Abstract

Higher education includes students' enculturation into expected disciplinary communication, but this process might be hindered by certain implicit theories about writing (transcription; talent; individual inspiration; basic ability; vocabulary and mechanics; non-teachable object) that differ from its actual configuration as a complex, situated and epistemic rhetorical activity. This article retrieves and contrast these theories in three different educational stages (entry, transition, and graduation) based on answers from 8192 university students. After applying Pearson's Chi-square Goodness of Fit Test, results show that students enter university with certain implicit theories (writing as mechanics and transcription of thought; learning through practice and across the curriculum and educational stages), but not with others (writing as a basic ability); furthermore, higher education trajectories partially transform certain theories (writing as individual inspiration and transcription of thought), but do not affect others (situational adequacy and textual structure relative importance), while incorporating expectations about writing tasks (personal stance in essays; use of citations in explanations; contrasts in comparisons). Understanding the distribution and the degrees of stability or transformation of implicit theories about writing not only makes contributions to scientific knowledge, but it also informs literacy, writing across the curriculum, and students' support programs and initiatives.