Lots of schools now teach writing (VERY GOOD). However, I don't know about you, but the most useful pedagogical training *I* ever got before being unleashed on a higher ed classroom was, "the dry erase markers will always fail you, so bring your own" (side note: this is in fact very good advice)

So writing training is scattershot. People pick it up from their mentors, and if your mentor is a great writer and a great teacher then congratulations! But more likely you're just expected to pick it up through vibes and by piecing together advice along the way...

For graduate training, I'll talk about public health, because thats what I know. There is no systematic standard or training approach to teaching writing. AND in graduate education we devalue pedagogy as a distinct skill (and lets talk about all the ways that THAT is gendered) ...

Oh, this textbook is also solid!

www.macmillanlearning.com/college/us/p...

This is just correct.

it was always a truism in law school that the techies had an intuitive understanding of legal writing that the fuzzies had to learn

Sure! There are lots of decent texts on the skill and technique involved in argument. For teaching, I like the Toulmin Method:

owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_...

Yep. Logic courses are critical to the skills IMO.

Best thing I ever did for my writing was take symbolic logic in college. I can't recommend it highly enough.

and there's just no way in the absence of such training people should expect to be especially skilled in it.

Share them, please! Like I trained in two different academic fields in which the technical skill of argument *is* part of the curriculum (ethics and law), and I have an extensive background in debate. But going through all this convinced me there's so much to learn in how to argue

It’s easier to just teach (& to use) the proper jargon, the buzzwords & code phrases that serve as passwords into the private clubs of each discipline. Well-structured essays are HARD.

Writing well - making cogent arguments, without using strawmen or blatant cherry-picking to “prove” your points - certainly isn’t taught in higher ed. In part because such a low percentage of academics can do this well consistently.

ELSI over and over again until the end of time

Can she be a bad commander and still be heroic? I guess it's possible in theory, but is she both?

It just never really grabbed me the way it seems to grab others. And while Luna and Jones are good enough actors to make their characters sing, the relationship btw them is strangely paced and underexplained IMO. But I'm in the minority on this, I know.