Large WID Courses (25+ Students)

Course Context

Large WID courses present distinct opportunities and constraints. At this scale, students can still engage meaningfully with writing, but instructors often find that the teaching of writing looks different than it does in smaller classes.

In large courses, writing instruction often relies less on sustained one-to-one exchange between instructor and student and more on shared structures that support learning across the class

Role of Writing in the Course

In many large WID courses, writing can function as a learning tool used throughout the semester. Faculty often find that frequent, purposeful but short writing helps students engage with course material, work through complex ideas, and practice disciplinary ways of thinking. Such writing also gives faculty members access to student learning made visible which can be helpful in calibrating (and recalibrating) instruction.

Rather than centering primarily on polished individual products, large courses often use writing to support ongoing engagement with course concepts and opportunities for synthesis across units. In this context, writing-to-learn activities may play a more prominent role, with selective opportunities for learning-to-write disciplinary forms depending on course goals and expectations.

Writing Tasks and Projects

Faculty teaching large WID courses often use a mix of writing tasks rather than relying on multiple major individual papers.

Common approaches include:

• low-stakes writing (e.g., responses, short analyses, case write-ups, discussion-based writing) that keeps students actively working with course material and ideas
• one substantial writing project, which may be individual or group-based, depending on course goals and disciplinary norms
• group projects or group writing assignments, which some faculty find make more sustained writing work feasible by distributing labor and creating opportunities for collaboration

Individual papers, reports, or projects can certainly be part of a large WID course. At the same time, many instructors note that substantial individual projects often require careful staging and ongoing support in order to produce strong work. In larger classes, providing that level of support can be challenging. When major individual projects are included, they often work best when limited in number, clearly focused, and supported by intermediate writing tasks.

Support and Feedback

In large courses, support for writing often works best when it is distributed rather than relying primarily on extensive instructor commentary on student work.

Faculty may draw on strategies such as:

• targeted instructor feedback on one or two key assignments or moments of synthesis
• peer review, used selectively and with clear guidance, as one way for students to receive feedback and learn from one another
• reflection, often built into low-stakes writing (e.g., midterm or end-of-term reflective pieces), to help students make sense of feedback and assess their own learning
• AI-assisted feedback tools at early or lower-stakes stages, when appropriate. When AI tools are used, instructors need to provide guidance and training so students learn how to use them effectively and responsibly, and to frame these tools as supplements to—not replacements for—instructor judgment and course goals

Class time can also be used to discuss shared writing challenges, examine models of effective work, or reflect on patterns emerging across student writing.

Assessment and Writing Weight

In WID courses at Rhode Island College, writing assignments should account for 40–60% of the final course grade, depending on disciplinary expectations and course goals. The examples below are offered as illustrative shorthand, not as models that must be replicated.

If writing accounts for approximately 40% of the course grade, instructors often rely on frequent low-stakes writing supported by one more substantial assignment. For example:

• a final paper or project (individual or group): ~15–20%
• ongoing low-stakes writing, including reflective work: ~20–25%

If writing accounts for approximately 50% of the course grade, some instructors combine low-stakes writing with a small number of more focused projects. For example:

• one medium- or high-stakes project: ~20–25%
• a mix of low-stakes and supporting writing tasks (responses, short analyses, reflections): ~25–30%

If writing accounts for approximately 60% of the course grade, writing may serve as a central mode of learning across the course. For example:

• one or two substantial projects (individual or group): ~25–30%
• frequent low-stakes writing and supporting tasks, including reflection: ~30–35%

These examples illustrate different ways writing can be weighted and structured in large courses, rather than a single recommended formula.

Design Takeaway

In large WID courses, writing often works best when it is designed as a shared learning practice rather than as a series of individualized exchanges between instructor and student. Low-stakes writing, selective use of more substantial projects—including collaborative writing projects—and distributed forms of support can help make writing central to learning while keeping expectations aligned with course size and workload manageable.