Date of Award


Degree Type


Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)



Committee Chair(s)

Jared Colton


Jared Colton


Michael Sowder


Jessica Rivera-Mueller


In the current realm of collegiate English, there exists a polarized separation between two fields: composition and creative writing. Though there are a number of ways these two fields intersect, they are seen and taught as distinct entities, and have been so for much of the last three decades. Some scholars see the blending of the two fields as potentially hindering to students’ writing development in either field – the idea that attempting to do two things at once, rather than focusing on each one at a time, will inevitably result in less-effectiveness in both. Others see creative writing as having no practical use, thus the need for the continued separation. Because of these stances, the closely-related fields function independently from one another; generally, neither actually considers the other in the classroom, despite the benefit(s) this could provide. However, while little has been written on what’s to be gained from integrating the two fields, much is lost due to the separation – e.g. the spark of interest in English, in general, that creative writing provides or the acute similarity in goals and skill-development that both fields share. In this paper, I examine the pedagogical benefits of integrating the two fields, focusing specifically on what’s to be gained by diminishing the separation. My materials will include scholarly articles from prominent journals in either field (such as College Composition and Communication, College English, and The Writer’s Chronicle, among others), as well as textbooks to provide specific details about the similarities between them. I aim to address questions concerning the current separation so modern scholars in each field will consider the immense benefit(s) of integrating aspects of each field in both the composition and creative writing classrooms.