CONVERSATION PROJECT

ASSIGNMENT RATIONALE

My annotated bibliography is focused on applications of disability studies to the field of education, particularly the college writing classroom, and is primarily interested in how an instructor can meaningfully incorporate disability studies into their pedagogy and curriculum. Disability Studies asks writing teachers to view their students’ diverse bodies and minds as a resource, to think critically about the power of language and its effects, to see what role the body plays in the writing process, and to consider the accessibility of their spaces and assignments.

The Conversation Project is the fourth and final project in what I’ve very loosely sketched out as a four-project series for a First-Year Writing course at a community college or university with a diverse student population. It will come at the end of the term, after students have completed a literacy narrative, an ethnography of space, and a project of their choice. For each assignment, students can choose the language they use, the mode in which they deliver it, and whether or not to work individually or collaboratively. These choices were influenced by the concept of Universal Design (UD) in Disability Studies. In the pedagogy of a composition classroom, UD principles include encouraging collaboration and cooperative learning, diversifying media, fluctuating teaching methods, and allowing students to show their knowledge in a variety of ways; teachers are encouraged to “permit,” “listen,” “update,” “guide,” “clarify,” “review,” and “allow” (Dolmage 24). This project reflects my adaptation of these practices into an assignment: I will “update” my pedagogy and curriculum to be accessible to minds and bodies of all abilities; I will “clarify” my expectations and how students will be evaluated; I will “permit” my students to choose the topics they write about; I will “allow” them to compose in the language and mode of their choice; I will “listen” to their needs, ideas, and experiences; I will give ample opportunities for different forms of “review” of their work; and I will “guide” them to success.

While the connections to Disability Studies and Universal Design were my primary influences in designing this assignment, I was also influenced by the findings of The Meaningful Writing Project. In this study, researchers found that the most meaningful writing projects “offer students opportunities for agency; for engagement with instructors, peers, and materials; and for learning that connects to previous experiences and passions and to future aspirations and identities” (Eodice et al. 4). The Conversation Project features all three: I’ve purposefully given students as much agency as possible while still fulfilling the requirements of a research project; I’ve built in the option to work collaboratively, but we will discuss topics, engage in peer reviews, and I will offer my own feedback; and in allowing students to choose their topics, language, and modes, I hope to tap into their unique identities, skills, and experiences so they can successfully complete a project that advances their own unique goals.

I took the learning outcomes for this project from the WPA Outcomes Statement that identifies outcomes for first-year composition courses in postsecondary education. The statement lists over twenty outcomes overall, but I identified the following outcomes as most relevant to this project:

  • Learn and use key rhetorical concepts through analyzing and composing a variety of texts

  • Locate and evaluate (for credibility, sufficiency, accuracy, timeliness, bias and so on) primary and secondary research materials, including journal articles and essays, books, scholarly and professionally established and maintained databases or archives, and informal electronic networks and internet sources

  • Use strategies such as interpretation, synthesis, response, critique, and design/redesign to compose texts that integrate the writer's ideas with those from appropriate sources

  • Adapt composing processes for a variety of technologies and modalities

  • Reflect on the development of composing practices and how those practices influence their work

Tara Wood notes that the scaffolded assignment, a “core principle of writing pedagogy,” relies upon time, giving students a sense of pacing and sequence. Wood argues, however, that teachers must pay attention to how they construct time or else they risk enforcing “normative time frames upon students whose experiences and processes exist in contradiction to such compulsory measures of time” (Wood 260-61). With this in mind, I wanted to create a scaffolded assignment that allowed students to complete the project step-by-step, offered some flexibility in time, and provided opportunities for feedback and revision. Students will complete their projects over the course of about four weeks and should turn in a total of three versions of their work. Their first assignment is to pick their topic and give an informal presentation on their topic in class. My intent here is using a brief class discussion after each presentation to help fine-tune the topics and generate interest in each other’s projects. The next week, they will turn in a draft for peer review to be completed in class. The class discussions and peer review reflect my attempt to incorporate the Universal Design principles of collaboration and cooperative learning into this assignment, even if students choose to work independently on their projects. After that, they will turn in a draft for instructor review. This allows me to review their work, give feedback in the format that best fits their project and the student’s needs, and guide their final revisions to help them succeed. Finally, they will submit their completed project and reflection as part of their final portfolio for the course.

In terms of evaluation, I’ve employed a form of contract grading for this assignment, as I would for the other major assignments. So, students who meet each requirement of what I’ll dub the Bottom Line will make at least a B-, as would be described in the syllabus. The requirements for this assignment are intentionally worded to accommodate different topics, languages, and modes of delivery. It’s important to point out that in keeping with Wood’s idea of “cripping time,” meeting the specified due dates is not part of the Bottom Line. This is my way of keeping time flexible for the students who need it to be while still having set due dates. My feedback on the first draft will primarily be about assessing where they are in relation to the Bottom Line and helping guide them to meet the Bottom Line and keep rising.


WORKS CITED

Dolmage, J. (2008). Mapping composition: Inviting disability in the front door. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann (Eds.), Disability and the teaching of writing: A critical sourcebook (pp. 14-27). Bedford / St. Martin’s.

Eodice, M., Geller, A. E., & Lerner, N. (2017). The Meaningful Writing Project Learning, Teaching and Writing in Higher Education. Norman, UT: Utah State University Press.