As the year is winding down and all freshmen (save some lucky engineers) have completed their Writing 1 credit, we are able to reflect on the class. Despite the fact that most of the reflection consists of general whining and moaning, to look on Writing 1 after taking the class still leads to varied and polarizing views. One such view is that Writing 1 is not an enjoyable class but still necessary in the college education framework. Another such view—my view—is that the entire course is irrelevant and should be done away with entirely.

First of all, regardless of the value of the essays or the writing taught, the course is irrelevant simply because there is no consistency in its instruction. By making Writing 1 a required course for all incoming freshmen, the necessity arises for there to be a large number of sections taught by many different teachers. Because writing isn’t a subject that has a fixed set of guidelines like math or science (grammar notwithstanding), each instructor has a different interpretation of what they deem to be good writing. Thus a student may earn a C in Writing 1 whereas they could have turned in the exact same essays to a different teacher and earned an A- or the like. There is no way to regulate so many teachers and their different writing styles in a class where there are no set guidelines to be met. Because of this discrepancy, the course should be either changed to a pass/fail class that isn’t counted against the student or just removed from the curriculum.

Regardless of the teaching variable, Writing 1 also fails to instill any foundations for good writing. Nothing in the course’s syllabus focuses on building cohesive sentence structure, keeping the reader engaged or analyzing others’ writing. To be honest, the lessons taught in the Advanced Placement English Literature course are far more useful to creating a good writer. Learning how to vary your syntax, expand your diction and use your tone to your advantage are valuable lessons overlooked during Writing 1. Instead, the course focuses on broad-stroke writing topics such as theme (personal narrative, argumentation) and organization more than the more-important micro aspects.

While I do believe knowing how to write about your own life or being able to analyze the media all around you are important skills, they are useless if your sentence-level writing is not up to par. In my opinion, the only worthwhile essay assignment was the argumentative analysis as it forced you to look at someone else’s work, decipher their argument and then formulate a response. At the very least, this essay taught an important life skill—being able to respond coherently to others’ opinions.

Lastly, the Writing 1 requirement is irrelevant in the grand scheme of Washington University’s curriculum because Arts & Sciences already requires students to take a writing-intensive course. If that requirement were extended to the other three schools (with the same current system of testing for engineers), then Writing 1 would be obsolete as all students would still receive the same, if not better, writing instruction. Also, eliminating Writing 1 would serve the dual purpose of cutting back on the absurd amount of requirements students have to complete, thus letting freshmen explore their options of study with an additional three credits.

Even though I doubt the course will be removed anytime in the near future, it should at least be improved or changed to an entirely pass/fail course. To force such a watered-down version of writing upon freshman is a disservice to all parties involved. It would be better if the administration actually made the class a consistent study in the construction of arguments, rather than just another blow-off distribution requirement.