The Digital-Forward Writing Course

2022 ◽  
pp. 272-288
Author(s):  
Robert S. Kadel ◽  
Myk Garn ◽  
Karen K. Vignare
Keyword(s):  
Composition Courses ◽  
Student Writing ◽  
First Year ◽  
Instructional Designers ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Pedagogical Strategies ◽  
Traditional Course ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
Broad Variation ◽  
Writing Instructors

First-year writing and composition courses can be major roadblocks for students as their success in later courses often hinges on their abilities to construct a quality written document. Students enter composition courses with broad variation in their abilities and yet must all meet the same standards of completion. In order to address this inequity, greater opportunities for writing and in receiving feedback are paramount. Yet such opportunities would place a high burden on writing instructors in a traditional course. This chapter proposes the digital-forward writing course that draws on a combination of a number of digital tools and pedagogical strategies that can increase writing opportunities while maintaining or even reducing instructors' time commitment. This information is drawn from a workshop held in 2020 that asked writing instructors, instructional designers, developers, and other educators to ideate on meeting the challenges of the entire student writing journey. Specific tools and a discussion of the value of adaptive courseware are included.

Building a local learner corpus

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica H. Kwon ◽  
R. Scott Partridge ◽  
Shelley Staples
Keyword(s):  
Faculty Members ◽  
First Year ◽  
Construction Process ◽  
Writing Program ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Learner Corpus ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
Teaching Interventions ◽  
Learner Corpus Analysis ◽  
Writing Instructors

Abstract This paper describes the construction process involved in creating a robust local learner corpus of texts produced by international students in a first-year writing course at a large public, mid-western university in the U.S. We show how involving faculty members and graduate students of our local writing program in the process of learner corpus analysis provides them with opportunities to develop their skills and knowledge as writing instructors, course designers, and, ultimately, knowledge producers. An additional benefit of such an undertaking is that the corpus can become part of the infrastructure of a research community that allows continued contributions by others individually and collaboratively. We also illustrate the usefulness of our local learner corpus for research, teaching, mentoring, and collaboration within our writing program with examples of the research projects and teaching interventions we have developed.

scholarly journals Re-Imagining the First Year as Catalyst for First-Year Writing Program Curricular Change

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia Crank ◽  
Sara Heaser ◽  
Darci L. Thoune
Keyword(s):  
College Retention ◽  
Habits Of Mind ◽  
Curricular Change ◽  
First Year ◽  
Writing Program ◽  
Research Project ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Writing Courses ◽  
Multiple Measures ◽  
Writing Course

This article describes a revision of a first-year writing program curriculum using the pillars of the Reimagining the First-Year Program. The authors adapted principles related to mindset and habits of mind from both college retention scholarship and composition scholarship. After developing a research project in order to understand what elements of mindset correlate with readiness for credit-bearing writing courses, the authors created a multiple measures placement system for enrolling students in a credit-bearing first-year writing course with co-requisite support.  

The Ethics of Teacher Responses to Translingual Student Writing

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-38
Author(s):  
Lauren M. Connolly
Keyword(s):  
Student Writing ◽  
First Year ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
History Of ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Native English Speaking ◽  
Teacher Responses

This chapter will discuss the history of instructor comments in first-year writing and consider the differences in commenting for translingual students, native English-speaking students, as well as students from various language backgrounds and experiences. The goal is to consider ways beyond simply pointing out errors in students' writing and consider the rhetorical appropriateness of the students' texts and how instructors can provide comments to students to maintain the integrity of students' language backgrounds.

Evaluation in the course development process

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kris Van de Poel ◽  
Jessica Gasiorek
Keyword(s):  
Development Process ◽  
First Year ◽  
Course Development ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Minimal Impact ◽  
Course Content ◽  
Course Materials ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
The University

Evaluation is a critical but frequently underutilized part of the (language) course development process. Instructors’ reasons for avoiding it vary, but often include the concern that conducting evaluations will draw time and attention away from course content. Using All Write, a first-year writing course at the University of Antwerp, as a case study, this article shows how mechanisms for feedback and evaluation can be incorporated into course materials with minimal impact, as well as demonstrates the benefits of evaluation as both a validation process and a guide for course revision. Moreover, it will show how the stakeholders, primarily learners, but also teachers, may be drawn into the process and potentially benefit from it.

Broadening the Scope of Community Engagement

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 159-169
Author(s):  
Sarah Finn
Keyword(s):  
Food Justice ◽  
First Year ◽  
Original Music ◽  
Campus Network ◽  
Engaged Learning ◽  
First Year Writing ◽  
Student Groups ◽  
Writing Course ◽  
New Community ◽  
Activist Groups

This article explored a community-engaged, first-year writing course that partnered students with student activist groups on campus at Northeastern University in Boston. Their placement with peers connected them with the campus network and illuminated the ways that they could advocate for social justice in their new community. Students wrote in multiple genres as they attended the meetings and events of different groups involved with environmentalism, food justice, adjunct rights, and more. As students connected their social-change work to the classroom, they learned more about different genres of writing, from scholarly inquiries to multi-modal “deliverables” supporting their student groups. These final “deliverables” included posters, videos, prezis, banners, and even original music to be played at meetings or events. The fact that student worked with peers alleviated some common challenges of community-engaged learning, such as a sense of saviorhood. Instead, students felt a sense of civic investment and developed rhetorical flexibility that they implemented in the classroom and with their groups. Students found the course meaningful and valued the opportunity to get involved with campus activism. As they developed as activists and writers, students felt that the classroom and community spheres overlapped and informed each other.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document