Posted in CCCC 2013, Politics of Remediation, Race, Scholarship of Basic Writing, What's New in Basic Writing

Scott Lyons: “American Indian Writers and the Question of “Assimilation”

Scott Lyons began by confessing that he does not consider himself an expert in Basic Writing. Interestingly, his work seemed absolutely crucial to the conversations we’ve been having all day on teaching basic writing students.

He writes about his experience teaching at a tribal college in Minnesota. He was the first PhD to be hired at the college to teach writing. There were four full-time instructors. There were three Ojibwe teachers and one white teacher. Because of his degree (and not his experience, he assures us), Lyons quickly became the head of the department. One day, the white teacher, one of the best at the school, came to him in tears. She said that she felt like a bad person. She wanted students “to be themselves.” She wanted them to be “the sovereign people that they are.” The teacher said she “did not want to be a part of their assimilation.”

Lyons acknowledges this teacher’s concerns and does so by showing some of the black and white images of assimilation that many of us are familiar with. Lyons included a “before and after” picture of American Indians in schools of assimilation. The “after” photo has been noticeably lightened. The clear message is that assimilated students actually have lighter skin.

The whole story is not just about assimilation though. There were prominent arguments for annihilation as well. Lyons shared newspaper excerpts from notable writers, like author L. Frank Baum (writer of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz), who wrote that it was “better that they die.” Lyons demonstrates that these writers seemed to simultaneously revere the American Indian culture, while they depicted them as vanishing tragically *but necessarily.*

Lyons makes the distinction between cultural assimilation and economic assimilation. Cultural assimilation usually includes religious assimilation to Christianity. However, economic assimilation is a crucial part of the story too. When it comes to economic assimilation, American Indians have been historically exiled. Lyons argues that progressive pedagogy understands economic assimilation and the role education plays in that process.

Lyons ends this talk by returning to the image of the teacher crying in his office, the teacher who does not want to be complacent in the assimilation of her students. Lyons ends by making the following points. If you want to help Indians engage “settler culture,” you need to not see yourself as a bad person. “Rez English” is not useful because the market that we share does not use that language. Lyons states that teachers should point out that English is an American Indian language now. Finally, he encouraged teachers to emphasize the importance of studying the writing of American Indians.

from the panel “Race, Language, and Access: Possible Futures of Basic Writing”

Moderators: Steve Lamos & Wendy Olson

Featuring: Scott Lyons, Beatrice Mendez-Newman, Min-Zhan Lu, & Shirley Faulker-Springfield

~ Sheri Rysdam, UVU

Advertisements
Posted in CCCC 2013, Politics of Remediation, Scholarship of Basic Writing, Uncategorized, What's New in Basic Writing

At “Basic Writing and Race: A Symposium”

Here are some of my thoughts on Victor Villanueva’s talk, “Toward a Political Economy of Basic Writing Programs.”

After earning my PhD at WSU with Victor Villanueva as my mentor, I still don’t tire of hearing this work. It is his way of engaging an audience that probably resulted in his talk ending with a standing ovation. He drew chills, goose bumps, and, no doubt, renewed, re-inspired, and motivated his audience to think about their programs and their teaching in new and innovative ways.

Basic Writing programs are almost always in crisis. Sound familiar? It seems like every few years, a basic writing program has to argue for its existence. That is because, Villanueva states, crisis is a necessity of capitalism. Remedial writing programs are also a product of capitalism.

Basic Writing exists because *institutions* too often fail to educate women, people of color, and the poor. Too often, Basic Writing students are viewed as the ones with the problem. Villanueva encourages us to remember that basic writing students are not the problem. The problem is a function of capitalism, which requires an exploitable class of people. Race, class, and gender have been the most exploitable population, and it is not mistake that Basic Writing programs are largely populated with these people.

Villanueva reminds us that BW is not in need of remedies or in need of development. There is no illness. There is no cognitive dysfunction. We must stop thinking about our students in terms of deficit and needing to be “prepared” for classes beyond basic writing.

Instead, writing needs to happen across the curriculum. Teachers and administrators of basic writing need to be in conversation with other disciplines to allow these writers to exist within the larger university—not exiled to their remedial classes. Part of this work means giving these students college credit for the work that they do so that the exploitation of paying for credits that do not count toward a degree does not continue. This is an especially crucial aspect of supporting our poor and working-class students.

According to Villanueva, if Basic Writing is going to move outside of the deficit model, where the teacher/missionary/savior “converts the natives,” basic writing must “enter in to a dialogue across the disciplines” so that students see their community, see themselves as a crucial part of the university, and understand how to gain access.

Of course, Villanueva’s talk was far more nuanced in addressing issues of assimilation, enculturation, and identity. These are some of the quick points and observations that stand out to me.

I cannot think of a more energizing way to kick start CCCC 2013! Stay tuned! ~ Sheri Rysdam, UVU

Posted in CCCC 2013, Scholarship of Basic Writing, What's New in Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?

Quick Guide to Basic Writing Sessions at CCCC 2013

CCCC 2013

The Council on Basic Writing presents its annual quick guide to Basic Writing sessions and workshops to help you connect with other Basic Writing faculty at the 2013 CCCC Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada. This year’s CCCC 2013 convention is incredibly exciting with many, many Basic Writing offerings and its own Basic Writing strand (hooray!).

Our thanks to this year’s CCCC program chair, Howard Tinberg for his visible and vocal support of Basic Writing.

This list was compiled by J. Elizabeth Clark from submissions on our CBW-L listserv using information and descriptions provided by the presenters.

Thanks to all of you for crowd-sourcing this guide. Happy CCCC 2013! 

You can download a Microsoft Word version of the information in this post by clicking this link: CCCC 2013 BW Sessions.

Pre-Conference Workshops:

MW.03: Expanding the Conversation: Graduate Students, Contingent Faculty, and the Future of Basic Writing

W01: TYCA Presents: Developmental Education in the Two-Year College, a Place of Possibility

W06: Council on Basic Writing 2013: Basic Writing and Race: A Symposium

CCCC 2013 Regular Sessions:

A.17: There’s Nothing Basic about Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 6, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 10:30 AM – 11:45 AM

Join us for a face-to-face exploration of major issues facing Basic Writing faculty and students. This roundtable discussion is the culmination of month-long asynchronous dialogue highlighting issues in Basic Writing.

Chair: John McKinnis Buffalo State College
Co-Chair: Rochelle Rodrigo Old Dominion University

Speakers:

Debra Berry, College of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas – Teacher Preparation
and Professional Development

J. Elizabeth Clark, LaGuardia Community College, CUNY – Teaching with
Technology

Elaine Jolayemi, Ivy Tech College – Who Are Basic Writers?

Leigh Jonaitis, Bergen Community College – Who Are Basic Writers?

Marisa Klages, LaGuardia Community College – Teacher Preparation &
Professional Development

Carla Maroudas, Mt. San Jacinto Community College – Student Placement
Amy Edwards Patterson, Moraine Park Technical College – Day-to-Day Life
in the Classroom

Ilene Rubenstein, College of the Desert – Academic Skills/Writing Centers

A.33: What Works: New Approaches in the Basic Writing Classroom
Location: Riviera, Skybox 205, 2nd floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 10:30 AM – 11:45 AM

21st century pathways into the basic writing classroom that includes innovative methods to initiate as models for integrative learning.

Speakers:

Anita August – We Need to Talk about Student X: ‘Situating’ Visual Literacy in the Basic Writing Curriculum

Heather Camp, Minnesota State University, Mankato – Revisiting Writing-about-Writing in the Basic Writing Classroom

Susan Gebhardt, Burns Norwalk Community College – Using Invention Techniques with Community College Basic Composition Students

C.03: Public Access, Public Work: A Case Study for Multiple Basic Writing Pilots
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 105, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 1:45 PM – 3:00 PM

Chair: Stacy Day Penn State University-Abington

Speakers:

Stacy Day, Penn State University-Abington – The English Enhancement Pilot: A Narrative of Development, Implementation, and Assessment

Nicole McClure, Penn State University-Abington – Diverse Learners in Digital Spaces: Developing Supplemental Online Instruction for Basic Writers

Karen Weekes, Penn State University-Abington – One University, Demographically Dispersed

C.26: Making the Personal Public: Storytelling as Academic Discourse
in College Composition
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 207, Second Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 1:45 PM – 3:00 PM

This panel examines narrative and storytelling from three perspectives: the basic writing classroom, the first-year student, and theoretical frameworks.

Speakers:

Amanda Athon – Storytelling and Basic Writing

D1: The Go-To Place for Basic Writing–Two-Year Colleges
Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 5, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 3:15 PM – 4:30 PM

Chair: Patrick Sullivan
Manchester Community College, CT

Speakers:

Jennifer Swartout, Heartland Community College, Normal IL
Three Rivers – Merging Scholarship on Community Colleges, Basic Writing and Developmental Education

Carolyn Calhoon-Dillahunt, Yakima Valley Community College, Yakima, WA
Basic Writing in the Two-Year College—Mission Possible

Lynn Quitman Troyka, Queensborough Community College, CUNY, New York, NY
CCCC’s Stance toward BW and Two-Year Colleges

D.07: Approximating the University: Novices Practicing Knowledge in the Basic Writing Classroom

Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 7, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 3:15 PM – 4:30 PM

Chair: Karen Gocsik, Dartmouth College

Speakers:

Laura Braunstein, Dartmouth College – Entering the Conversation: How Sources Support and Impede Learning

Karen Gocsik ,Dartmouth College – Assembling Knowledge: How Novice Writers Practice Knowing

Cynthia Tobery, Dartmouth College – Writing Together: How Collaboration Enhances (and Limits) Knowledge Construction

D.28: Concurrent Literacies: Digital Literacy and Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Grande Ballroom H, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 3:15 PM – 4:30 PM

Chair: Linda Howell, University of North Florida

Speakers:

Rachael Jordan, CSU Northridge – Engaging in Digital Public Space: Facebook & Basic Writing Students

Pegeen Reichert Powell, Columbia College Chicago – Low Tech Means to High Tech Ends: Teaching Digital Writing in the Basic Writing Classroom

Lauren Williams, CUNY Bronx Community College – Rethinking Basic Writing for a Digital Future: Replacing Assimilation with an Agenda of Empowerment

E.02: The Thin and Imaginary Border between Remedial and Degree-Credit Composition: Using Multiple Measures to Assess Student Readiness for College Reading and Writing

Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 103, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 4:45 PM – 6:00 PM

Chair: Holly Hassel, University of Wisconsin Marathon County

Speakers:

Joanne Giordano, University of Wisconsin Colleges – Ready or Not: The Inaccuracy of Standardized Tests in Placing Students in Remedial Courses

Holly Hassel, University of Wisconsin Marathon County – Using Multiple Measures to Assess Student Readiness

Cassandra Phillips, University of Wisconsin-Waukesha – Ready to Write: Multiple Measures and Learning the Writing Process

E.07: Basic Writer as Lightening Rod, Rosetta Stone, and Crucible: Access, Accountability, Hispanic-Serving Institutions, and Texas
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 104, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 4:45 PM – 6:00 PM

Chair: Susan Wolff Murphy, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi

Speakers:

Chimene Burnett, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi – Institutional Identity and the Basic Writer

Michelle Garza, San Antonio College – (Re)Evaluating the Public: An Examination of Current Approaches to the Teaching of Writing and Argument

Chelsea Mikulencak, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi – Evaluation of a Basic Writing Program

Susan Wolff Murphy, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi – Evaluation of a Basic Writing Program

E.13: Social Connectedness and Student Support: Enhancing Success and Retention in the Transition to College-Ready
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 110, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 4:45 PM – 6:00 PM

Chair: Erin Lehman Ivy Tech Community College Columbus/Franklin

Speakers:

Hope Parisi, Kingsborough Community College/ CUNY – Competing and Converging Rhetorics: A Writing Tutorial for Taking a Student Support Services and Basic Writing Collaboration Public

Lynn Shelly, Indiana University of Pennsylvania – Marginality and Mattering: Basic Writing as Public Work

Zandree Stidham, University of New Mexico – Los Alamos – This Is Why We Leave. This Is Why We Stay: Forces Impacting the Trajectory of Transitioning Developmental Students

TSIG 04: The Council on Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 107, First Floor
Time: Thursday, 3/14 from 6:30 PM – 7:30 PM

This meeting of the Council on Basic Writing (CBW) SIG will provide networking opportunities for basic writing faculty. The CBW mission statement and charter will also be discussed. The Innovations Award and the Travel Award recipients will also be honored.

F.01: Basic Writing, Rhetorical Education, and Civic Engagement
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 201, Second Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 8:00 AM – 9:15 AM

Chair: Emily Walters University of Dayton

Speakers:

Jonathan Bush, Western Michigan University – Connecting to Community: Place-Based Pedagogy and the Developmental Writing Classroom

Bridget Ann Fahey, St. Ambrose University – The Role of Rhetoric in Basic Writing

Derek Handley, Community College of Allegheny County – Basic Writing and Conversations within the Community

F.25: Occupying the Language of Remediation: From CSUSB to Deborah Brandt to The Hunger Games
Location: Riviera Hotel, Grande Ballroom H, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 8:00 AM – 9:15 AM

Chair: Esther Gutierrez, California State University, San Bernardino

Speakers:

Francesca Astiazaran, California State University, San Bernardino
Sonia Castaneda, California State University, San Bernardino
Robert Diaz, California State University, San Bernardino
Brisa Galindo, California State University, San Bernardino
Gina Hanson, California State University, San Bernardino
Carol Haviland, California State University, San Bernardino
Sara Scotten, California State University, San Bernardino
Arturo Tejada, Jr., California State University, San Bernardino
DeShonna Wallace, California State University, San Bernardino

F.28: The Work of Scholarship: Hermeneutics in Public and Institutional Arguments on Basic Writing
Location: Riviera, Grand Ballroom B
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 8:00 AM – 9:15 AM

Public and institutional discourses on Basic Writing and basic writers often center on policy initiatives addressing economics, efficiency, standardization, and testing. A cursory glance at the scholarship of BW reveals vastly different foci within the field. This session will explore that scholarship by revealing four different avenues of interpretation within BW that researchers might use to rewrite the ways public and institutional policy affect the practice of the BW classroom.

Chair: Hannah Ashley, West Chester University

Speakers:

Karen Uehling, Boise State University, ID – Assessment, Placement, and Access: Framing Arguments from Local and National Histories

William Lalicker, West Chester University – Agency through Assessment: Developing a Basic Writing Program Strength Quotient

Michael Hill, Henry Ford Community College – The Work of Philosophical Argument in an Age of Mechanical Assessment

Abby Nance, Gardner-Webb University – A Tale of Two Classrooms: Practicing Trauma-Sensitive Placement

G.01: The Accelerated Learning Program: Deepening the Teaching of Writing to Basic Writers
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 202, Second Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 9:30 AM – 10:45 AM

The Accelerated Learning Program at the Community College of Baltimore County as taken the national spotlight as a model in acceleration for basic writers. In the ALP, students who have placed into a non-credit bearing basic writing course are mainstreamed into a credit-bearing English composition course with twelve other composition students. ALP students are therefore concurrently enrolled in two English courses that meet consecutively and are taught by the same faculty member. After attending the English composition course, ALP students proceed as a cohort to another classroom where the basic writing section is taught in a workshop format that supports the students’ work in English 101. The presentation will also describe the program at Georgia Gwinnett College, how ALP is tailored to fit their needs and results after 1 year.

Chair: Linda De La Ysla, Community College of Baltimore County

Speakers:

Linda De La Ysla, Community College of Baltimore County – ALP at CCBC

Christine W. Heilman, Georgia Gwinnett College – ALP at GGC

H.01: Perspectives on the History and Future of Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Grande Ballroom A, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

This panel will offer perspectives on the history and possible futures of basic writing from scholars whose work has focused on this field’s social, material, and institutional histories. At this important juncture in our educational history—when access is threatened by economic conditions as well as misinformed perceptions of who and what basic writing is, and can be—this panel aims to provide a long view of the important moments in basic writing’s history, particularly those that portend for its future.

Chair: Kelly Ritter, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Speakers:

Andrea Abernathy Lunsford, Stanford University – What’s in a Name: The Development of Basic Writing

George Otte, The City University of New York – Anything But Basic

Mary Soliday, San Francisco State University – Where We Were Is Where We Could Be

H.08: Digital Media and Basic Writing: Enhancing the Work of Composition
Location: Riviera Hotel, Top of the Riviera North, Monaco Tower, 24th Floor
Time: Friday, March 15 from 11:00 AM -12:15 PM

These speakers will argue that if we are to truly reinvigorate our commitment to assist all writers, we must teach our basic writers not only how to write, but also how to do school. One means by which we can accomplish this work is through a digital pedagogy which teaches students the tools they will employ in their classes and their lives outside the classroom. Digital media applications can help students learn to be more attentive to the rhetorical situations of composing, gain authority over their own writing, better understand the role of genre conventions, and transition from basic writing to first-year writing.

Chair: Sara Webb-Sunderhaus, Indiana-Purdue Fort Wayne (IPFW)

Speakers:
Nancy Pine, Columbus State Community College – “But I’m Just Not Good With Technology”: From Resistance to Empowerment in Basic Writing Courses

Catherine Braun, The Ohio State University at Marion – Encouraging Inquiry/Challenging Formalism: Remix Assignments in a Basic Writing Class

Sara Webb-Sunderhaus, Indiana-Purdue Fort Wayne (IPFW) – “A Narrative Can Be Explored in More Ways than One”: Digital Media and the Transition From Basic to First-Year Writing

H.16: Toward Consensus: Basic Writing Pedagogy in Community Colleges, from Faculty Development to Active Learning
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 109, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

Are there any core pedagogical principles upon which teachers of basic writing in community colleges can agree? Drawing from recent research in basic writing instruction and our work as teacher-scholars, we suggest that principles based upon general consensus in the field and the experiences of classroom teachers can ground the practice of basic writing.

Speakers:

Jamey Gallagher, Community College of Baltimore County – Faculty Development as Consensus Building

Peter Adams, Community College of Baltimore County – Thinking Our Way Toward a Pedagogy for Basic Writing

Michelle Zollars, Patrick Henry Community College – Transforming Colleges and Classrooms through Active Cooperative Learning

H.18: Politics, Basic Writing, and the CSU System
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 111, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

Chair: KC Culver University of Miami

Speakers:

Mathew Gomes, Michigan State University – Foreign Investments: International Student Recruitment and the Modern Utility of Remediation in the CSU System

Brenda Helmbrecht, California Polytechnic State University – Still on the Front Lines: The Battle to Protect Students from a ‘Remedial’ Debate

Dan Melzer, CSU Sacramento – Ending Remediation: A Critical Discourse Analysis

I.07: Reacting, Rallying, Re-imagining: Full-Fledged University Students, Basic Writers No More
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 103, First Floor
Time: Friday ,3/15 from 12:30 PM – 1:45 PM

Chair: Don Kraemer, California State Polytechnic University

Speakers:
John Edlund, California State Polytechnic University, Ponoma – Reacting, Rallying, Re-imagining: On Stretching a First-Year Composition Program

Kristy Hodson, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona – Reacting, Rallying, Re-imagining: On Teaching a Stretched First-Year Composition Course

Leonard Vandegrift, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona – Reacting, Rallying, Re-imagining: On Supporting a Stretched First-Year Composition Program

J.04: Legitimizing Basic Writers: A Public Conversation
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 105, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM

Chair: Carolyn Ostrander Syracuse University

Speakers: Deborah Marrott, Utah Valley University – (More) Public Conversations about Writing and Literacy: Renewing the Call for Student-Present Research in Basic Writing

Dawn Terrick, Missouri Western State University – From Private to Public, from Marginal to Mainstream: Legitimizing the Work of the Basic Writing Student

J. 16: Trends in Accelerated Learning Programs
Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 4, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 2:00 PM-3:15 PM

Chair: Robert Miller, The Community College of Baltimore County

Speakers:
Robert Miller, The Community College of Baltimore County – The Creation of the Website and the Process of Gathering Information

Cheryl Scott, The Community College of Baltimore County – A General Overview of the Accelerated Learning Program at CCBC and Nationally

Monica Walker, The Community College of Baltimore County – An Analysis of the Results Gathered from the Collected Data

J. 34: Troubling Placement in Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 5, First Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM

Chair: Sarah Kirk, University of Alaska Anchorage

Speakers:

Sarah Kirk, University of Alaska Anchorage – Tracking Student Success: Evaluating a Local Writing Sample as an Additional Placement Tool for Basic Writing Students

Ashley Ludewig, University of Louisville – (Re)Investigating Writing Apprehension as a Placement Tool: A Qualitative Exploration of Writing Apprehension with First-Year, At-Risk Writers

Sean Molloy, Hunter College, CUNY – ‘Caught in the Net of Numbers’: How Mina Shaughnessy Validated High-Stakes Writing Course Exit Tests

Keith Rhodes, Grand Valley State University – Own Your Own Placement: Self-Efficacy and the Public Face of Directed Self-Placement

J.37: Fostering Reading Identity for Students in the Developmental Writing Classroom
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 202, Second Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 2:00 PM – 3:15 PM

Description for my presentation: This presentation will discuss the results of classroom experiments designed to help basic writing students become more proficient readers and writers of difficult texts through guided experiences with metacognition and revision as they engage in the reading process—reading their own writing and the writing of others.

Speakers:

Cheryl Hogue Smith, Kingsborough Community College, CUNY – Basic Writers as Basic Readers: Addressing Obstacles to Academic Literacy

Meghan Sweeney, University of Nevada, Reno – Fostering Reading Identity for Students in the Developmental Writing Classroom

Maureen McBride, University of Nevada, Reno – Fostering Reading Identity for Students in the Developmental Writing Classroom

K.28: Navigating the Academic Lingo: Language and Difference in Basic Writing
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 209, Second Floor
Time: Friday, 3/15 from 3:30 PM – 4:45 PM

Chair: Deborah Teague Florida State University

Speakers:

Mwangi Chege, University of Cincinnati–Blue Ash – Navigating the Terrain of Academic Discourse as an African American Basic Writer: Teachers as Co-Laborers by Adapting a Dialogic and Culturally Responsive Classroom Management Pedagogy Approach
Dhruba Neupane, University of Waterloo – Mainstreaming Basic Writing Today: Possibilities and Challenges

Meredith Singleton, University of Cincinnati – Exploring the Vernacular Literacy of Community College Students

Sarah Stanley, UAF – Tejada’s Whisper: Micro, Meso, and Macro Levels of a Parenthetical Limit Situation

L.31: Grading and Assessing Basic Writers
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 210, Second Floor
Time: Saturday, 3/16 from 9:30 AM – 10:45 AM

Speakers:

Kerry Lane, Joliet Junior College – Collect $521 and Pass

Wendy Swyt, Highline Community College – Transparency and Grading Contracts: The Work of College Readiness

Chris Vassett, Mesa Community College – A Public Implementation of the Writing Program Administrator’s Outcomes Statement in a Developmental Writing Course

M Session Digital Pedagogy Posters
Location: Top of Riveria–South
Time: Saturday, 3/16 from 9:30 AM – 10:45 AM

Speakers:

Amy Edwards Patterson, Moraine Park Technical College – Encouraging Digital Dexterity in Basic Writers

Lynn Reid, Farleigh Dickinson University – Encouraging Digital Dexterity in Basic Writers

Nicole Hancock, Southwestern Illinois University – Encouraging Digital Dexterity in Basic Writers

We will share two assignments designed to increase digital dexterity in basic writers—an online journal, meant to familiarize students with electronic ways of thinking, and digital literacy narratives to enhance rhetorical thinking. The team, representing a technical college, a community college, and a private university, will share interviews and student projects.

M.15: Class Confidence: Basic Writing, Early Start, and the Future of Remediation at Public Universities
Location: Riviera Hotel, Royale Pavilion 8, First Floor
Time: Saturday, 3/16 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

Chair: Tom Wilcox, California State University, Fullerton

Speakers:

Sheryl Fontaine, California State University, Fullerton – Learning the Etiquette of Academic Culture

Elizabeth Saur, California State University, Fullerton – Enforced Remediation and Reinforced Fears

Patrick Vallee, California State University, Fullerton – Say What? Understanding and Using Professor Feedback

Steve Westbrook, California State University, Fullerton – Remediation or Class Discrimination

M.19: Going Public through Partnership: Basic Writing as a Nexus for Transfer, Advocacy, and Activism
Location: Riviera Hotel, Capri 115, First Floor
Time: Saturday, 3/16 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

Heeding calls from student affairs scholars for academic and student affairs to work together, the speakers will describe their efforts to establish support networks for marginalized students in basic writing courses and to share responsibilities for student success with invested institutional partners. By focusing on student writing as a point of connection, basic writing teachers and administrators can draw on such partnerships on campus and beyond, as sources of support and as sites for students to invest in their writing.

Chair: Nicole MacLaughlin University of Notre Dame

Speakers:

Nicole MacLaughlin, University of Notre Dame – Reaching towards the Whole Student: Collaboration as an Essential Element of an Accelerated Approach to Basic Writing

Ann McNair, University of Southern Mississippi – Operation Advocacy: Partnerships for Fostering Student-Veterans’ Success and Activism in Writing

Paula Patch, Elon University – Better Together: Opportunities for Including Athletic Academic Advisors as Partners in the Teaching and Learning of Writing

M.20: Radical Reform: Changing Basic Writing through Basic Writing Teachers
Location: Riviera Hotel, Skybox 206, Second Floor
Time: Saturday, 3/16 from 11:00 AM – 12:15 PM

Speakers:

Shiloh Peters, Missouri State University – Teaching Writing IS a Second Language: How Second Language Acquisition Theory May Mitigate Instructor Bias

Jerry Stinnett, University of Oklahoma – Finding a New Flagpole: Print Literacy, Teaching Practices, and the Instructional Counterpublics of Basic Writing

 

Posted in Basic Writing Projects & Initiatives, CCCC 2013, Politics of Remediation, Professional Developmwnt, Publishing, Resources, Scholarship of Basic Writing, Social Media, Tech, What's New in Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?

Join Us In A Conversation About Basic Writing

Hi, everyone!

You are invited to join us in a conversation about Basic Writing! We’d love to hear your thoughts, ideas, experiences, and pedagogical approaches in teaching Basic Writing!

We hope you will join us to share resources, best practices, and to engage as a national community helping members respond to local issues.

This discussion follows up on last year’s roundtable at CCCC. As we did last year, we invite you to join both the asynchronous and synchronous conversations.

Join the conversation online: February 12, 2013 to March 13, 2013. Online conversations will be held on the Council on Basic Writing Facebook Page (https://www.facebook.com/groups/50538806660/).

Then, join us in person to continue the conversation at CCCC 2013: Session A.17, Thursday 3/14 10:30 AM – 11:45 a.m. There will also be an online option to join this session if you are not attending CCCC 2013.

THERE’S NOTHING BASIC ABOUT BASIC WRITING ONLINE TOPICS (CBW FACEBOOK PAGE): Everyone is invited to join in the conversation!

WHO ARE BASIC WRITERS?
Facilitated by Elaine Jolayemi, Ivy Tech and & Leigh Jonaitis, Bergen Community College
2/12/13-2/16/13

ACADEMIC SKILLS/WRITING CENTERS
Facilitated by Ilene Rubenstein, College of the Desert
2/17/13-2/21/13

TEACHING WITH TECHNOLOGY
Facilitated by J. Elizabeth Clark, LaGuardia Community College–CUNY
2/22/13-2/26/13

TEACHER PREPARATION & PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Co-Facilitated by Debra Berry, College of Southern Nevada & Marisa Klages, LaGuardia Community College–CUNY
2/27/13-3/3/13

STUDENT PLACEMENT
Facilitated by Carla Maroudas, Mt. San Jacinto Community College
3/4/13-3/8/13

DAY-TO-DAY LIFE IN THE CLASSROOM
Facilitated by Amy Edwards Patterson, Moraine Park Technical College
3/9/13-3/13/13

Hope to see you online or in person!

There’s Nothing Basic About Basic Writing!

Posted in CCCC 2012, Scholarship of Basic Writing

A.23 Basic Writers in Transition: A Developmental Process

This session intensively foregrounded the words and experiences of student writers navigating boundaries of academic writing. The researchers honored the students’ experiences and shared them in ways that reveal students developing agency and growing as writers.

Lori Brack & Mary Hammerbeck, “We Walk the Lines”

Brack and Hammerbeck discussed case studies of two students they pseudonymed as April and May, extensively quoting from these students’ reflections. May described how both teachers and peers take over a writer’s ideas, telling the student writer what to say, no matter what the writer’s original intention. April described trying to grasp the language of the classroom and reach others through it, rather than stay with a familiar language. Students in both cases lose authority over their own work in the writing classroom.

How can teachers consciously support this transition more effectively, so that students can adapt/refine a familiar language rather than learning a new one, and so that teachers can assist students to convey their own ideas rather than having the teacher take over or direct the student?

  • The student has to be actively constructing the rhetorical relationship.
  • Students should enter the discourse as researchers of their own language use.
  • Students should write for a practical, real, responding reader – not an abstraction.

3 Recommendations:

  1. Course readings should help students understand the possibilities of various literacies and identity constructions. Readings can help students see how others have positioned themselves in relation to academic discourse.
  2. Papers should have a known audience, such as an exchange between classrooms or an online community, to help basic writers learn from the responses of real readers.
  3. Assign projects that allow students to explore their own home languages as they are transitioning to academic discourse. This can be an interview/ethnographic project.

As one student wrote: “Although my writing has improved, my voice is still my voice, and I can hear it just as clearly today.”

Dawn Finley, “Using Text-Based Assignments to Build Student Confidence”

Finley saw lack of context for student writing assignments, as well as a high attrition rate, in BW and fycomp at her community college. She designed a new curriculum and a study based on the Daly-Miller instrument. She selected two students with very high apprehension for focused interviews.

Students read 3-5 articles every week and worked in small groups, conducting peer review conversations in writing. They got feedback about their ideas, as opposed to feedback about their writing mechanics. They read each others’ work at every class and got constant feedback.

Finley’s two case study students reported that their confidence rose with the intense practice, and their grades improved. Their writing apprehension scores dropped significantly.

Finley also reported that in her class overall, students’ reading responses as well as formal essays improved in part because of the constant feedback but also because students were reading constantly. She selected high-interest articles based on topics requested by the students.

Posted in Basic Writing Projects & Initiatives, CBW 2012, CCCC 2012, Fun!, Scholarship of Basic Writing, What's New in Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?

W7 The Accelerated Learning Program as an Evidence-Based Success Model

Peter Adams, Community College of Baltimore County; Heidi Johnsen, LaGuardia Community College; Michelle Zollars, Patrick Henry Community College; Jan Allen, Community College of Baltimore County

Jan Allen discussed some context for Developmental Education, including disappointing outcomes for students enrolled in developmental courses. There is significant pressure for students to earn degrees, and the overall financial crisis of our time. This is leading to threats to providing developmental education classes, reductions in the numbers of seats available.

Why do so many students drop out of developmental courses or fail to progress? Survey data at CCBC shows that the problem is NOT learning, but rather that “life happens” – legal, financial, transportation, health issues – and that students lose confidence because of these life issues.

At CCBC, the ALP gives students a choice at placement. Either they can take developmental writing separately, or they can take an “ALP section” in which they take developmental and 101 at the same time. They are in a 101 section of 20 students – 8 are  developmental, the rest are not. The 8 students take the developmental course with the same instructor in the period immediately following. In the second period, they have a workshop that supports the 101 class – answering questions, reviewing drafts, scaffolding the assignments. In addition, affective issues are addressed – how to succeed as a college student, solve problems that interfere with their progress. Because of the combination of classes, there is more time to address these additional issues and more ability to address individual needs.

Students have a much better attitude about being in ALP than in the regular developmental course. They are in a supportive community, they are getting credit for their 101 course and are engaging with students at the next higher level, their “pipeline” is shorter, and they are more likely to try the same model in their math classes if they succeed in the writing course.

Peter Adams mentioned that ALP is a combination of several other approaches including “stretch,” the studio model, and learning communities. Adams presented data showing that ALP has doubled pass rates in English 101, from 27% to over 60%. In English 102, pass rates increased even more. In credits earned after two years, twice as many ALP students had accumulated 30 credits. Adams commented that he does not think ALP creates better writers, but keeps them in college.

There has been a deliberate effort to scale up the size of ALP. It has grown dramatically at CCBC and also been instigated at 46 other campuses.

Michelle Zollars represents one of those other campuses. At Patrick Henry College in Virginia, she had to “tweak” ALP to get the program to fit the campus culture and gain acceptance from administrators, including alterations in class size and room arrangements, as well as credit hours. Several faculty attended the ALP Institute in order to allow ALP to scale up. Data show significant improvements in pass rates and retention. It’s cost-effective for the college even offering the small ALP section since students don’t drop out.

Zollars also described how ALP will be the model across the state of Virginia in the redesign of developmental English, in which reading and writing will be combined statewide.

Heidi Johnsen described implementation at LaGuardia, a large urban campus, where ALP students are also showing impressive gains in a context driven by placement and exit testing on CATW.

Peter Adams listed what seems to really make the difference with ALP – no matter what type of campus:

  1. Students are mainstreamed into comp – rather than being held back and demoralized by the stigma of developmental placement.
  2. Pipeline is shortened by one semester.
  3. Exposure to stronger students.
  4. Cohort spends more hours per week together.
  5. Meaningful context for the developmental course, since it’s concurrent.
  6. Small class size – should not be more than half of the 101 class.
  7. Attention to affective and life issues.
  8. Same instructor teaches ALP and comp.

Adams also commented on pedagogy for an accelerated classroom, advocating a “backward design” for curriculum development. In other words, what is the target course, and what happens there? This is what should happen in developmental writing. If developmental writing course looks like the fourth grade, it’s demoralizing. He also advocated for active learning and thinking skills in the developmental classroom. Adams commented about the integration of reading and writing as another significant goal he hopes to see taking more shape in ALP.

Faculty development is key to the success of ALP. Elements include workshops each semester, a 20-hour institute for new faculty, and ALPIN, the ALP Inquiry Network. ALPIN is an online community that supports conversations among faculty (using Drupal), structured around weekly posts by instructors, with comments following.

(Note: I put this presentation in the Fun! category, along with all the usual ones, because it was fun to hear these enthusiastic presenters talking about these magnificent successes. Plus, Michelle was hilarious.)

Posted in CBW 2012, CCCC 2012, History of Basic Writing, Politics of Remediation, Scholarship of Basic Writing

W.7 Gathered at the Gate: Basic Writing in Evidence

Our first speaker this morning is Bruce Horner, University of Louisville, “Re-locating Basic Writing.”

Horner reviewed a familiar-sounding situation – the struggle in which we fight for the same things over and over – reframing this in light of Alistair Pennycook’s argument that every new iteration is changed by its location in time and place.

BW’s tradition refuses to settle for fixed ideas of who can be taught, and how. Rather than using the difficulty students have as a reason to cast them aside, we use the difficulty productively, as a site of for creating new knowledge about reading and writing.

Basic writers and their teachers and programs are always located ideologically on the periphery of institutions. Basic writing can be re-located at the leading edge, instead, since it calls assumptions into question and brings on new insights about literacy.

Horner described an “archipelago model” of languages and literacies in which different languages are seen as separate and stable. Pegagogies transmit these stable languages. This model overlooks the “traffic” among languages, literacies, and their users.

The “traffic model” takes into account location practices – what happens in time and place, by users of language, through engagement. Users adapt their practices according to their experiences in traffic. Our students are participants in the traffic. They are rewriting English and literacy practices themselves, and the basic writing course is a site in which English is reworked.

Pennycook’s term is “sedimentation” – to the extent that language consists of fixed forms, it’s the result of iterations practiced by language users, participating in “fertile mimesis.” Basic writers are engaged as agents in this process.

(This is my first try at doing this – trying to capture some key points, apologies for any errors as well as lack of overall coherence.)

Posted in CCCC 2012, Scholarship of Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?

Basic Writing at CCCC 2012

    Updated 12 March 2012

This is an emerging list of Basic Writing presentations at CCCC 2012. If you are presenting on Basic Writing & would like your presentation listed, please send: title, your name, date/time, and a brief (50-100 words) description of why your presentation would be interesting to the Basic Writing Community. Send to lclark[at]lagcc[dot]cuny[dot]edu. This list will be updated periodically.

We are also recruiting live bloggers for the CBW site. Do you want to live blog CCCC 2012? If so, please contact lclark[at]lagcc[dot]cuny[dot]edu. We are looking for people willing to blog sessions of particular interest to Basic Writing faculty & students.

Basic Writing Presentations at CCCC 2012

Wednesday, 21 March 2012

Wednesday, 21 March from 9-5 p.m.: CBW Pre-Conference Workshop: Gathered at the Gate: Basic Writing in Evidence (See separate description)
Featured presentations by: Bruce Horner, Mike Rose, Peter Adams and more. Complete Schedule here.

Wednesday, 21 March from 5-6:30 p.m. Join us for a Wine, Cheese, and Technologies Reception sponsored by Pearson and CBW in Room 223 at the Conference Center.

Thursday, 22 March 2012

1. “Should Basic Writing Be Placed on the Endangered Species List?”
Mike Rose, Lynn Troyka, Peter Adams
Thursday, March 22nd from 1:45-3:00 p.m.

**FEATURED SESSION ON BASIC WRITING** We are very excited about all of the basic writing activity at CCCC this year, but we’re especially excited about this featured session with 3 of the luminary voices in basic writing. This panel will review recent developments in the political and economic environment threatening the very survival of basic writing, but will conclude with an examination of several more hopeful trends.

2. “Fluid Boundaries: Constructing a Meaningful Assessment of a Basic Writing Workshop”
Paula Patch
Thursday, March 22nd from 4:45-6:00 p.m.

I will discuss the programmatic implications of revising the assessment and involving the basic writing faculty in the revision—of our basic writing course (ENG 100) at Elon University. The goal of the course, which students take concurrently with our first-year composition course (ENG 110), is to provide extended instruction in process strategies and to support the work done in ENG 110 so that the student has the best possible chance for success in ENG 110 and in other classes that require writing. The faculty who teach the course, including me, have found success in using one-on-one conferencing and activity-based—rather than assignment-based—instruction to provide feedback and direct and just-in-time instruction to students who are working on writing projects from other courses. While acknowledging the necessity of keeping some learning outcomes common to the assessment of both courses in order to facilitate a comparison of learning outcomes across student groups, the ENG 100 faculty requested modifications to the assessment instrument and process to more accurately reflect the content and goals of the ENG 100 that are different—yet that precisely define the reason for offering the course—from the content and goals of ENG 110. I will discuss the revision process and the results of the revised course assessment from the perspectives of the program coordinator and the basic writing faculty.

3. “Basic Writing Programming: Gateways to Access Accompanied by Institutional Whispers”
Joyce O. Inman
Thursday, March 22nd from 4:45 to 6:00 p.m.

I will explore the ways in which basic writing programs are yoked to standards-based discourse in problematic ways, and negotiations of the flexible spaces in this discourse are necessary for students to discover their own subject positions in academe. I intend to highlight programs that are successfully negotiating these spaces in the discourse that surrounds basic writing by analyzing the texts produced by these programs for their institutions, their communities, and their students. I will conclude by relating my own experiences as a Director of Composition attempting to reframe basic writing at my institution.

4. Basic Writing Special Interest Group (SIG)
Thursday, March 22nd from 6:30-7:30 p.m.

Join us for opportunities to connect with Basic Writing faculty from around the country. Also, the CBW 2012 Fellowship Winner will be announced!

Friday, 23 March 2012

1. “Digital Coaching for Measurable Outcomes in Basic Writing: Preliminary Results from the Global Skills for College Completion Project”
Rosemary Arca, Foothill College; Jason Evans, Prairie State College; Robin Ozz, Phoenix College; Reid Sunahara, Kapi’olani Community College
Friday, March 23rd from 8:00 a.m. to 9:15 a.m.

Basic writing faculty discuss their research on effective pedagogy and their online collaboration with basic skills math faculty in a national project that aims to increase students’ success in basic skills courses.

2. Beyond the Classroom Walls: Redefining Literacy and Basic Writing Through Community Engagement
Lynn Reid, Regina Clemens Fox, Rasheda Young

Friday, March 23rd from 9:30 AM -10:45 AM

This panel will offer two examples of community-engaged research projects that fostered a critical reconsideration of literacy narratives as they are relevant to the backgrounds and contexts that shape the literate lives of basic writers. Both of these projects offer solid evidence that suggests that “traditional” approaches to teaching basic writing should be re-evaluated.

3. “Banal Resistance as the Gateway to Justice in Basic Writing.”
Michael D. Hill

Friday, March 23rd from 11:00-12:15

BW students often display a sedate resistance to their placement, to the work, and to the classroom practicing what I call a banal resistance due to their lack of institutional knowledge and their lack of argumentative agency. This presentation will explore the banal resistance of basic writers as an expression of injustice and as gateway for BW scholars to undertake questions of justice within their practice and pedagogy

4. “Expansion of Acceleration in Basic Writing – The Replication Program”
Robert Miller, Linda De La Ysla, Michelle Zollars, Heidi Johnson

Friday, March 23rd from 11:00-12:15

Three Community Colleges will discuss how they have partnered to replicate a highly successful and innovative basic writing program. Each college will describe the challenges faced and methods used to overcome these challenges. Finally, we will discuss how/if replication of an Acceleration model has been successful at our schools: The Community College of Baltimore County, Patrick Henry Community College, La Guardia Community College

5. A Promising New Model for Basic Writing: The Accelerated Learning Program (ALP)
Peter Adams, Jan Allen, and Nejla Camponeschi

Friday, March 23rd from 3:30-4:45

Recognizing that only about a third of our basic writers ever passed ENG 101, we developed a mainstreaming approach we call the Accelerated Learning Program (ALP), which has doubled our success rate. In this session we will describe ALP, report on results, report on several studies we have conducted on student behavior and on what features of ALP have produced these results, and describe an on-line faculty development effort that accompanies ALP.

6. “Teaching Meta-awareness: A Key for Students’ Transfer of Writing Knowledge Through Discursive Gateways”
Barbara Bird

Friday, March 23rd from 3:30-4:45

Reading about affective meta-awareness leads students to gain their own voice in academic discourse. Although this title does not mention “basic writing,” my study was/is focused on basic writing students.

Saturday, 24 March 2012

1. Forming Future Basic Writing Professionals: Reports on Graduate-Level BW Teacher Preparation Projects from Alaska, Idaho, and New York
Karen Uehling, Barbara Gleason, Sarah Kirk, Viktoriia Dudar, Wynne Ferdinand

Saturday, March 24 from 9:30 AM to 10:45 AM

We will describe and analyze three innovative approaches to educating future basic writing instructors currently being offered at our respective universities: University of Alaska Anchorage, Boise State University, City College of New York.

2. Basic Writing for a Transcultural Era: Using Inclusive Academic Discourses to Democratize the Gateway
William Lalicker

Saturday, March 24 from 11 AM to 12:15 PM

3. “No Other Way But Monsters: A Defense of the Sophistic Basic Writing Classroom”
Sarah Bartlett Wilson

Saturday, March 24 from 12:30pm-1:45pm

This presentation argues that sophistic BW classrooms are uniquely and powerfully situated spaces within the Academy because of their distinct capability to initiate firstyear students’ personal and academic growth.

4. A CCCC Synchronous/Asynchronous Event! There’s Nothing Basic about Basic Writing
Round Table

Shelley Rodrigo, Elaine M. Jolayemi,Carla Maroudas, Ilene Rubenstein, Amy Edwards Patterson, J. Elizabeth Clark, Leigh Jonaitis, Marisa A. Klages, Debra Berry, Kelly Keane, and Susan Miller-Cochran

Saturday, March 24 from 12:30 PM to 1:45 PM

As the number of students placed into basic writing courses grows, especially in the two-year colleges, how to best support these students has become an increasingly complex area of inquiry for faculty and researchers. Who are these students? How are they placed and evaluated? How can Writing Centers best support them? How can technology best be employed in the classroom or online? What kinds of training do faculty need? How does day-to-day life in the basic writing classroom differ from a transfer level or advanced composition classroom?

Our roundtable has an asynchronous and a synchronous component; the dialogue will asynchronously initiate on the CBW Facebook page, continue synchronously at CCCCs, and continue again online. The purpose of the dialogue is to engage as many people as possible in a discussion about issues related to Basic Writing. We hope that in these discussions individuals will share resources, best practices as well as develop a national community that can also help members respond to local issues. By starting the discussion online we will engage a larger audience as well as document, summarize, and synthesize the discussion to remain as resources for others after the conference. More about this project here.

At CCCC, our presentation will be synchronous, both face-to-face at CCCC as well as online by having 5-6 laptops, with internet connections, available during the
session so that active online participants who cannot make it to the conference can participate.

Stay tuned for more details on this presentation and the emerging conversation prior to CCCC.

Posted in CCCC 2012, Politics of Remediation, Scholarship of Basic Writing, What's New in Basic Writing, Who is Basic Writing?

Join Us For an On-Line Discussion About Basic Writing!

There’s nothing basic about Basic Writing!

Please JOIN US for an online roundtable hosted on Facebook to discuss
issues in Basic Writing!

Elaine Jolayemi, Carla Maroudas, Ilene Rubenstein, Amy Edwards
Patterson, J. Elizabeth Clark, Leigh Jonaitis, Marisa Klages, Debra
Berry, Kelly Keane and Shelley Rodrigo got together after CCCC last
year with the idea of extending the conversation around Basic Writing
using technology. We wanted to provide an opportunity to hear about
Basic Writing from our colleagues across the country. So, you’re all
invited!

What is this about? As the number of students placed into Basic
Writing courses grows, especially in the two-year colleges, how to
best support these students has become an increasingly complex area of
inquiry for faculty and researchers. Who are these students? How are
they placed and evaluated? How can Writing Centers best support them?
How can technology best be employed in the classroom or online? What
kinds of training do faculty need? How does day-to-day life in the
Basic Writing classroom differ from a transfer level or advanced
composition classroom?

The purpose of the dialogue is to engage as many people as possible in
a discussion about issues related to Basic Writing. We hope that in
these discussions individuals will share resources, best practices as
well as develop a national community that can also help members
respond to local issues.

How will it work? Each week, new topics will be launched on the CBW
Facebook Group for an informal, asynchronous chat. This will lead up
to CCCC where we will synchronously chat (face-to-face and online) at
CCCC in a roundtable on Saturday, March 24, 2012. By starting the
discussion online we will engage a larger audience as well as
document, summarize, and synthesize the discussion to remain as
resources for others after the conference. So, no matter where you are
and whether or not you’re coming to CCCC, we want to hear from you!

We’ll post one of the following topics each Sunday and Wednesday on
Facebook and then open up the conversation. Please listen in, join
the discussion and participate!

Topics and Themes:

*2/26: Who are Basic Writers?
*2/29: Student Placement
*3/4: Day-to-Day in the Life
*3/7: Teaching with Technology
*3/11: Teacher Preparation
*3/14: Professional Development
*3/18: Academic Skills & Writing Centers

How do I get started? Just join the CBW Facebook Group (you ask for
membership and we’ll add you) and start posting!

The group is “Council on Basic Writing
https://www.facebook.com/groups/50538806660/

If you have questions or need technical help, please feel free to
contact Shelley Rodrigo at shelley.rodrigo@gmail [dot]com or J. Elizabeth
Clark at lclark@lagcc [dot] cuny [dot] edu