- Email: [email protected]
Deploying 21st Century Writing on the Economic Frontlines
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Computers and Composition 30 (2013) 1–2
Deploying 21st Century Writing on the Economic Frontlines This special issue examines the disconnect between theory and reality for techno-rhetors moving from technologyrich graduate training to the less-than ideal setting normal for most new instructors. These are interesting times, and funding for education does not appear to look rosier in the future, a prediction most unfortunate. Rather than surrender to the economic stress about how much more must now be done with less, the editors for this special issue chose to accentuate the positive, which is the infinite intelligence and flexibility of the Computers and Writing community in dealing with hard times. The articles included provide, address, and explore pedagogical strategies in addition to underlying theories from teachers on these frontlines who have found ways to work technology successfully into their classes even when funds or equipment are lacking. The issue began as conversations between two new tenure-track professors about the disparity between the possibilities shown through a technology-rich graduate education in rhetoric and composition and the reality of teaching 21st century literacies without computers, needed software, or sometimes both. Lanette moved to a university enthusiastic about her background in Computers and Writing, but one with one computer classroom to serve all technical writing classes and little to no possibility for the sixty or so composition classes or graduate classes in writing theory. Liz initially moved to a university with a strong engineering focus, but one that did not extend its love of technology necessarily to arts and letters, even for technical writing. For both, it was a matter of limited resources. We found our work-arounds, and knew there were potential solutions for teacher-scholars willing to try something out. In the end, our efforts meant time worked in our favor. Lanette’s department is now in a renovated building and because of her willingness to work with existing technology and to “make things work” by scheduling her writing classes across campus in other computer classrooms intended for the sciences, she was included in the planning for the new building. The current building has Crestron units in all classrooms and even better, four computer classrooms, two dedicated to composition, and all with a rotation schedule that includes all writing classes. Augment that with campus-wide wifi, students with portable technology beyond laptops such as smartphones and iPads, and much more is possible. Liz is now at one of the few laptop campuses in the nation. However, even with more technology than most campuses, many undergraduates were in the camp of have-nots in their K-12 institutions; and Liz is finding that her role as graduate faculty is in training her students much like she was trained in her doctoral program, with the addition of adding the possibility of her students being have-nots when they leave the campus. We believe that our situations are far from unique and others agree. Join us in celebrating their ideas for 21st century composition when the funds for technology are not forthcoming, and through this special issue, listen in while they share their strategies as well. We lead off this issue with a look at enforced technology, or, what to do when your university mandates a paradigm that is antithetical to your field’s best practices. In “A Pedagogy of Resistance Toward Plagiarism Detection Technologies,” Stephanie Vie argues for a pedagogy of resistance, noting that the commodification of student writing and the codification of the singular-author view that these technologies promote do so at a price: collaborative writing, the mainstay of social software as well as many work environments, is ignored to the point of being delegitimized. She concludes that “if we are forced into the circular logic of avoiding plagiarism/catching plagiarists/punishing plagiarism and prizing singular authorship above all other forms, then we risk failing to find the ability to break free and move beyond to more challenging modes of writing that rely on community.” Next, Erin Karper details a situation similar to our inspiration for this issue—that of a new tenure-track instructor coming from a technology-rich environment to one that if not actively hostile, may revel a bit in technology avoidance. Her journey may not have started well, but it concludes with specific strategies for teaching with/out technologies—and 8755-4615/$ – see front matter © 2013 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2013.02.001
2
Deploying 21st Century Writing on the Economic Frontlines / Computers and Composition 30 (2013) 1–2
even though challenges persist, her willingness to continue answering why we need computers to teach writing is a winning strategy for a changing campus. For online writing teachers, technology is a given, although which technologies and what options vary widely. In “Re-embodying Online Composition: Ecologies of Writing in Unreal Time and Space” Ken Gillam and Shannon K. Wooden resist the impulse to simply accept that writing is taught online and continue to question how we can best use this environment. They focus on the concept of “social situatedness” and through it, how to “create high-functioning learning communities in an otherwise disembodied online learning space, not by upgrading our technological tools but by pedagogically guiding learners toward ecological and productively collaborative interactions with one another.” Of course, besides examining current practices, hard economic times are a good time to reexamine past practices and perhaps revive and renew them. John B. Killoran details the history of audio feedback in “Reel-to-Reel Tapes, Cassettes, and Digital Audio Media: Reverberations from a Half-Century of Recorded-Audio Response to Student Writing” and asks why it remains a marginal feedback process given its effectiveness and strong student support. Given the current popularity of podcasts and the wide availability of inexpensive smartphone/iPad apps that allow audio commentary on documents such as iAnnotate, perhaps its time has come. We would certainly be remiss without some consideration of the actual space where we teach writing. Susan MillerCochran and Dana Gierdowski in “Making Peace with the Rising Costs of Writing Technologies: Flexible Classroom Design as a Sustainable Solution” concentrates on sustainability and the tenuous balance between budget and need. Their solution was a flexible room model that ended up being more cost-effective than traditional computer classrooms with fixed designs. The statistics Miller-Cochran and Gierdowski provide should assist others who wish to promote a similar, sustainable plan. Finally, the topic of assessment is ongoing for our field, and the choice between proprietary, open source, and custom portfolio infrastructures is a particular dilemma for Writing Program Administrators, but is also one of keen interest for writing instructors “on the frontlines.” J.S. Dunn, Jr., Carrie Luke, and David Nassar lend insight into the decision-making process, one that can be complicated by institutional pressures and cost constraints. “Valuing the Resources of Infrastructure: Beyond From-Scratch and Off-the-Shelf Technology Options for Electronic Portfolio Assessment in First-Year Writing” shows how an under-resourced college writing program faced its technology by using the expertise of its instructors to develop an in-house system for electronic portfolios. How we deploy 21st century writing in the classroom needs to take into consideration how our students compose outside the walls. We as techno-rhetors may be on the economic frontlines, but we are also on the cusp, the thin leading edge of what is and what will be for composing now and for the future. This issue is dedicated to those who refuse to know it can’t be done. Lanette Cadle Elizabeth A. Monske
Computers and Composition 30 (2013) 1–2
Deploying 21st Century Writing on the Economic Frontlines This special issue examines the disconnect between theory and reality for techno-rhetors moving from technologyrich graduate training to the less-than ideal setting normal for most new instructors. These are interesting times, and funding for education does not appear to look rosier in the future, a prediction most unfortunate. Rather than surrender to the economic stress about how much more must now be done with less, the editors for this special issue chose to accentuate the positive, which is the infinite intelligence and flexibility of the Computers and Writing community in dealing with hard times. The articles included provide, address, and explore pedagogical strategies in addition to underlying theories from teachers on these frontlines who have found ways to work technology successfully into their classes even when funds or equipment are lacking. The issue began as conversations between two new tenure-track professors about the disparity between the possibilities shown through a technology-rich graduate education in rhetoric and composition and the reality of teaching 21st century literacies without computers, needed software, or sometimes both. Lanette moved to a university enthusiastic about her background in Computers and Writing, but one with one computer classroom to serve all technical writing classes and little to no possibility for the sixty or so composition classes or graduate classes in writing theory. Liz initially moved to a university with a strong engineering focus, but one that did not extend its love of technology necessarily to arts and letters, even for technical writing. For both, it was a matter of limited resources. We found our work-arounds, and knew there were potential solutions for teacher-scholars willing to try something out. In the end, our efforts meant time worked in our favor. Lanette’s department is now in a renovated building and because of her willingness to work with existing technology and to “make things work” by scheduling her writing classes across campus in other computer classrooms intended for the sciences, she was included in the planning for the new building. The current building has Crestron units in all classrooms and even better, four computer classrooms, two dedicated to composition, and all with a rotation schedule that includes all writing classes. Augment that with campus-wide wifi, students with portable technology beyond laptops such as smartphones and iPads, and much more is possible. Liz is now at one of the few laptop campuses in the nation. However, even with more technology than most campuses, many undergraduates were in the camp of have-nots in their K-12 institutions; and Liz is finding that her role as graduate faculty is in training her students much like she was trained in her doctoral program, with the addition of adding the possibility of her students being have-nots when they leave the campus. We believe that our situations are far from unique and others agree. Join us in celebrating their ideas for 21st century composition when the funds for technology are not forthcoming, and through this special issue, listen in while they share their strategies as well. We lead off this issue with a look at enforced technology, or, what to do when your university mandates a paradigm that is antithetical to your field’s best practices. In “A Pedagogy of Resistance Toward Plagiarism Detection Technologies,” Stephanie Vie argues for a pedagogy of resistance, noting that the commodification of student writing and the codification of the singular-author view that these technologies promote do so at a price: collaborative writing, the mainstay of social software as well as many work environments, is ignored to the point of being delegitimized. She concludes that “if we are forced into the circular logic of avoiding plagiarism/catching plagiarists/punishing plagiarism and prizing singular authorship above all other forms, then we risk failing to find the ability to break free and move beyond to more challenging modes of writing that rely on community.” Next, Erin Karper details a situation similar to our inspiration for this issue—that of a new tenure-track instructor coming from a technology-rich environment to one that if not actively hostile, may revel a bit in technology avoidance. Her journey may not have started well, but it concludes with specific strategies for teaching with/out technologies—and 8755-4615/$ – see front matter © 2013 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2013.02.001
2
Deploying 21st Century Writing on the Economic Frontlines / Computers and Composition 30 (2013) 1–2
even though challenges persist, her willingness to continue answering why we need computers to teach writing is a winning strategy for a changing campus. For online writing teachers, technology is a given, although which technologies and what options vary widely. In “Re-embodying Online Composition: Ecologies of Writing in Unreal Time and Space” Ken Gillam and Shannon K. Wooden resist the impulse to simply accept that writing is taught online and continue to question how we can best use this environment. They focus on the concept of “social situatedness” and through it, how to “create high-functioning learning communities in an otherwise disembodied online learning space, not by upgrading our technological tools but by pedagogically guiding learners toward ecological and productively collaborative interactions with one another.” Of course, besides examining current practices, hard economic times are a good time to reexamine past practices and perhaps revive and renew them. John B. Killoran details the history of audio feedback in “Reel-to-Reel Tapes, Cassettes, and Digital Audio Media: Reverberations from a Half-Century of Recorded-Audio Response to Student Writing” and asks why it remains a marginal feedback process given its effectiveness and strong student support. Given the current popularity of podcasts and the wide availability of inexpensive smartphone/iPad apps that allow audio commentary on documents such as iAnnotate, perhaps its time has come. We would certainly be remiss without some consideration of the actual space where we teach writing. Susan MillerCochran and Dana Gierdowski in “Making Peace with the Rising Costs of Writing Technologies: Flexible Classroom Design as a Sustainable Solution” concentrates on sustainability and the tenuous balance between budget and need. Their solution was a flexible room model that ended up being more cost-effective than traditional computer classrooms with fixed designs. The statistics Miller-Cochran and Gierdowski provide should assist others who wish to promote a similar, sustainable plan. Finally, the topic of assessment is ongoing for our field, and the choice between proprietary, open source, and custom portfolio infrastructures is a particular dilemma for Writing Program Administrators, but is also one of keen interest for writing instructors “on the frontlines.” J.S. Dunn, Jr., Carrie Luke, and David Nassar lend insight into the decision-making process, one that can be complicated by institutional pressures and cost constraints. “Valuing the Resources of Infrastructure: Beyond From-Scratch and Off-the-Shelf Technology Options for Electronic Portfolio Assessment in First-Year Writing” shows how an under-resourced college writing program faced its technology by using the expertise of its instructors to develop an in-house system for electronic portfolios. How we deploy 21st century writing in the classroom needs to take into consideration how our students compose outside the walls. We as techno-rhetors may be on the economic frontlines, but we are also on the cusp, the thin leading edge of what is and what will be for composing now and for the future. This issue is dedicated to those who refuse to know it can’t be done. Lanette Cadle Elizabeth A. Monske