To determine whether a teacher's guidance of the writing process in the classroom can produce measurable improvement in students' writing and learning over the course of a semester, an instructor of a college business management course taught three sections of the same course, using the same texts and making the same assignments (six written case analyses), but approaching the writing process differently in each of the three sections. Section A was taught in the traditional way with an emphasis on lectures about business policy. Written case analyses were assigned with the assumption that students knew how to write, and that the instructor's job was to deal effectively with course content. In Section B, writing assignments were given in a manner designed to make the writing process more effective. Class discussion was frequently directed toward the nature of the writing process, and students were encouraged to use writing as a technique for developing thought. Section C was taught like Section B, except that students were also required to submit a draft of each written case analysis to an outside reader for review and then to revise the draft for final submission. The results suggest that the draft intervention and response technique used in Section C had a significant positive impact on students' rhetorical and analytical skills. A surprising result was the failure of the emphasis on writing in the lecture format to have a positive impact on either student performance or student improvement. (HOD)