term paper to foster writing. There is resistance to the term paper, though, because students
balk; faculty dread the extra work; and sometimeslittle
is accomplished. Wecontend that it is the methodof incorporating writing into the classroom that largely
governs success. What follow are several concrete steps
that teachers should find helpful both to enhancethe effectiveness of the term paper and to provide a general
methodfor incorporating other types of writing assignments into the classroom.
ONE:Teach Writing as a Process
Many students do not write well because they--and
perhaps their teachers--view writing as a product rather
than a process (Murray, 1976; Sommers, 1978).
agronomy, for example, the way we traditionally write
is conditioned by what we read--the finished product
found in monographs and journals. Students typically
see a finished article and assumethat it is a printed first
draft. But, we should teach our students to view writing
as a process of discovery, learning, and exploration of
what is known--and unknown. Teachers need to stress
that a journal article--indeed, any good piece of writing--culminates the manyrecursive cycles of the writing
process. Wedo not composea finished article at a single
sitting, nor should we foster this misconception, but in-
stead, we should provide students with realistic models
--especially of our own drafts--of how professional
writers work.
TWO:Encourage and RewardPrewriting Activities
Although students generally know how to gather material for a writing assignment, their prewriting is generally ineffective. Compositionresearch showsthat even
the most rudimentary outline helps the writer organize
information (Emig, 1971); students, however, tend
write a paper and later extract a useless outline only if
one is required. Rather than being asked to prepare a
formal outline, students can be encouraged to use the
prewriting stage to ask questions, then to search for
ideas, and finally to jot downthoughts to help compose
the first draft. For example, in a cropping systems
course, a student might choose the topic "double
cropping," which he then narrows to "wheat-soybean
double-cropping in the USA." Next he poses questions
about the topic to which he will seek answers--questions such as: Howlong must the growing season be? Is
there sufficient rainfall for two crops? Whatcultivars
are suitable for double-cropping? What type of soil
preparation is needed? On what soil types will doublecropping work? To help answer these questions, a
student would read Papendick, Sanchez, and Triplett’s
Multiple Cropping; would search the indexes of
AgronomyJournal and Crop Science for pertinent articles; might consult faculty experts in plant breeding, soil
management, and meteorology; might check experiment
station bulletins, theses, dissertations, and extension
publications for relevant research; and might, if available, conduct a computerized literature search.
In place of the detailed outline, students can complete
a simplified writing plan to identify their audience, define their purpose, and organize their thoughts (Table
1). The writing plan urges the writer to address critical
questions at the outset; it allows teachers to give
students early feedback; and most important, it
provides direction to prewriting and writing efforts and
thereby reduces frustration often experienced early in
the writing process. Teachers should reward students’
prewriting activities. By requiring students to hand in
their plans, for which some automatic credit is given,
the teacher provides incentives to engage in writing as a
process. Not only is prewriting beneficial to students,
but such activities eventually save grading time because
the final paper will have fewer problems.
THREE:
Encourage Discovery in the Writing Stage
"I just can’t get started," students lament, staring at
a blank piece of paper. Their problem arises partly from
their discouraging belief in perfect first drafts, partly
from a natural reluctance to begin writing. Teachers can
help by exhorting students simply to start writing, to get
something on paper. We must convince students that
writing is discovering, that writing spontaneously can
LEARNING TO WRITE IN AGRONOMY
Table 1. Sample questions for a writing plan.
1. Whois the audience? (Whois to read this?)
2. What is the purpose of the paper? To synthesize information? To inform?
To persuade?
3. Whatis the single most important point (thesis) to get across to the reader?
4. Howwill you introduce the topic and create reader interest?
5. What major points do you want to make and in what order? Why?
6. Howwill you conclude the paper?
reveal new perceptions, fresh connections, a deeper
grasp of the subject. For example, spontaneous writing
on the subject of acid rain prompted one student to add
a whole new section on acid snow. Another student discovered a key connection between no-tillage farming
and water conservation. Still another student, writing
about spatial variability in soil temperature, developed
the idea that the same problem occurs in a growth
chamber.
FOUR:Use Intermediate Response as Part
of Evaluation
For some agronomyteachers the term paper will remain the preferred writing assignment; but it can become a more effective instrument of learning if it is
combined with both teacher and peer responses. Such
intermediate reviews during the writing process allow
students to develop a paper as scientists write journal
articles.
After students write a first draft, they are ready for
peer response, where they critique each other’s work.
Students submit multiple copies to the teacher whodistributes them to other students for response. Working
alone or meeting in groups of three or four, students
evaluate the drafts. Teachers can facilitate the review by
providing specific questions designed to identify
strengths and weaknesses--questions about the thesis,
content, organization, focus, and direction of the
paper. The collective aim of peer response is to improve
writing. The required peer responses must be completed
within a few days, after which students receive their
critiqued papers from their peers. Students can then
consider these suggestions during the rewriting phase of
the writing process. At this time students revise and edit
their current drafts to create their final drafts, both of
which are handed in the last week of class along with
peer responses. While evaluating the final draft, the
teacher can use the peer evaluations and the earlier draft
to gaugea student’s progress.
Peer responses can help overcome many problems in
term papers. Unable to conceive of an idea, gather information, and complete an entire paper the night before it is due, students must progress through phases of
a writing process. Alongthe way are opportunities to respond to constructive criticism. Peer responses also
allow students, as they review others’ papers, to sharpen
their critical abilities. Our survey of agronomystudents
(Table 2) showedthat 74°70 felt that the review process
helped them see weaknesses in their own writing, and
81%felt that the criticism they received was more valu-
33
able than cursory grammatical and spelling corrections.
Moreover, peer response reduces the authoritarian nature of grading, since the instructor is not the sole respondent; and peer response saves the teacher grading
time because students submit more polished papers. Because most spelling and grammatical errors have already
been detected, teachers can concentrate on content,
organization, and overall effectiveness. Most students
welcomepeer response as a way of getting their papers
"pre-graded."
FIVE:Teach Rewriting--First as Rethinking and
Reshaping, Then as Correcting Mechanics
Many students confuse writing with editing. Perl
(1978) found that inexperienced college writers edit their
words and sentences so often that they break the rhythm
of their writing and thinking, and lose their ideas. When
they stop their writing to concentrate on word choice or
spelling, their thoughts disappear. After such careful
editing, whole paragraphs and sections may then be deleted.
Moreover, many students also confuse rewriting with
editing. Overly concerned with form rather than
content, students spend disproportionate time correcting superficial problems. Both Emig (1971) and Perl
(1978) found that students typically limit revision
error-hunting. Teachers foster this conception when
they return papers with only spelling and grammatical
errors marked. Far better to comment,if only briefly,
on the properties of good prose: original thought,
mastery of the topic, persuasive development of a
central idea, and effective sentences. It is important to
show that organization, coherence, and clarity dwarf
matters like occasional misspellings. One way to communicate this goal for each assignment is to establish
grading criteria that stress the properties of goodwriting
named above.
EVALUATION OF THE PROCESS
A 1983 survey (Table 2) of 92 agronomy students
assessed their attitudes toward writing in four widely
different agronomy courses at the junior and senior
level--crop physiology and metabolism, agricultural
climatology,
cropping systems, and agronomic
research; 82°7o of the sample were agronomy majors.
These undergraduate classes included problem-solving
courses (agronomic research and agricultural climatology), where writing has been considered less appropriate,
as well as concept-based courses, where discussion of
topics is especially appropriate. In problem-solving
courses, a professor may need to spend more time discussing writing and its benefits to showhowwriting can
help students assemble the parts of the course into a
coherent framework.
The survey showed that students recognized the importance of writing. Most students believed that writing
skills were valuable to their careers (88%), that writing
34
JOURNAL OF AGRONOMIC EDUCATION, Vol. 14, Spring 1985
Table 2. Students' attitudes toward writing. Results of a 1983 survey
of 92 students in undergraduate agronomy courses.
Response t
Question
TA
TD
-%-
1. Writing skills will not be valuable in
my career.
5
2. The writing assignments helped me learn the
course material.
47
3. The writing assignments helped me write
better.
23
4. Short assignments helped me learn more
than a term paper did.
29
5. The benefits of writing were not
worthwhile.
7
6. Peer responses helped me see weaknesses
in my writing.
30
7. Constructive criticism from peers helped
me write better papers.
44
8. I had difficulty criticizing other students'
papers.
20
9. Peer criticism mainly concerned spelling
and grammar.
8
10. I would like to use peer responses for all my
writing assignments.
18
7
18
70
39
10
4
47
24
6
44
20
7
14
43
36
44
24
2
37
16
3
23
25
32
11
35
46
32
32
18
t Response categories: A = agree; TA = tend to agree; TD = tend to disagree;
D = disagree.
helped them learn the subject matter (86%), and that
writing helped them write better (70%). Students' comments on the value of writing and peer response were
generally positive, and most students (79%) thought the
benefits of writing were worthwhile. Students viewed
peer response as a mechanism to help them see weaknesses in their own writing (74%) and valued constructive criticism from their peers (81%). Peer response encouraged students to meet deadlines and allowed papers
to be "pre-graded." Most important, students dis-
covered how other students wrote and thought. But they
disliked having to write multiple drafts, and felt unqualified to critique their peers' papers. Both problems
can be overcome by stressing the many benefits of
multiple drafts and peer response: improved focus,
firmer organization, fuller development, greater
sentence clarity, and more accurate grammar and
mechanics.
SUMMARY
In this article we have discussed recent work in the
field of writing to show both how the writing process
works and how writing can be used to help agronomy
students. Understanding the process of writing, agronomic educators can begin to successfully incorporate
writing into their classes and improve student writing.
To include writing does not rob teachers of valuable
class time, but rather makes the available time a more
effective learning period for students; in addition, the
peer response process makes grading more efficient.
Hence we challenge agronomic educators to convey the
importance of writing to their students and to help
students develop the writing skills required for success
in their careers.