1. Citation

Frigo, Stefanie A., and Collie Fulford. Introducing Bringing the Outside In: Internationalizing The WAC/WID Classroom. p. 7.

2. Summary

Stefanie Frigo and Collie Fulford of North Carolina Central University begin their article, Introducing Bringing the Outside In: Internationalizing the WAC/WID Classroom, by defining internationalizing as the inclusion of international texts and ideas into the US and English classrooms (1). This focus on a world outside of the English-speaking West is to help prepare students to participate in an ever more globalized world, where understanding and respecting other cultures will be key to economic success in the workplace (2). While students come from all backgrounds in a class, the instructor also must keep up a sense of intercultural awareness in the curriculum to ensure students truly understand the importance of a global outlook. This focus on the world will keep classrooms relevant.

The article sites three different researches who proposed this same idea in the past, Vocke (1988), Kehrer (1990), and Goodwin (1995), pointing out that the citizens in the United States are already “multinational” (3). The focus is changing classroom texts to reflect our role as global citizens, rather than just citizens of one country. By text, the article is referring much to what we think of in English 101 at WWU, promoting media, videos, audio like podcasts, websites, and even plays—anything that can be used to better understand a different culture (4). The literature that could be used in classrooms could come from authors who write about the experience in the US in different languages, or authors who write about their global experience in English. This leads into the idea of English, not as something spoken only in England or the United States, but of an international English that is molded to those who use it around the world.

The crux of the article is that we in the US are guaranteed to interact with people who speak more than one language and who are from somewhere else in the world. If we can teach cultural understanding, we can link up with the widespread use of English being taught worldwide as a force to internationalize others and ourselves (6). The focus on this globalized curriculum comes in four parts: “internationalizing writing programs, internationalizing STEM, ideal teaching practices for international learners in the writing classroom, and non-native speakers’ author stance,” (5). Through focusing on the position of international authors, genre, and the conventions in L2 English speakers, we could revolutionize the way we teach writing.

3. Quote Bank

“The most common interpretation of internationalizing curricula and programs, whether writing-focused or not, is rooted in the recent move to prepare institutions for education, teaching, learning, and research in a global community.  Increasingly, companies are requiring mobility in their workforces, the capacity to create inter-cultural understanding, and the ability to communicate across and through cultural barriers that exist both within and without professional spheres.” (1)

“Regardless of how “internationalization” is defined, there is little doubt that the ability to communicate in a global world is increasingly expected and demanded by new graduates in order to be competitive in a challenging world environment.  This environment, it should be noted, is one in which almost 40% of American companies have missed out on opportunities because of a lack of “internationally competent employees…” International competency is prized by prospective employers and graduate programs, and there is thus significant pressure on institutions to develop courses to satisfy this need. This push has extended down to individual classrooms and syllabi on college campuses across the nation and particularly to the disciplines of composition and rhetoric.” (2)

“It is important to remember, however, that although the classroom itself may be inherently international in terms of student demographics, the instructor is still responsible for ensuring that it is infused with deep cultural awareness. Donahue (2009) emphasizes the importance of this responsibility, arguing that internationalizing the classroom can have an impact far beyond the ability to simply communicate across cultures: ‘We need international work because we can no longer do without deep understanding as the world shifts and slips.  We need the ability to negotiate that comes from deep intercultural awareness; the ability to shift in understanding of our global position; the research trends and strong methods other scholars have developed; the deep familiarity with other systems and contexts, developed in so much more that the occasional encounter, fulfilling but exotic; the suspicion about market forces at work in the more glib general discussions about the value in internationalizing higher education.’” (3)

“Most authors conclude that a cross-cultural approach to content is fundamental, but equally important may be broadening the notion of ‘text’ to include more than just print media—film, audio recordings, webtexts, performances—all of which can be ‘read’ and analyzed in ways that highlight and value cultural differences. In an early study of a cross-cultural approach to composition that incorporated international readers and foreign films, Kehrer et al. (1990) argued for the benefit of multimodal texts, saying that ‘The purpose of the cross-cultural courses is not only to instruct the students in the basics but also, through word and film, to immerse them in the shared bonds of the human condition which know no barriers.  As students become more culturally aware, they also develop composition and critical thinking skills.’” (4)

“In ‘Internationalizing Writing in the STEM Disciplines,’ Ghanashyam Sharma considers the importance of World Englishes and their influence on writing in the STEM disciplines, arguing that writing instruction in these areas should be informed by the transnational and cross-cultural nature of collaboration in these technical subjects. Through her study exploring student beliefs about a monolingual version of World English, Sharma investigates how this myth interferes with complex writing within STEM. Sharma offers a series of strategies to enhance teaching practices within WAC/WID’s internationalization of writing practices in science, technology, engineering, and math.” (6)

4. Reflection

I am starting to move more toward this idea of an internationalized composition in the STEM fields. I had never heard of Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) before starting this class, but I love the way they integrate writing into every class. It felt to me that Frigo and Fulford included the business benefits of a well-cultured student as a weak means of justifying the need for multilingual and culturally sensitive students (2). This article also shares much in common with Giroux, and I believe the concerns of Alexander and Rhodes would be well-voiced here. Composition does not yet have an academic place in STEM fields, and to think about introducing an international composition seems like this would trap and stagnate the definitions of both composition and of international. From an intersectional lens, my understanding is that educators would want to allow for a free flow from the students of their culture, an at the same time ensure the use of multimodal texts in the classroom that come from all around the world, instead of relying on the traditional English canon (2, 4).

What I believe this article needs is harder research. It makes sense to me that learning a second language and having an international background is a huge benefit to anyone as an individual—my firm conviction is that the ability to recognize that someone can come from an entirely different culture does immense work toward increasing someone’s empathy and ability to connect on the most basic human level. I don’t think enough has been done to compare the relative successes of people who have the opportunity to becoming internationalized. In this program, I understand there was an issue with the testing for the world language requirement that was part of the reason that was waived, but further I’ve heard it said that learning a second language is not helpful to MFA students. I assume this is not a widely held belief, since it seems ridiculous that opening a whole new language of literature and understanding would not benefit a creative person. I realize here that I’m falling into the end of my last RAB assignment, so allow me to step away and end this paragraph by saying it would be nice if studies in the benefits of internationalizing could be funded.

The argument to internationalize composition, and then teach composition across the curriculum, appeals greatly to me. To teach writing is, on some level, to teach reading so that students can recognize effective writing. To be able to recognize an international text and understand that, is to broaden the means of communication one person has, and the apply that to people of every discipline, background, and career path looks to me to be the start of an incredible community.