Posted in CBW2019, CCCC2019, History of Basic Writing, Mission Statement, Scholarship of Basic Writing, Uncategorized, What Is Basic Writing?

Towards a Position Statement on Basic Writing

This is draft text we are working on for a Statement on Basic Writing. We are seeking input into the principles, including action steps, questions, and summaries of information/knowledge/research.

Principle 1:

STUDENTS WHO PLACE INTO BASIC WRITING ARE INTELLECTUALLY CAPABLE, AND WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE AND VALUE THEIR HUMANITY AND INDIVIDUALITY, INCLUDING THEIR VOICES, EXPERTISE, EXPERIENCE, LANGUAGES, AND IDENTITIES.

Principle 2:

BASIC WRITING IS NOT A PRECURSOR TO LEGITIMATE ACADEMIC WORK; THEREFORE, STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXPERIENCE BASIC WRITING AS VALUABLE IN ITS OWN RIGHT.

Principle 3:

BASIC WRITING IS ROOTED IN A HISTORY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE; THEREFORE, WE MUST CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION FOR ACADEMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS.

Principle 4:

BASIC WRITING IS A RESEARCH-BASED DISCIPLINE WITH AN EVOLVING SCHOLARLY HISTORY, AND ITS TEACHERS MUST BE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONERS ENGAGED IN PEDAGOGICAL RENEWAL.

Principle 5:

BASIC WRITING COURSES SHOULD ENGAGE STUDENTS IN READING AND WRITING AS SOCIAL, CONTEXTUAL, MEANING-MAKING ACTIVITIES.

Suggested Changes In Today’s Session

http://www2.ncte.org/statement/secondlangwriting/

http://www2.ncte.org/statement/21stcentframework/

What is our goal here?

Statement for admins?

Statement for BW instructors?

Best practices for TEACHING vs. Best practices for HIRING? Both? Neither?

Preamble: precarity

Three moves in the polemical preamble–1st claim our origin story as radical democracy and opportunity for students, 2nd to own our own positionality, and to transition to our principles

What do we MEAN by Basic Writing?

The Council of Basic Writing Statement of Ethos and Principles

Basic Writing is a pedagogical program designed to empower students who have been failed by racist and classist structures in education. Basic Writing grows out of the ideal of democratic equitable education–an ideal meant to provide accessible opportunities for all people.

The Council of Basic Writing understands that Basic Writing is a fraught and imperfect enterprise. Given the decades-long underfunding of education and neoliberal logics dominating educating, conditions in institutions, the classroom, and in society are even more precarious. The Council of Basic Writing refuses to capitulate to notion that there is no value in developmental education. Instead, we see the work of teaching underprepared writers as a direct challenge to these structures.

BW is an important way to address generational inequalities and promote access to higher education but we should not that BW can also be used to perpetuate inequalities and limit access to higher education.

We recognize Basic writing as a site with the most vulnerable students with the most vulnerable teachers. Basic Writing students are vulnerable in the sense that they often come from majority minority communities, use varieties of English that are not privileged and are denigrated. Basic writing students are often first-generation students and students affected by adverse socio-economic conditions. Basic writing students face racist and classist structures and assessment practices. Basic writing teachers are vulnerable in the sense that they often receive less professionalization and are frequently contingent.

Basic Writing instruction must include anti-racist and critical pedagogies. Basic writing must be driven by research-based best practices and the mission of these programs must recognize the social justice implications of our work.

Where does BW live? Dual enrollment/ALP/etc.

We recognize Basic writing as a site with the most vulnerable students with the most vulnerable teachers.

Basic Writing students are vulnerable in the sense that they often come from majority minority communities, use varieties of English that are not privileged and are denigrated. Basic writing students are often first-generation students and students affected by adverse socio-economic conditions. Basic writing students face racist and classist structures and assessment practices.

Basic writing teachers are vulnerable in the sense that they often receive less professionalization and are frequently contingent.

Here in the preamble, we need to define BW as opposed to “remediation” and “basic writing” and “developmental writing.” (and developmental English)

CONTINGENT labor–how do we address the labor conditions of BW faculty

Add the adjunct faculty data!

Language–Edits

Principle I: STUDENTS WHO are PLACEd INTO BASIC WRITING ARE INTELLECTUALLY CAPABLE, AND WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE AND VALUE THEIR HUMANITY AND INDIVIDUALITY, INCLUDING THEIR VOICES, EXPERTISE, EXPERIENCE, LANGUAGES, AND IDENTITIES.  

[trying to take a less defensive posture for Principle I?) →    We should recognize and value the humanity and individuality–including their voices, expertise, experience, languages, intelligences, and identities — of students who enroll in basic writing courses.

Principle II: BASIC WRITING IS NOT A PRECURSOR TO LEGITIMATE ACADEMIC WORK; THEREFORE, STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO EXPERIENCE BASIC WRITING AS VALUABLE IN ITS OWN RIGHT.

Principle III:BASIC WRITING IS ROOTED IN A HISTORY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE; THEREFORE, WE MUST CONTINUE TO ADVOCATE FOR ACCESS TO HIGHER EDUCATION FOR ACADEMICALLY DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS.

Principle IV:BASIC WRITING IS A RESEARCH-BASED DISCIPLINE WITH AN EVOLVING SCHOLARLY HISTORY, AND ITS TEACHERS MUST BE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONERS ENGAGED IN PEDAGOGICAL RENEWAL.

Principle V:BASIC WRITING COURSES SHOULD ENGAGE STUDENTS IN READING AND WRITING AS SOCIAL, CONTEXTUAL, MEANING-MAKING ACTIVITIES.

Notes from Today’s Session on these proposed principles–from our discussion

  1. Should principle 4 be a subset of principle 2?
  2. Preamble: thinking about having it be a political preamble–should we do this work / continue this work — we need to take on those preconceptions and the basis and foundation for basic writing as a radical part of open admissions pedagogy–also issues of dual vulnerability–students and faculty
  3. Preamble: claiming and enacting principles based on this
  4. Question about language: can we say democratic, access inclusive
  5. Principle 2 is defensive (as written): suggestions for writing it more positively–see photos below.
  6. Focus: we should not be defensive in our language
  7. Principle 4 should be a subset of principle 2
  8. Discussion of adjunct/contingent labor/non-tenure-track labor–need to make sure that we are supporting fair labor conditions AND pointing to adjunct/contingent labor/non-tenure-track–question about linking it to this work that already exists: https://cccc.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/working-conditions-ntt
  9. Principle 5: justification of how basic writing studies should proceed / how basic writers make up a large component of what we do, but it makes up a smaller amount of the scholarship
  10. Principle 5: basic writing research should not be to fix students. It should be to understand who they are and how they compose
  11. Principle 5: we need to be aware of the social cultural that the research must be ethically bound to address
  12. Principle 5: students should be actively engaged in the research and design
  13. Principle 5: where could basic writing of the future lend a hand? Distance learning; recognizing how mental health is playing a role; tracking basic writers in their lives beyond the classroom and supporting them beyond the composition classroom
  14. Clarify that students who place into basic writing might still benefit from additional types of support
  15. Economic arguments around courses
  16. Principle 1: students who enroll instead of place
  17. Principle 1: “intellectually capable”–name the way students are capable
  18. Principle 1: look at WPA statement
  19. What types of calls for research?
  20. They are basic in a particular way
  21. Deserving of equal scholarly attention
  22. These writers operate from a different knowledge base

Additional Notes & Edits (from the wall)

Small Group Work

Next Steps:

We will circulate this on the Facebook page, on the Blog, and on CBW-L for comments and feedback.

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized

Teaching Students How to Perform Science Writing

Robby Nadler explores Basic Writers in Science

The next session highlight the 2018 INNY Award Winners: Robby Nadler and Lindsey Harding presented the work they did with Christy Desmet, Kris Miller, & Kimberly Brown’s work on curriculum development at the University of Georgia in helping introductory biology students learn to write for science.

The presentation examined the collaboration between UGA’s Division of Biology, First-year Composition, and the Writing Intensive Program. They examined writing gaps in transferring writing skills between the humanities and the sciences, specifically biology, developing a specific curriculum to address the gaps they discovered.

They focused on teaching for transfer, peer review, citations, the use of source material in science (different from in the humanities), writing abstracts, word banks, with students. With faculty and graduate learning assistants, they focused on five minute mini-lessons (5MT).

Participants were invited to sketch out a 5MT and share it in small groups. Group one focused on integrating sources into student writing. Group 2 focused on understanding the conventions of the genre.

More about the INNY Award

https://cbwblog.wordpress.com/the-inny-award/

Posted in CBW2019, CCCC2019, Resources

Resources Recommended During CBW 2019

Books

Daniel Heath Justice’s Why Indigenous Literatures Matter (Indigenous Studies)

Kelly Ritter’s Before Shaughnessy: Basic Writing at Yale and Harvard, 1920-1960 (Studies in Writing and Rhetoric)

John Warner’s Why They Can’t Write: Killing the Five-Paragraph Essay and Other Necessities

Asao B. Inoue’s Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future

https://www.amazon.com/Antiracist-Writing-Assessment-Ecologies-Assessing/dp/1602357730

Technologies

Zoom, Screencastomatic & Jing for screen casting

Key Articles Referenced During the Day

Beam, Sara N. and Holly Clay-Buck. “Low-Spoon Teaching: Labor, Gender, and Self-Accommodation in Academia.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, vol. 37, no. 1, 2018, pp. 173-180.

Brueggemann, Brenda Jo. “An Enabling Pedagogy: Meditations on Writing and Disability.” JAC, vol. 21, no, 4, 2001, pp. 791–820.

Elbow, Peter, “A Unilateral Grading Contract to Improve Learning and Teaching [co-written with Jane Danielewicz]” (2008). College Composition and Communication. 3.
Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/eng_faculty_pubs/3

Miserando, Christine. “The Spoon Theory.” But You Dont Look Sick? Support for Those with Invisible Illness or Chronic Illness, 26 Apr. 2013, butyoudontlooksick.com/articles/written-by-christine/the-spoon-theory/.

Strategies

Predecessor’s materials (when you are an administrator): what can you learn? What can you reuse?

Programs/Models

ALP: Accelerated Learning Program (there are many models, but Community College of Baltimore County is the model and program that generated the ALP model and trained many of the campuses using ALP in the U.S.)

http://alp-deved.org

UDL: Universal Design for Learning

http://www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl.html#.XIlPCy2ZPOQ

Posted in Accessibility, CBW Exec Board, CBW2019, CCCC, CCCC2019, Teaching, Tech

Lean On Me: Self-Accommodation and Teaching with Disabilities

The amazing Sara Webb-Sunderhaus generously made her entire keynote presentation, “Lean on Me: Self-Accommodation and Teaching with Disabilities” available on Scribd (link below).

I hope you’ll read her full talk. This is an amazing story and journey. Sara’s brave story touches on: mindful teaching, abundant self-care, questions about identity, changing identity, the role and load of writing program administrators, disclosing impairments to students, feminism, the whole self, vulnerability, and a call to think about how to structure work in ways that allow you to do your best work–whatever that means at a given time in your life.

A few quotes from Sara’s talk that really spoke to me:

“I vividly remember thinking that one moment had changed my life in ways I did not yet understand…”

“Over the past year and a half, I have struggled to come to terms with a changing identity, sense of self, and expectations.
Today I’d like to talk with you about what this process has been
like. Specifically, I will discuss the impact of my disability on my teaching, the types of resources I have needed and continue to need, and how I have learned to practice self-accommodation as I continue to come to terms with the ways my life has changed over the past 18 months.”

“If I had been an adjunct, with no health insurance, there is no doubt I would have had to declare bankruptcy. But I was not an adjunct—I was a tenured associate professor, with a great deal of sick time, supportive colleagues, and a caring chair. All of these factors were critical resources as I adjusted to my new reality.”

“What I have had to learn this academic year — and what I am still in the process of learning — is how to implement low-spoon theories of writing program administration and teaching and make use of the resources available to me. I refer here to Christine Miserandino’s spoon theory, which uses spoons as metaphors for energy.”

“Self-accommodation is an intensely important and woefully overlooked academic practice, especially for women,” adding that “it is directly at odds with America’s culture of ruthless self-reliance and ‘toughing it out,’ with women’s perceptions of self-worth being tied to usefulness, with expectations of female availability, and with our own (often founded) fears of appearing ‘weak’ or less capable than male colleagues” (173).”

“It forced me to become comfortable with accepting help and relying on others when appropriate, and it made me explore why I had such a fear of being a burden to others. I have learned — and am still learning — that it is okay to ask for help when I need it. That does not mean that I am over-reliant on others or not doing my job. I do not have to constantly prove to myself that I am strong or independent, because I know that I am all of those things; accepting a dear colleague’s help does not lessen me in any way.”

“I’ve now reached a place where it feels like a responsibility, not a burden, to disclose my disability to students. I want all students to know that people who at first glance may appear “able bodied” may not be. I want students— both those with disabilities and those without — to know that being born with or acquiring a disability may change someone’s life, but it doesn’t necessarily have to change their goals and ambitions.”

“I will never be able to work in the same ways I did before, because I live in crip time now. That is okay — more than okay — to admit. I still sometimes feel embarrassed to have these conversations with students, but without exception they have been kind and generous. I hope that sharing my vulnerabilities with them has led to a classroom environment in which they feel can be vulnerable, and I know I feel closer to this particular group of students than I ever have by this point in a semester. My students have helped me reach a point of self-acceptance, and I am grateful to them for that.”

During the Q&A Session, participants shared experiences, strategies, and questions such as:

–it’s difficult to file for accommodations; many people don’t file for accommodation

–vulnerability

–disclosure

–invitation to join the CCCC Standing Group for Disability Studies

Please read the full text of Sara’s talk here:

https://www.scribd.com/document/401544701/Lean-on-Me-Self-Accommodation-and-Teaching-with-Disabilities

Posted in CBW 2013, CCCC 2013, Politics of Remediation, Who is Basic Writing?

Small Groups!

CBW had 5 small groups to discuss “Race, Locality, and the Public Work of Basic Writing.”

Preparing and supporting students of color

We want to empower students & create a sense of agency in their lives;
There are tensions between expectations like end-of-term assessments (high stakes tests) and preparing and supporting students of color;
Why do these conversations exclude students? Why do we have these conversations without students at the table. How do we navigate this?
The group also shared grading practices (basic skills or inviting a conversation in the grade?);
The group discussed the difference between focusing on grammar and engaging in conversations about content.

Preparing and supporting faculty of color

The group discussed tokenism and the importance of avoiding it! (e.g. particularly when faculty of color are recruited for committee work and then don’t have time to publish and other do other work);
The group discussed teaching evaluations, (e.g. students commenting on “accents” as if all faculty don’t have an accent; that if a faculty member of color makes even 1 comment about race, that some students begin to make an issue out of it), so tenure and promotion committees need to be educated about issues like this;
Support: invite collaboration (in publishing, in teaching, etc.);
Support & mentoring: make tenure & promotion expectations clear.

Race and pedagogical practices

The group discussed My Writing Lab & how it’s become a stand-alone module;
CLASP (University of Washington)–professional development for teachers;
The relationship between curriculum & race & pedagogical practices;
The relationship of edited, standard American English and whiteness;
The position of the teacher in the classroom & giving race time and space in the class for conversation.

Basic Writing and Race Nationally and Locally

There was a discussion of the politics of remediation (who do we educate? When? Why?);
How do we address attacks on developmental education?
How do we address politicians and engage them in conversation?
How do we connect with other groups in order to make connections? (even outside of traditional academic groups?)
How do we use social media to raise the profile of basic writing?

Meeting challenges and attacks on basic writing programs:

The group discussed the Complete College America initiative;
Developmental courses have been dropped or outlawed in several states;
Their suggestions include a number of ideas that are exactly the work of basic writing;
Their goal is to end “traditional remediation”;
The group feels that the work attacks developmental programs (as a straw man for what’s wrong with education).

There was a discussion also about ways that we can appropriate the language of programs like Complete College American in order to get funding & recognition for our programs.

Another discussion followed the theme of how much “subversive complicity” is enough? Too much? How far do you go?

The group brainstormed ideas to address this:

Have WPA experts visit campus to discuss and evaluate basic writing programs (from our own colleagues);
NADE accreditation (National Association for Developmental Education);
Collect evidence (student success stories);
Accumulate statistics for success;
Advocacy within our own council. We need to be more like ATTW: we need to create awareness for CBW.

This group also wanted to talk about MOOCs, but ran out of time.

20130313-110325.jpg

Posted in CCCC 2012

Annual Business Meeting and Town Meeting

The CCCC annual business meeting started off early this morning.

Malea Powell mentioned that the executive committee is examining several interesting new measures such as fully funding the research initiative and the possibility of electronic voting. CCCC continues to lose membership, but at a lower rate than other years, at about 4%.

Chris Anson announced that the twitter and blog feeds were “kind” to the conference. As well they should have been! Kudos to Malea Powell and Chris Anson and all for a great 2012 conference.

Kent Williamson announced that CCCC has a growth in spending. He specifically focused on the organization’s commitment to investing in technology at the conference for $80,000 this year; $83,000 for next year. $32,000 in support for contingent faculty for this year and $33,000 for next year (supports about 100 people).

The meeting then moved to a town meeting with discussions on CCCC Leadership Opportunities, CCCC and Diversity Issues, Increasing CCCC Membership and Open Feedback.

I sat at the “Open Feedback” table. Issues raised at the table included: having CCCC create more sessions/focus on attacks on higher education, issues of nimbleness in addressing addressing issues that come up in a timely way (e.g. Intellectual property), ways of educating members about how to get issues/ideas up through the official channels (responding to state/national legislation & public commentary comes up quickly and the structures of CCCC and NCTE is too difficult), support structures and resources are not always clear, representing issues of basic writing in CCCC and NCTE structure & issues, focus on how budget cuts affect contingent faculty, cuts in developmental programs, test scores limiting access to higher education, state mandates don’t recognize disciplinary knowledge.

The CCCC executive committee is working on a strategic plan to specifically address the nimbleness of the organization.

Karen Lunsford suggested a standing legislation committee that monitors and tracks federal legislation. Our table really liked this idea specifically because much of the legislation is happening state by state and we could look for patterns that are developing.

Our table also discussed the best ways to reach people. Our table endorsed the ideas of multiple platforms for easy access (same information cross-posted). We discussed the fact that the NCTE inbox is difficult to read & that few people access Connected Community. Instead, the traffic is on listservs, blogs, Google +, Twitter, and Facebook.

We were happy to hear about the move to update position statements regularly with updated research. Our table concurred that access to updated research on issues (like class size, assessment, etc.) is critical.

The group ended by talking about membership fees. We need a better structure for raising funds and making CCCC accessible to contingent faculty and others.

We then turned to the resolutions:

Two official resolutions of thanks and appreciation to Chris Anson, the 2012 program chair, and Vincent Casaregola and the Local Arrangements Committee, both passed by acclamation.

Resolution 3 to establish a Contingent Faculty Travel Fund funded by voluntary member contributions in consultation with the Labor Caucus and the Committee on Part-Time, Adjunct, and Contingent Labor carried (I think it was unanimous).

Following up on a sense of the house motion form last year, the group approved a motion to condemn the representations of American Indians and other racial and other ethnic groups or their names, cultures, and traditions as sports symbols, mascots, and team names. This was approved.

A resolution that “CCCC-sponsored journals will provide authors a non-exclusive right to place pre- and/or post-publication drafts of their published scholarly articles on the Internet; and

Will advocate for open-access publishing opportunities for other publishing venues…”

After discussion about the role of publication, open access, the scholarly community, the peer review process, this resolution was referred to the Executive Council for further discussion and consideration.

A proposal on plagiarism detection services was postponed until a later meeting.

There were two state of the house motions:

First: from the Status of Women in the Profession:

“We support women’s right to participate in public and policy discourse about their reproductive self-determination; and women should be free from being bullied, silenced, and shamed when advocating for themselves and others. We oppose the hostile rhetoric that has characterized the recent discourse about women’s reproductive lives.

This motion carried.

Second: the CBW Sense of the House motion thanking Chris Anson & Howard Tinbergen (see separate post). This motion passed (with a second from Kathleen Yancey! Yay!)

The Annual Business Meeting was a robust & exciting opportunity for discussion. The town hall meeting was excellent and provided a great forum for discussing issues important to higher ed, the field, and the organization. However, I was disappointed that more people didn’t attend. I hope that more people will put this on their agendas!

Posted in CBW 2012

Mike Rose

Hannah Ashley began our session with Mike Rose with a very personal introduction about the influence Mike Rose had on her choices as a graduate student and her decision to focus on basic writing, developmental education, and issues of social justice. In graduate school, Hannah published an article citing Mike’s work. He e-mailed her about the article and it gave her the courage to pursue what has become her life’s work. I’m sure that Hannah’s wonderful story encapsulates how many of us feel about Mike Rose and his work. That Mike Rose took the time to write back to her about it is further testament to just how cool Mike Rose is. For how many of us has Lives on the Boundary or Mind at Work or some other Mike Rose book been a guide for those of us committed to basic writing and developmental education? I am certainly one of those former graduate students for whom Mike Rose’s writing served as a guide to the kind of work I wanted to do. I imagine most of us in the room could testify to the critical importance of Mike Rose’s work not just in our field but on our personal, professional decisions. Did I mention that he’s receiving the 2011 CCCC Exemplar Award? (During questions and answers, Bill Lalicker said that Mike signed his copy of Lives on the Boundary in a cowboy bar in Laramie, Wyoming).

So, it won’t surprise you that you want to be first in line at your local bookstore to purchase His new book. At our session today, Mike Rose shared the introduction his forthcoming book Back To School: Second Chances at Higher Ed due out in fall 2012. The new book focuses on the role of education in society as a second, third, or more chance at education. The book is a series of essays on higher education addressing issues like the critical importance of adult education. It raises critical questions about the debate between occupational training and college-for-all. Another essay addresses why so many adults hunger for education; students return for education certainly for work but also so they can read to their children and help them with homework and because they enjoy reading. Today, there are many opportunities, but they are also under attack. How do we work to protect these programs and the public institutions that offer a wider education than just occupational education? But how do we also think about the importance of providing vocational training students need while also providing intellectual breadth?

In the last 30 years, have you heard anything about education that wasn’t about economics? Even informed citizenry gets only a small nod. The really rich motives for education need to be addressed more. Rose began this question in Why School and continues it in this new book.

In the rich question and answer period, people raised questions and comments such as these:

So much education today is hopeful, trying to suggest that when we have high expectations for students, they do inspiring things, even when there’s a lot working against them.

The notion of “The People’s College” (the final chapter) is a challenge to fight to change perceptions of community colleges as places of failure instead of places for success & possibility.

The group also discussed Pima Community College and the trend to get rid of developmental education (trends in California and Connecticut). What happens when the cure contributes to the malady? Decisions are made on a legitimate concern, but have unintended consequences. Policy cures are far from the day-to-day realities of the classroom, the tutoring center, and other spaces for education.

The book and the conversation ended with a discussion of the learning society (the conclusion to Mike Rose’s new book) and the ways in which education can help students to “make things right.” These journey metaphors encapsulate the the ways students are focused on not just getting a job but living a better life, a life defined by a more complicated understanding of learning and education.

Rose shared “Mikey’s little theory” of cognitive momentum. For the students who make it and are successful, there comes a point when they are building this knowledge base and they can do things they couldn’t do before. There’s a body of knowledge and you can use it; all of a sudden you are able to solve problems with that new knowledge and a change starts to happen that affects student identity.

We ended with a fabulous student story from a student literacy narrative. We need to help share all of these powerful student stories to the national conversation about education.

Mike asked that we all visit his website and share your ideas and comments! Mikerosebooks.blogspot.com

20120321-160517.jpg
Mike Rose at CBW 2012

20120321-160642.jpg

20120321-160656.jpg
Hannah Ashley and Mike Rose

20120321-162824.jpg
Question and Answer session with Mike Rose

20120321-165438.jpg

20120321-165446.jpg
Thanks All Around & A Standing Ovation

Posted in CBW 2012, What's New in Basic Writing

Accelerated Learning Project (W7)

Today, we were excited to hear more about the Accelerated Learning Project, originated at the Community College of Baltimore County by Peter Adams. ALP is an alternative model for teaching basic writing by placing basic writers in an introductory composition course (not a basic or developmental writing course) with composition students. The basic writing cohort, embedded in the composition course also meets separately in a small group with the instructor. In that smaller group, students are able to work on additional papers, drafts, and projects related to the composition course.

Today, more than 46 colleges and universities are experimenting with ALP. Today, we had a chance to hear from the Community College of Baltimore County, LaGuardia Community College, and Patrick Henry Community College so that we could see the local differences in the model as it was adapted at a rural and an urban community college.

Michelle Zollars of Patrick Henry Community College reported on local innovations at their campus as PHCC adapted the model for their campus. Developmental Education in the state of Virginia is moving towards adapting ALP.

Heidi Johnsen talked about the challenges of administering ALP at a large, urban community college with standardized placement and exit exams.

In both case studies, ALP courses had a significantly higher pass rate than stand alone basic writing courses.

You can learn more about ALP here: ALP
And here: ALP Professional Development

20120321-135705.jpg

20120321-141956.jpg

20120321-142010.jpg