"I didn't specify a certain type of writing assignment [to the faculty teaching the pilot one-credit freshman seminar courses this fall]," said Bud Warner, Dean of Academic Programs "but I did suggest they make an early writing assigmment so that they could give students some feedback to introduce them to the rigors of college writing."
The professors followed his suggestion.

Types of Assignments
In "The Obsession with Weight," psychology professor Jerry Frey assigned a short paper due after six weeks of class and a long one due at the end of the course. Students analyzed an issue of interest to them and compared the position of Paul Campos, author of The Obesity Myth, with other positions, for example, those of Atkins diet proponents. Besides the papers, he required students to post comments on Blackboard before and after class to reflect on the reading and comment on issues discussed in class. Most wrote a paragraph or two.

Biology professor Jim Stidham assigned a paper of three to four pages each week in his seminar "Oceans: The Last Frontier?" His objectives were to ensure that all students "read the weekly assignment and that they 'put it all together' by writing what we might call a review or summary."

In "McDonaldization," a seminar using the text Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser, history professor Mike Nelson assigned five papers with a minimum of two full pages each. The papers introduced the subject, put it in a larger context, and included a thesis, the main point or argument­­the core of the work.

For the first paper, students documented the class trip to McDonald's, observing the apparent themes in the experience and what made the trip unique or typical. Another assignment asked students to interview someone at PC who worked for McDonald's or an equivalent fast food restaurant and compare his or her experience to those depicted in Fast Food Nation. Another paper reviewed the film Super Size Me. The last paper sent students to the Internet to write about McDonald's' image on both official web pages and unofficial or personal pages, noting what themes appear and what perspectives seem to be absent.

Don Raber, political scientist, explored with students "the increasing integration of politics, markets, and technologies around the world" in Globalization. He assigned a series of two-page papers that answered a question in response to The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas Friedman. The first assignment asked the following question: "In describing what it means to be a 'globalist,' how does Friedman emphasize the importance of seeing 'the big picture' in world events?" Raber posed a question for seven of the assignments and allowed students to come up with their own on two. Students had to write five of the nine response papers. The final assignment was an eight-page book review of the text, integrating what they had read and evaluating globalization as a phenomenon.

In "Word and Image," Laura Crary of the Art Department used Ways of Seeing by John Berger, which discusses words and images found in fine art, commercial photography, and photojournalism. Crary assigned four short papers due every other week and one longer final paper. The short papers asked for responses to questions about the assigned readings, videos, or television programs. Students analyzed "visual and written texts, thinking critically about the visual world, and the clear development of their ideas through written essays."

For the first paper, students compared and contrasted illustrations in various sections of The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal. Crary asked questions to jog students' thinking: "How does each paper illustrate the news and business features as compared to the cultural sections? How do these approaches seem to illuminate the editorial policies of the two papers?" She allowed personal observations and first-person narrative.

In Crary's second assignment students discussed the themes in Still Killing Us Softly, Jean Kilbourne's 1987 video, and then looked at the daily Times Style section, the Sunday New York Times Magazine, and other recent magazines to see if the same images persist: "Do images of men seem to have changed? Have images of men or women changed more? What about images of children?" She asked students to connect Kilbourne's themes with those of the author of their course text, trying Berger's suggestion to substitute a woman for a man to see how the message and response to the image may change. Students scanned or photocopied the selected images, cited them correctly, and included them with the paper.

For the third paper Crary's students visited the Harper Center Gallery exhibit "Passionate Observer: Eudora Welty Among Artists of the Thirties" and wrote a short review of its themes: Crary asked, "What kinds of ideas about race, class and gender in 1930s America do you get from these pictures? How does seeing these works 'in person' affect your perception of them, as opposed to seeing them in a magazine?"
Responding and grading The papers counted 25% of the total grade for Frey's seminar with the e-mail observations being part of the class participation grade. Papers made up 80% of Stidham's course grade and 50% for students of Nelson, Raber, and Crary.

Frey explained what he expected for his papers in the syllabus, encouraging Writing Center visits. He read and commented on drafts of the first paper and did the same for the second paper if students handed in a draft a week before the due date. Nelson offered to look over the students' papers if they handed in a draft at least 24 hours before the due date to give him adequate time for comments.

Asked whether he was satisfied with the writing, Frey said, "In the case of the best students, I was pleased." Raber was also pleased with the responses of his students. He graded the short papers on a 5-point scale:

5 = outstanding,
4 = good/excellent,
3 = satisfactory/good,
2 = needs improvement,
0/1 = poor or unsatisfactory.

Although Raber offered students the option of writing more than five responses and keeping only the five highest grades, no one accepted. Stidham assigned a letter grade to each paper. He did not have a score sheet but plans to use one next time. He found that most of the students were quite good at writing.

Crary commented on rough drafts "if students chose to submit them." She "wrote comments all over the final paper and allowed them to revise them for an improved grade at the end of the term." She based the grading on how well students addressed her questions and how thoroughly they developed their responses and analyses. She said about 80% of the students met the objectives for the assignments.

Advice for faculty teaching future freshman seminars
Frey advised those teaching a freshman seminar to remember that freshmen "probably know less about writing a focused essay than you think." Extra time spent introducing the assignment and your expectations is time well spent.

Stidham's advice is to require students to write but to give them very specific details about what should be done and a score sheet. Crary suggests keeping papers short, two to three pages in length, and spreading them out over the term. "Encourage students to visit the Writing Center," she adds.
Finally, Crary sums up one way writing helps achieve a goal of the freshman seminar: "Create assignments that force freshmen to confront and challenge their ideas."
Jill Frey