Personalizing first-year writing course design and delivery: Navigating modality, shared curriculum, and contingent labor in a community of practice

Q1 Arts and Humanities Computers and Composition Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102847
Mary K. Stewart, Andrew Kelly Stewart
{"title":"Personalizing first-year writing course design and delivery: Navigating modality, shared curriculum, and contingent labor in a community of practice","authors":"Mary K. Stewart,&nbsp;Andrew Kelly Stewart","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article describes five first-year writing instructors’ experiences with personalizing shared curriculum across three different course delivery formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online). The data is drawn from teaching journals that the co-authors, a non-tenure track, part-time Lecturer and a tenured Writing Program Administrator, and three Graduate Student Teaching Associates completed throughout Fall 2022. The findings illustrate both benefits and drawbacks related to shared curriculum: discussing and troubleshooting curriculum in a community of practice is highly valuable, but separating course delivery from course design is challenging. In our study, those challenges manifested as disconnects between course content and disciplinary identity, as well as personal feelings of failure. On the other hand, the need to personalize shared curriculum across multiple delivery formats proved productive, especially when instructors used asynchronous online materials as a starting point to develop hybrid and face-to-face lesson plans. Ultimately, we advocate for more conversations about how writing programs can support contingent faculty as they personalize shared curriculum through both course delivery and design, and we offer an example of a successful community of practice that revises shared curriculum in response to community members’ experiences with teaching in multiple modalities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461524000239/pdfft?md5=4e3b1d8eb94a854924375191f9e5e98e&pid=1-s2.0-S8755461524000239-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers and Composition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461524000239","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article describes five first-year writing instructors’ experiences with personalizing shared curriculum across three different course delivery formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online). The data is drawn from teaching journals that the co-authors, a non-tenure track, part-time Lecturer and a tenured Writing Program Administrator, and three Graduate Student Teaching Associates completed throughout Fall 2022. The findings illustrate both benefits and drawbacks related to shared curriculum: discussing and troubleshooting curriculum in a community of practice is highly valuable, but separating course delivery from course design is challenging. In our study, those challenges manifested as disconnects between course content and disciplinary identity, as well as personal feelings of failure. On the other hand, the need to personalize shared curriculum across multiple delivery formats proved productive, especially when instructors used asynchronous online materials as a starting point to develop hybrid and face-to-face lesson plans. Ultimately, we advocate for more conversations about how writing programs can support contingent faculty as they personalize shared curriculum through both course delivery and design, and we offer an example of a successful community of practice that revises shared curriculum in response to community members’ experiences with teaching in multiple modalities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一年级写作课程设计和授课的个性化:在实践社区中驾驭模式、共享课程和临时工
本文介绍了五位一年级写作指导教师在三种不同的课程授课形式(面授、混合式、在线)中对共享课程进行个性化设置的经验。数据来源于共同作者(一位非终身制兼职讲师、一位终身制写作课程管理员)和三位研究生教学助理在 2022 年秋季完成的教学日志。研究结果表明了共享课程的好处和弊端:在实践社区中讨论课程并解决课程问题非常有价值,但将课程交付与课程设计分开则具有挑战性。在我们的研究中,这些挑战表现为课程内容与学科身份之间的脱节,以及个人的失败感。另一方面,事实证明,在多种授课形式中个性化共享课程的需求是富有成效的,尤其是当教师将异步在线材料作为制定混合式和面授课程计划的起点时。最后,我们主张就写作项目如何支持特遣队教师通过课程交付和设计个性化共享课程展开更多对话,并提供了一个成功实践社区的例子,该社区根据社区成员在多种教学模式下的教学经验修订了共享课程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Computers and Composition
Computers and Composition Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
25 days
期刊介绍: Computers and Composition: An International Journal is devoted to exploring the use of computers in writing classes, writing programs, and writing research. It provides a forum for discussing issues connected with writing and computer use. It also offers information about integrating computers into writing programs on the basis of sound theoretical and pedagogical decisions, and empirical evidence. It welcomes articles, reviews, and letters to the Editors that may be of interest to readers, including descriptions of computer-aided writing and/or reading instruction, discussions of topics related to computer use of software development; explorations of controversial ethical, legal, or social issues related to the use of computers in writing programs.
期刊最新文献
“Wayfinding” through the AI wilderness: Mapping rhetorics of ChatGPT prompt writing on X (formerly Twitter) to promote critical AI literacies Exploring the interaction among writing fluency, writing processes, and external resource access in second language writing assessment Ecologies, bodies, and OWI teacher preparation: reflecting on a practicum for graduate instructors teaching writing online When generative artificial intelligence meets multimodal composition: Rethinking the composition process through an AI-assisted design project Multilingual English second language students’ voice in digital storytelling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1