Composition Conference 2009

The 2009 Arizona State University Composition Conference was held on Friday and Saturday, February 20-21, 2009, on the ASU Tempe campus. It was an outstanding success and met its objective of satisfying specific, previously identified faculty needs. This report discusses the conference participants, range of topics offered, feedback results, and the benefits of this conference for ASU both now and in the future.

We chose to hold this year’s conference on Friday afternoon/evening and Saturday because Writing Programs faculty had previously complained that workshops currently offered during the work week conflict with their teaching schedules or require special trips to campus for mere one-hour workshops. We designed this conference as a kind of one-stop shopping experience, so that faculty could choose to attend several sessions on topics they desired, mostly on the same day, and with no conflicts with their teaching schedules. Faculty also had expressed a need for opportunities to develop professional acquaintances with their peers, so we planned for such opportunities at our conference.

Presentation Abstracts

Concurrent Workshops 1

Secrets of Blackboard That Save Time for Those with Experience

Room: L1-30

Lead Presenter: Scott Hermanson

Members: Wendy M. King,

Ellen Kennedy Johnson

Facilitator: Judy Holiday

This hands-on session will explore strategies for saving time in the Blackboard environment, including

·         Organizing submissions into separate dropboxes for each assignment

·         Utilizing the Blackboard grade book and quiz functions

·         Assigning and evaluating online discussions

·         Determining the best Blackboard framework for each assignment

·         Copying materials from one class to another

Room: L1-10

Lead Presenter: Duane Roen

Facilitator: Laura Cruser

Participants will learn how to craft a teaching philosophy and other documents in a teaching portfolio.

Concurrent Workshops 2

Creating Simple Web Sites Using Google Sites

Room: L1-30

Lead Presenter: Bruce Matsunaga

Facilitator: Regina Clemens

This presentation provides instructors a walk-through on how to create a Google Sites web site for use as a class or personal site. Google sites are also an easy way to have students create an e-portfolio.

Developing a Curriculum Vita and Cover Letter

Room: L1-10

Lead Presenter: Duane Roen

Facilitator: Balbir Backhaus

Participants will learn how to craft a curriculum vitae, and a cover letter for the job application.

Professor Edward M. White

“Social Class and the Teaching of Writing”

Edward M. White (Ph.D. from Harvard University, 1960) has written or edited 13 books and about 100 articles or book chapters on writing, writing instruction, and writing assessment. In 2007, he co-edited (with a former student) his fifth textbook for college writing students, The Promise of America, and fully revised the fourth edition of his book for teachers, Assigning, Responding, Evaluating. His best-known books are Teaching and Assessing Writing, which won a Shaughnessey award from the Modern Language Association in 1994, and Assessment of Writing, an MLA research volume, in 1996.   After taking early retirement in 1997 as an emeritus professor of English at the CSU San Bernardino campus, where he was named “Outstanding Professor” in 1994, he joined the University of Arizona English department, where he continues to teach graduate courses in writing assessment, writing research, and writing program administration. Now in his 51st year of teaching, he is also rewriting Teaching and Assessing Writing for a third edition, working on another writing textbook, and—that supreme indulgence of the elderly—writing a memoir. 

7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.

Room: LL13

7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.

Room: LL10

Wendy M. King,

Chair of the 2009 ASU Composition Conference

Neal Lester,

Chair of the Department of English,

Presentation on First-year Composition

Sarah Duerden

Katherine Heenan

Camille Newton

Jackie Wheeler

Zachary Waggoner

For many students the two-semester requirement for First-Year Composition sometimes appears unreasonable, especially when it seems that the courses cover the same material and involve similar papers. We will discuss the problem and its ramifications for students and teachers.

Jon Drnjevic

As instructors and Faculty Associates rarely qualify for the various teaching awards offered at ASU, the English Department instituted an award program specifically for this group of teachers. The Teaching Awards Committee asked Instructors and Faculty Associates to submit a mini-lesson, a paper assignment, a group activity, or a peer review activity and four (4) selections were chosen for a $500 honorarium.

David Pegram: Evaluation/Analytical Comparison

Wendy M. King: Online Discussion Series

Marian Crotty: Definition Argument Mock Trial

Shavawn M. Berry: Writing Wiki Assignment

Susan S. Davis

Laura Cruser

Beyond Editing: Revision as Art and Power

Room: LL12

Lead Presenter: Steve Beatty

Members: Cornelia “Corri” Wells

Stephanie Downie Hummer

Facilitator: Catherine Rezza

This roundtable will address both theories and practical approaches of compelling revision, including strategies for student-teacher conferencing and small group peer review.

Same Coin, Different Sides: Distinguishing Between English 101 and English 102

Room: LL14

Lead Presenters: Sarah Duerden and Jackie Wheeler

Members: Katherine Heenan, Camille Newton, Zachary Waggoner

Facilitator: Leslie Chilton

We will explain the differences between English 101 and English 102, the objectives that should be met in each course, and the underlying rationale for each course. We will conclude by offering sample assignments and syllabisequences that fulfill the goals of each course.

Room: LL43

Lead Presenter: Ginny Simmon

Member: Lydia Lafaro, ASU Librarian

Facilitator: Sarah Fedirka

Learn new ways to take books out of the library. Forget peering through shelves and walking down aisles. Come to the ebrary.

Online Teaching: Plusses and Pitfalls

Room: LL45

Lead Presenter: Teryl Sands

Members: Mick Parsons, Elizabeth Lowry

Facilitator: James Cahill

Our presentation will focus on main advantages and disadvantages in teaching online writing courses including issues of development, technology, convenience, communication, workload, participation, and evaluation.

Interactive Learning with Technology across the (English) Disciplines

Room: LL47

Lead Presenter: Ebru Erdem

Members: Rosemarie Dombrowski,

Facilitator: Shavawn M. Berry

We plan to explore various definitions of “interactive learning” as well as a variety of methodological approaches including interactive lectures, interactive group work, and interactive student presentations. Additionally, we will outline the goals of the various technically-augmented activities and discuss how we measure their success in First Year Composition, technical writing, and literature courses.

Evaluating Student Writing: Cutting the Paper Load through Effective Assignment Design

Room: LL60

Lead Presenter: Edward M. White

Facilitator: Wendy M. King

We will discuss the “Heuristic for the Writer of Writing Assignments” on pages 7-8 of Assigning, Responding, Evaluating (available free from the Bedford/St. Martin’s rep at the conference today) and then consider various options for responding from chapter 3, particularly page 69.

Negotiating Language Differences in the Writing Classroom: A Workshop for All Writing Teachers

Room: LL02

Lead Presenter: Paul Kei Matsuda

Facilitator: David Cleveland

The presenter will discuss the implications of working with an increasingly diverse student population in Writing Programs courses and share strategies for negotiating language differences—both for teachers and students.

Noon to 1:00 p.m.

Room: LL13

Noon to 1:00 p.m.

Room: LL02

Dan Brendza

Room: LL12

Lead Presenter: Rossana Lhota

Members: Jeanne Simpson,

Mary Early

Facilitator: Judy Holiday

This interactive presentation will explain the mission and partnership of ASU’s Learning Support Services and the Writing Center, including their resources for faculty and student success. Participants will also be asked to consider new possibilities for the LSS and WC as resources for students and faculty.

Creative License: Sparking Our Students’ Imagination, Innovation, and Love for Language

Room: LL14

Lead Presenter: Shavawn M. Berry

Members: Amisha Patel, Heather Hoyt

Facilitator: Justin Sikes

Presentation will center ona paneldiscussion and interactivedemonstration of various creative writing techniques and approaches. Suitable for use in English 217 (and other creative writing courses), techniques include ideas such as the use of online writing portfolios, web logs, journals, free writing, visual rhetoric, original writing prompts, and thank you notes and acknowledgements between students for their course work. Audience participation is encouraged.

De-Centering Power Structures in Writing Classrooms

Room: LL43

Lead Presenter: Mandy Solomon

Member: Natalie Martinez

Facilitator: Balbir Backhaus

This presentation will focus on how de-centering power structures in the writing classroom can foster a rich, non-threatening, highly stimulating learning environment. We will discuss how developing writing assignments through the WPA Outcomes Statement can be utilized specifically for a learner-centered community.

Effective Peer Review: The Importance of Creative Dialogue

Room: LL 47

Lead Presenter: Ryan Skinnell

Members: Richard Hart, Bruce H. Glenn

Facilitator: Kent Nielsen

The three presenters look at three different options for creating dialogue as an integral part of peer review. All three presenters believe that such dialogue makes more effective peer review for everyone involved.

Room: LL60

Lead Presenter: Elle Wolterbeek

Member: Jennifer Waters

Facilitator: Julianne White

This presentation will focus on best practices for hybrid instruction, including examples of best practices and handouts to provide direction and resources.

Student Group Work in Online Environments

Room: LL02

Lead Presenter: Steve Puklin

Members: Wendy M. King, Ginny Simmon

Facilitator: Mick Parsons

Presentations on successful group work with online students and how the online environment affects student interaction

Room: LL12

Lead Presenter: Jan Kelly

Members: Susan Flores, Bruce H. Glenn

Facilitator: Alana Brussin

In this interactive workshop, participants will engage in activities and learn about assignments designed to assist students in generating and evaluating arguments for particular audiences.

Audience is Not an Afterthought: Teaching Writers to Address Readers

Room: LL14

Lead Presenter: Carol S. O’Shea

Members: Adelheid Thieme,

Jennifer Waters

Facilitator: Diana Bowling

The presenters will share their practical strategies for developing audience awareness in student writers enrolled in courses ranging from WAC101 to ENG302.

We Like to Move’ Em…Move’ Em: Interactive Lectures/Active Learning in the Composition Classroom

Room: LL43

Lead Presenter: Michael Pfister

Members: Thomas Skeen, Natalie Martinez

Facilitator: Richard Hart

Our focus is centered on the use of emerging digital technologies and active learning strategies as a means of facilitating writing practice in the composition classroom at Arizona State

Student Evaluations: Raising Scores, Understanding Departmental Usage

Room: LL 47

Lead Presenter: Judith Van

Member: Zachary Waggoner

Facilitator: Ryan Skinnell

The presenters will discuss strategies that improve student evaluation scores and enhance pedagogical goals.

Evaluating Student Writing: Cutting the Paper Load through Effective Assignment Design

Room: LL60

Lead Presenter: Edward M. White

Facilitator: Ryan Muckerheide

We will discuss the “Heuristic for the Writer of Writing Assignments” on pages 7-8 of Assigning, Responding, Evaluating (available free from the Bedford/St. Martin’s rep at the conference today) and then consider various options for responding from chapter 3, particularly page 69.

Room: LL02

Lead Presenter: Amisha Patel

Members: Jan Kelly, James Procaccini

Facilitator: Mary Early

Changing notions of literacy and changes in culture open up bright possibilities for innovative teaching in the composition classroom; we’ll introduce strategies that compliment the texts and course plans you already use.

Effective Use of Journaling/ Writer’s Notebooks

Room: LL12

Lead Presenter: Jennifer L. Clifton

Members: Heather Hoyt, Laura Walsh

Facilitator: Susan S. Davis

This presentation will address misconceptions about journaling as it relates to teaching writing and introduce attendees to ways they can effectively use writer's notebooks with their students for different purposes during different stages of writing.

Room: LL14

Lead Presenter: Susan Flores

Members: Nicole Khoury,

Thomas Skeen

Facilitator: Julianne White

We will be discussing effective assignments, their objectives and outcomes. The importance of audience and research, and what students should learn from the assignments

Room: LL43

Lead Presenter: Dan Brendza

Facilitator: Alana Brussin

Join Dan Brendza in an informal discussion of classroom paradigms and the successful integration of structure and process.

Room: LL 47

Lead Presenter: Elle Wolterbeek

Members: Stephanie Downie Hummer,

Rita Hendin

Facilitator: Melinda Sims

This presentation will focus on best practices and recent research in using student groups and group conferencing in the teaching of composition. 

Evaluating Student Writing: Cutting the Paper Load through Effective Assignment Design

Room: LL60

Lead Presenter: Edward M. White

Facilitator: Nick White

We will discuss the “Heuristic for the Writer of Writing Assignments” on pages 7-8 of Assigning, Responding, Evaluating (available free from the Bedford/St. Martin’s rep at the conference today) and then consider various options for responding from chapter 3, particularly page 69.

2:50 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. in the last session

3:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Meet in the LL lobby at 3:15 p.m. or by the pendulum in the Lobby of Physical Sciences F-wing at 3:20 p.m.

Feedback

The response to the conference has been overwhelmingly positive as evidenced in the following excerpts from feedback surveys:

•  “Thank you for this opportunity to have these important conversations with fellow English professionals.”
• “It was great! Good presentations that will help me in the classroom. Thanks!”
• “I wasn’t sure if I wanted to go to ‘another’ teacher conference. However, what I got out of this conference will change what I do in the classroom next week at Mesa Community College.”
• “This conference is such a wonderful way to build community among all of us, but especially for Instructors. Thank you!!”
• “You surpassed the high quality of last year’s conference. I look forward to next year.”
• “It was great—Keep doing this!”

Faculty expressed particular appreciation for Dr. White’s presentations. When we requested suggestions for a keynote speaker for next year, numerous faculty requested we ask Dr. White to return again. His sessions were quite popular and were listed by most faculty as some of the most beneficial sessions they attended.

From examining the feedback surveys this year, we can begin planning for next year’s conference. Some important data to consider are:

• 81% of respondents attended more than half of the Saturday sessions
• 34% attended the Friday sessions
• 92% felt that the conference was a good length (with many of the other 8% hoping we will make it longer on Saturday next year and move the keynote address to Saturday morning)
• 88% stated that continuing with the complimentary meals in future conferences is of high importance for them, with 19% expressing a desire especially for lunch.

We extended limited invitations to faculty outside ASU this year in an effort to gauge the interest they might have for learning from the experts at ASU. We were impressed with the relatively large turnout from the greater Arizona community, especially in light of the fact that we gave them only 1-2 week’s notice. We think that in the future, this conference should expand even further to include more such invitations and a greater lead time so additional parties can plan to attend. With the positive momentum coming from participants this year, we anticipate a significantly larger turnout next year.