Volume 22, Issue 1/2

Published July 25, 2025

I am pleased to announce that we have finalized important changes to our journal’s editorial practices, which you can now find on ATD’s Submissions page at https://wac.colostate.edu/atd/submissions/. Over the last 18 months or so, we have been working to update our practices by taking as a starting point the 2021 “Anti-racist scholarly reviewing practices: A heuristic for editors, reviewers, and authors.” Our intention is to improve the journal’s practices and strengthen its commitment to equity, inclusion, linguistic justice, and multilingualism.

This issue includes four articles and two book reviews. The first two articles are quite different in many respects—one focuses on kinesiology students and peer review, and the other focuses on writing in calculus. Interestingly, they share a partial emphasis on learners’ perceptions regarding their learning through writing. The third article, a case study, underscores the importance of attending to a writing program’s web-based materials to ensure that stakeholders can engage meaningfully with the program and its resources. And the fourth article explores the integration of counterargument in writing intensive courses across a range of disciplines.

Introduction to Volume 22, Issue 1/2
Michael J. Cripps
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.01

Featured Articles:

Writing Circles in STEM: Why Structured Peer Review Engages Students as Writers, Thinkers, and Collaborators in Their Discipline
Tereza Joy Kramer, Claire Williams, Joe Zeccardi, and Joshua Rose
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.02

This study explores how students’ perceptions of themselves as thinkers and communicators within a STEM discipline are impacted by structured peer review. Quantitative and qualitative coding led to thematic analysis of students’ reflective writing papers produced during partial-credit companion courses called writing circles, which are weekly peer review groups facilitated by an instructor who is not the students’ disciplinary instructor. Study participants, during their circles, reviewed peers’ research proposals or lab reports for kinesiology courses, lower-division and upper-division. Analysis reveals that circles result in American STEM undergraduates increasing a) facility and appreciation for collaborative dialogue; b) ability to transfer communication and revision strategies; and c) confidence in their abilities as communicators, reviewers, and critical thinkers. These findings are relevant for educators searching for methods to support the learning of writing, critical thinking, and collaborating in STEM courses.

Writing to Engage in Multivariate Calculus: Students’ Perceptions of Math, Writing, and the Curriculum
Tyler Skorczewski and Justin Nicholes
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.03

Writing-related activities have long been identified as supporting students’ mathematics mastery and overall math success (Bahls, 2012). To further understand student experiences using writing in college math coursework, the present mixed-methods study explored the perceptions of a group of students (N = 55) in Multivariate Calculus who encountered writing-to-engage (WTE) assignments (Palmquist, 2020) at a four-year university in the midwestern USA. Pre- and post-course survey results suggest student preferences for technical and transactional writing over other forms, statistically significant positive movement away from skeptical thinking about math and math instruction, and enhanced perceptions of students’ writerly selves and student perceptions that the course was relevant for future careers.

Sustaining User Engagement: Programmatic Visibility and Website Usability for Cross-Curricular Literacy Programs
Christopher Basgier, Derek Ross, Norman E. Youngblood, and Hannah Smith
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.04

Sustainable visibility remains a challenge for cross-curricular literacy (CCL) initiatives such as writing across the curriculum (WAC) programs. The university community must be able to access relevant information, and they need to know how to participate. CCL program websites are a commonplace way to meet these needs, but research on CCL website design is scant. Without a scholarly base, CCL professionals may be left relying on intuition in website design, or else replicating other programs’ designs. In the process, they risk creating hard-to-use websites by mimicking ones designed for other programs, audiences, and contexts. Such acontextual site designs might jeopardize program visibility and sustainability. Therefore, in this article, we offer an IRB-approved user experience study of one CCL program. Via our analysis, we offer implications for CCL professionals and programs who are engaged in the process of (re)designing a website, with particular emphasis on implications for program visibility and sustainability.

Embracing Complexity: Contradictions Between Perception and Application of Counterargument in Writing Intensive Assignments
Christy Goldsmith and Julie Birt
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.05

Writing intensive (WI) courses are well-situated to support students’ counterargument skill development, a key element for both academic and civic discourse in today’s socio-political environment. However, while many researchers celebrate multi-faceted argumentation, few studies look beyond a dichotomous or “two-sided” approach in post-secondary writing instruction. In this qualitative study, we drew on our established WAC program’s extensive WI course proposal system to ask: How do WI instructors describe counterargumentation, both broadly and in relation to their writing assignments? Through grounded theory data analyses, we categorized and qualified instructors’ descriptions of counterargumentation use within 350 WI courses and assignments. Although there was agreement on the importance of argumentation, our successive rounds of analysis revealed interesting contradictions in the ways WI instructors conceptualized disciplinary argumentation and how they apprenticed students into argumentative writing tasks. As we explored the tension between instructors’ characterization and practice of counterargument, we realized the need to design intentional professional development to help WI instructors teach students how to embrace subjectivity as they design, implement, and assess student writing activities.

Reviews:

Review of Pedagogical Perspectives on Cognition and Writing, edited by J. Michael Rifenburg, Patricia Portanova, and Duane Roen. (2021). Parlor Press. 361 pages. [ISBN 978-1-64317-246-0 (paperback); 978-1-64317-247-7 (hardcover); 978-1-64317-248-4 (PDF); 978-1-64317-249-1 (EPUB)]
Reviewed by S. Fain Riopelle
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.06

Review of Essentials of Autoethnography, by Christopher N. Poulos. (2021). American Psychological Association. 100 pages. [ISBN 978-1-4338-3454-7]
Reviewed by Shana Scudder
DOI: 10.37514/ATD-J.2025.22.1-2.07

The mission of Across the Disciplines is to provide information for— and an opportunity for interaction among—scholars interested in writing, speaking, reading, and communication across the curriculum (CAC). We welcome contributions of the following kinds:

• articles on CAC theory, practice, and research
• reviews of publications addressing CAC theory, practice, and research
• papers formerly presented at scholarly conferences but not published elsewhere

For more information about submitting to this journal, please see the Clearinghouse invitation to contribute scholarly work and its statement on publication ethics. Submissions and peer reviews should be informed by these statements. Our peer review process is also guided by the practices outlined in "Anti-racist scholarly reviewing practices: A heuristic for editors, reviewers, and authors" (2021).

For queries or questions about submissions to ATD, please contact Michael J. Cripps, Editor, at mcripps@une.edu or 207-602-2908.