ABSTRACT
All writing program administrators (WPAs), whether they have direct responsibility for writing-across-the-curriculum (WAC) or not, need an understanding of this thirty-year-old, vital subfield of composition. WAC historian David Russell calls it “the most widespread and sustained reform movement in cross-curricular writing instruction” in U.S. higher education (Writing 272). Defining WAC, though, is easier said than done. A primary characteristic of WAC is its idiosyncrasy. As Chris Thaiss points out, “Consciously or not, WAC theorists and program leaders have encouraged almost unlimited variety in terms of what counts as writing and how it is evaluated…. [T]his lack of close definition is largely responsible for the growth of WAC programs…. [allowing, even encouraging, different parts of a faculty to maintain divergent, often conflicting goals …” (“Theory in WAC,”).
