My name is Seema Dahlheimer, and I’m the director of the Engineering Communication Center and a teaching professor in the McKelvey School of Engineering. I’m also the chair of the committee that decides on writing placements for engineering students. Therefore, I’m in a unique position to respond to River Alsalihi’s “Even engineers need to take College Writing,” both from my own perspective and on behalf of the McKelvey School of Engineering.

Alsalihi and I are aligned in our beliefs about what students should gain from a WashU education. The ability to critically analyze a text, think through an idea, consider audience and purpose, and write — not just coherently but with excellence — is something that I truly believe is important for all WashU students to learn and struggle through. An education without critical thinking is no education at all — it’s simply an information download.

The original op-ed offers me an opportunity to share a bit of what the Engineering Communication Center does and the ways we value and support critical thinking and the writing process in our courses. I hope this also dispels some misconceptions about engineering students and the engineering curriculum.

Almost all engineering students are required to take a writing course.

Almost all undergraduate engineering students are required to take Technical Writing, a 300-level writing course. The name of the class might conjure up images of technical specs, bland instructions, or code documentation. You might imagine that we spend the whole semester writing the sort of Byzantine instruction booklets that teach you how to clean your Keurig machine. If so, it’s no wonder you feel like engineers are missing out on the transformative experience of taking a small writing class that focuses on critical thinking!

In reality, Technical Writing is exactly the kind of class Alsalihi describes when discussing the value of College Writing. It’s a small discussion class focused not simply on producing good writing, but on thinking. Our students think about different audiences and rhetorical situations, spend time with a librarian analyzing information, consider different formats for communicating information, and research topics that inspire them. For their research projects, many of them explore their engineering-related interests through a critical lens — for example, some of their research paper topics include inequities in the healthcare system, the environmental impacts of mining practices, and the human implications of AI. 

Most of us who teach these classes have humanities or social science backgrounds, and that’s by design — it’s so that we can challenge our students to think in new and different ways. In class, students do a lot of freewriting, small-group discussions, full-class discussions, revision, peer workshopping, and collaborative writing. If you walked into one of our Technical Writing classes, you may not recognize it as an engineering class at all! It’s a writing class, through and through.

Most McKelvey engineering students actually do take College Writing.

Alsalihi’s article mentions that engineering students “may take a pre-test to be exempted” from College Writing. This is not wrong, but calling it “a pre-test” makes the Writing Placement Exam sound like a bit of a walk in the park. What does this exam actually look like? In it, we ask students to write a critical analysis of a text that we’ve given them — it’s typically an op-ed from a news source like The New York Times or The Atlantic. A committee of a few instructors (myself included) read the students’ essays, and those that rise to the level of “exempt” from College Writing are written with nuance, sophistication, and a critical eye. In recent years, we’ve offered this timed exam on Canvas and prohibited the use of outside sources, but we’re moving back to old-school paper and pencil this year to ensure students can spend dedicated time on the exam without distractions. It’s not enough to simply respond to the prompt; the students who earn this exemption do so because their writing is excellent. These are students who were fortunate enough to have high school experiences where they learned to think critically and showcase that thinking in their writing — much like they would have in College Writing.

This past fall, about 60% of incoming McKelvey students were required to take College Writing — and then, two years later, they will take Technical Writing. Contrary to the implication that McKelvey students don’t have to take a writing course while at WashU, most are required to take two such courses. 

We deeply value the humanities and social sciences and build them into the curriculum.

Alsalihi characterizes the Engineering School’s mentality as “so long as [students] don’t write with complete incoherence, we should just let them through so they can get started on Physics and Thermodynamics.” The implication here is that we prioritize science and math over a well-rounded academic background and clear communication skills. But if you talk to your engineering school friends, I think you’ll find that — by and large — they can communicate effectively about their work, think critically about their decisions as engineers, consider ethical implications, and explore human impacts in meaningful ways.

Furthermore, our faculty in the Engineering Communication Center teach a number of courses that might surprise you! For example, Engineering Ethics and Sustainability (required for most engineering majors) challenges students to think in depth about ethical dilemmas, apply an ethical framework to their analyses, present cases to the class, and participate in formal debates with their classmates. In Engineers in the Community — a community-engaged, social-justice class that satisfies a requirement for most majors — we explore the way St. Louis’s systems contribute to inequities. We discuss environmental inequities, the legal and healthcare systems, and other socially relevant topics. These are just a few of the courses required for many majors that we offer. Also, all of our engineering students are required to take 18 credits in the humanities and social sciences, which further strengthens their cross-disciplinary thinking.

Alsalihi’s perspective is appreciated, and I absolutely agree that critical thinking is an essential part of students’ education here at WashU. I hope this clarifies how we value critical thinking, the writing process, and the humanities and social sciences within the Engineering School. I invite any Student Life readers who want to learn more about the Engineering School’s humanities and social sciences requirements or course offerings to reach out to me at [email protected].