Ringing in the New Year - pedagogically

I have often reflected at the end of the semester, in true Profhacker fashion, by giving a 3x3 course evaluation. This means sharing what worked, what didn’t, and what I plan to change.  This was easy to do when I was essentially teaching the same class in multiple sections. However, now that I am teaching composition and professional writing it is hard to make such comparisons so this evaluation and reflection will likely not fall into such neat categories.

Overall, I feel pretty good about how my professional writing class turned out. I taught this class for the first time in the Spring and that was OK but as I had barely a week to plan the class (for the first time) and I inherited a book it was a bit rough. This time around I had the benefit of experience and time to plan so it was much more thought out and I do not plan to make any major changes for the new Spring Semester. Students report that they learned a lot and had fun. I feel the same way so what’s not to like?

My Writing II class continues to be a work in progress and I plan to revamp it yet again for the Spring Semester. I have high hopes for the new version as it is an idea that excites me (see The Walking Dead in my writing classroom) and I had an additional brainstorm about how to marry my new idea to my old practice of focusing more on writing in the disciplines so it will be a course about walking/writing dead in the disciplines.  I have spent a lot of my gym time thinking about this class and can’t wait to see what comes of it!

What worked

I borrowed/adapted a Group Learning assignment from Cathy Davidson for my professional writing class and this turned out to be a great assignment. Students really did an amazing job with it and we all learned something from the process as well as the results. For this assignment students had to teach the class about some technology/tool that could be used to produce their final projects. Throughout the rest of the semester students referred back to these tips/tools and used them for their PW project as well as work in other classes and their professional lives.

Another success for the Fall Semester was the use of Google Chat to support virtual office hours. While overall my use of Google was a bit hit-and-miss (see Google vs. Blackboard) in terms of success, I can unequivocally say that Google Chat gave my students quick and easy access to my help and advice. Although it was not always convenient for me (having to interrupt my work or break a chain of thought), it definitely helped create a connection with my online students that is always difficult to forge in an online class.

Finally, the use of interactive journals was something that worked well and I will continue to use. Side discussions, support, and practical advice were all a part of the peer comments on student journals and I think contributed to a sense of class community. I was pleased with this activity/assignment and will definitely use it again. 

What didn’t work

My attempt at a peer leader assignment, during which students would take turns leading discussions and track participation, was a dismal failure. They were supposed to work in teams and that was always a problem as most of the teams did not work well together at all. The evaluation part of the assignment was also problematic even though it was really a matter of noting who had participated and who had not. I wonder if this type of assignment is simply more problematic in an online class as I’ve done similar things with traditional classes. I’m not going to use this assignment until I’ve thought it through again so probably not for the Spring Semester as I’m at a loss right now.

Similarly, my class reporter assignment was terrible. I’ve always been intrigued by the idea of students creating a wiki, blog, or some other record of the lessons they learned in a class. However, the actual execution in both classes fell far short of my hope. I think the idea is still a good one but it may not work for a writing class as well as it does for a content-driven class and it may also be a problem for an online vs. traditional class. Either way, it is going back on the shelf for now while I mull it over.

My last failure is the scaffolding I prepared for my Writing II students as they worked on their final papers. I thought it would help them to chunk the paper but most were resistant to the idea and the final papers of those who did participate were often too chunky. I have some ideas for working the scaffolding into our discussion and reflection assignments that will make the support more subtle and allow students more room to grow. I read a blog post a few weeks ago (Intrusive Scaffolding) about how too much scaffolding is actually a disservice for students and I think this process assignment is a good example.

What will change

While I will still have students create Google accounts at the beginning of the semester, our early use of Google will be for interaction (Google chat) and social media (Google+). As I already noted (see Google vs. Blackboard), I used Google for journals, discussion, and writing workshop in the Fall Semester but this met with mixed results and I think sometimes the technology got in the way of the pedagogy which is never a good thing. I plan to use Blackboard’s blog tool for interactive journals and discussion but am reserving the option for using Google for writing workshop at the end of the semester.

As noted above (and in The Walking Dead in my writing classroom), we will discuss the big ideas found in our literary readings with those found in popular culture (specifically comic books and their related media). We will then explore (in discussion and in writing) the ways that those big ideas play out in the disciplines. Stay tuned for more on this idea!

This semester I am going to try out a journal assignment focused on self-assessment and self-regulation. One of the reasons I tried the peer leader assignment is that keeping track of all the posting/discussion activities is a logistical nightmare for me. It is a constant battle to find the right balance (not to mention the time) between teaching and evaluating. My hope is that by making a place/time for students to record (weekly) what they did to further their learning and meet the course goals will make them more aware of their own responsibility for their growth and grades. Plus, this will give me a private place to comment on their activities as a student separate from their writing and thinking. I hope that separating these enforcer activities from the writing coach/mentor activities (made in comments on class reflection and discussion) will allow me to focus my efforts as well.  Or maybe I have just devised another way to make my head spin. We’ll see!

How did your Fall Semester turn out? What are your plans for the Spring Semester? I always love to study (steal/copy/adapt/adopt) the assignments and class activities of other teachers.

My First Venture Into Contract Grading

First, I must give credit to both Cathy Davidson and Dave Cormier who were kind enough to openly share their grading contracts to support other educators attempting this for the first time. I definitely borrowed heavily from their example.

The class with which I am conducting my first foray into contract grading is an online version of a National Writing Project Summer Institute. The class is organized as an asynchronous graduate class with the option to take the class for six hours rather than three. The focus of the class, as of all NWP work, is to improve the teaching of writing. We will write, on personal and professional topics, and we will discuss and share our ideas about the teaching of writing. My colleague Lee Skallerup will join us as she wants to learn more about NWP work.

I remain intrigued by the idea of using contract grading for my more traditional classes, as I want all my classes to be a learning community rather than a traditional class. However, the very nature of an NWP SI is to be a learning community and years of experience participating in more traditional SI’s has prepared me to make this class my first foray into contract grading. As my students are teachers (or soon to be teachers) then I hope they will enter into our experiment with the proper spirit. I know this is going to be a great learning experience for me and hopefully for them.

I am interested by the increased opportunity for student success offered by contract grading and I am even more interested about the ways I can use contract grading and peer evaluation to foster self-regulation and self-directed learning in the way that Cathy Davidson argues for flipping or rather cartwheeling our classrooms. I will write more about this experiment/experience in the coming weeks but for now I will simply share my first grading contract and await feedback:

Contract Grading + Peer Evaluation:  Explanation and Contract

This class is an experiment in collective thinking, leadership, and project management.  The intent is to create a workshop (as opposed to classroom) experience where we explore, learn, and grow together while providing a safe place to experiment with our writing, thinking, and teaching as each student takes responsibility for individual and collective work. I want this to be a student-centered experience where you choose what your learning experience will be like, and make it fit your context and priorities.

Contract Grading is designed to change the power dynamic of the classroom. The instructor is still the ‘content expert’, but you are the one who knows how much time you have to devote to this course, and what you’d ideally like to get out of it. The contract lays out what ‘acceptable success’ looks like and then you get to make choices about whether you are willing to do the work to earn a grade deemed ‘excellent’. The contract focuses on your effort rather than on attempting to measure or quantify your learning. The peer evaluation provides support for your efforts in this class as well as helping you develop the necessary self-regulation to continue your growth and development after the class ends. This course aims for encouraging self-valued, lifelong learning.

This is my first time engaging in contract learning as an instructor, so there is a learning curve for me as well as well as for you, but if we work together I believe this can be a positive experience for us all.

Evaluation Method:
You determine your grade for this course by fulfilling a contract that spells out in advance the requirements for fulfilling the terms of your contract.   Peer evaluation comes in when students charged with leading for the week assess (Satisfactory or Unsatisfactory) how well their classmates fulfill their obligations to the class through reflection, discussion, and feedback. Peer leaders will work with the other students in the class, giving feedback to each student and working to achieve an S grade.   If the student fails to submit an assignment or does not submit a satisfactory revision after being given careful feedback, the peer leader will record a U grade for that assignment.   (The same method will work on assignments graded by the professor.) Every student will be in a position of peer-grader (working with two or three students at a time) one week during this class and will report these evaluations using a document viewable by the entire class.  Learning together and giving and receiving feedback is a subject we will discuss and practice.

Contract Grading:
The advantage of contract grading is that you, the student, decide how much work you wish to do; if you complete that work on time and satisfactorily, you will receive the grade for which you contracted.  This means planning ahead, thinking about all of your other obligations and responsibilities and also determining what grade you want or need in this course.   The advantage of contract grading to the professor is no whining, no special pleading, on the students’ part. If you complete the work you contracted for, you get the grade. Done. I respect the student who only needs a C, who has other obligations that preclude doing all of the requirements to earn an A in the course, and who contracts for the C and carries out the contract perfectly.   (This is a major life skill:  taking responsibility for your own workflow.)

Grade Calculating:
By June 5 (our second day of class), each student will email the instructor the contract (see below) for their chosen grade (or grades, contract for Eng 609 follows the contract for 608).  All requirements for each grade are spelled out below. 

There are only two grades for any assignment.  Satisfactory/Unsatisfactory.   Satisfactory is full credit.  Unsatisfactory (poor quality, late, or not submitted) is no credit.   At the end of the course, we tally.   If you fail to do a contracted assignment or your peers do not deem your work satisfactory, you will not receive credit for that assignment.  

Peer leaders (details below) who are in charge for a week will determine if the assignments posted during that week are satisfactory.  If not, they will give extensive and thoughtful feedback for improvement with the aim of collaborating toward Satisfactory work.   The goal is for everyone to produce satisfactory work, and the peer leaders will work with students to achieve that goal. 


REQUIREMENTS FOR A GRADE OF A in ENG 608:
(1) READING AND DISCUSSION, includes reading instructor lecture notes and required reading (book chapters, articles, etc.) as well as posting a substantive reflective response (by Thursday) which reflects your individual experience as well as the reading and making at least two responses to peer posts (by Sunday). Discussion will take place on a designated Google doc in the Reading and Discussion folder. Think of this as a collaborative research paper we are creating about the weekly topic. These can, and should, be inspired by and draw from your individual reflection journals but should not be simple repetition. They should engage your classmates and inspire discussion.

(2) WEEKLY REFLECTION JOURNAL POST, 500-1000 words about your views as a writer as well as a teacher in response to the class reading and discussion as well as writing group activities for the week.  Think of this as an evolving research paper.  It has the same importance and weight and seriousness.   You will create your journal as a Google doc in the Reflection Journal folder and share it with the instructor and class (simply adding a new post each week).   You will receive public feedback and responses from the instructor, any of the other students, and the two or three students leading and assessing that week.  Journal posts must be completed by Sunday night but the work should be ongoing throughout the week (with additions/changes after engaging in various class activities). All students are required to read their classmates journals and are encouraged to comment.   Journal posts may simply be reflections on yourself, your work, or your instructor’s or fellow learners’ ideas, but they should always be substantive, should use secondary sources where appropriate, and can use video, sound, images, animation as well as text.  They are intended to share your learning and make contributions to the field as well as give you the opportunity to wonder, question, challenge what you have learned and what you want to learn as a writer and teacher.

(3) LITERACY NARRATIVE, 500-1000 words (polished personal narrative) about your growth and development as a literate person including details that shaped the reader and writer you are today. Discuss specific events and people who had a powerful influence as well as your views about yourself as a literate person. You will create your literacy narrative as a Google doc in the appropriate Assignment folder and share it with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates literacy narratives and are encouraged to comment.   

(4) CREATIVE WRITING ACTIVITIES

1. Starts, share at least six early drafts with class via the appropriate Writing Workshop folder in Google docs. These should be the result of a simple free write response to a prompt or an idea of your own. These should not be the result of a great deal of time (probably less than an hour). The intent is for you to get in the habit of writing to build your writing muscles. As a part of this process you must also pay it forward by reading your classmates writing prompt responses. You are encouraged to comment but keep these comments positive and encouraging as this work is very preliminary (ie. I would love to see you continue with this piece, your writing made me laugh, cry, etc.). Do let people know if a particular image, phrase, etc. is intriguing or ask questions (but what happened to the baby bluebird?). 
2. Drafts, continue to work on at least two selected early drafts (using the same Google doc so we can track your progress, simply drag it to the appropriate Writing Workshop folder). These do not need to be final, polished drafts when you first share them but they should be complete (even if some sections might be a bit thin). The intent is for you to have something that can be used in writing workshop to start/continue a conversation about writing. On the designated Google doc indicate your particular worries, struggles, and/or concerns for your drafts. Ask for feedback but give your peers some guidelines so it is more meaningful and helpful. As a part of this process you must also pay it forward by reading your classmates drafts and responding to their requests. Your feedback should not focus on surface-level issues (grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.) but deeper writing issues. What is your response to this piece (emotionally, intellectually)? Provide the feedback your peers request but also put some serious thought into the strengths and weaknesses of the piece – help the writer play to their strengths! Give them advice that will help them develop, improve, and finally polish this piece. Learning to evaluate writing is key to becoming a good writer. 
3. Polished, experienced writers will tell you that no piece of writing is ever “done” but your goal here is to bring at least one piece of writing to a polished, complete form that you can proudly share/publish. Repeat the draft process (using the same Google doc so we can track your progress, simply drag it to the appropriate Writing Workshop folder) with one selected piece as necessary to move it toward that polished final draft.

(5)  PROPOSAL, one-page description of an article you could submit to a professional journal relevant to your current/future teaching position. The proposed topic should have clear relevance and connection to teaching writing in your current/future teaching position. Select a journal which could publish such a piece and base your documentation style on that journal’s editorial guidelines. You will create your proposal as a Google doc in the appropriate Assignment folder and share it with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates proposals and are encouraged to comment.   

(6)  ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY, working document that includes at least six credible and focused peer-reviewed journal articles (including at least two from your target publication) on the subject of your article. You can include class-assigned reading on your list but these cannot count for any of your six. You will create your annotated bibliography as a Google doc in the appropriate Assignment folder and share it with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates annotated bibliographies and are encouraged to comment. In addition, you are encouraged to share sources. If your own research includes a source that might be of interest to a classmate share it!   

(7) ARTICLE, 10-12 page article (based on approved proposal) about the teaching of writing. You will share your article as a Google doc in the appropriate Assignment folder with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates articles and are encouraged to comment.   

(8) PHILOSOPHY OF TEACHING WRITING, 3-5 page paper (plus a reference page) in which you reflect on the critical issues (in your opinion) concerning the teaching of writing in your current/future teaching position. You will share your philosophy as a Google doc in the appropriate Assignment folder with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates philosophy statement and are encouraged to comment.   

(9) PEER LEADER, will act as peer leader with one or two additional students to monitor student engagement in required activities. You will be responsible for reading all contributions to the class discussion, weekly reflection journals, and writing workshop for that week and offering substantive feedback for each student then filing an S or U grade with the instructor using the Peer Leader Evaluation document. If a student receives a U in one or more of these areas then it is your responsibility to offer constructive feedback and an opportunity for the student to turn that into a Satisfactory piece of work.

CONTRACT:   By agreeing to this contract for an A in English 608, I agree to all of the terms above (satisfactory completion of #1-9).   
 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONTACT FOR A GRADE OF B IN ENGLISH 608
I wish to earn a grade of B in English 608.   To fulfill my contract for a grade of B, I will complete satisfactorily #1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9 above.
  

-------------------------------------------------

 
CONTACT FOR A GRADE OF C IN ENGLISH 608
I wish to earn a grade of C in English 608.   To fulfill my contract for a grade of C, I will complete satisfactorily #1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 9 above.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
REQUIREMENTS FOR A GRADE OF A in ENG 609:
(1) READING AND DISCUSSION REPORT I, teams of two or more will prepare and share an overview and summary of the key points culled from our weekly reading and discussion as well as reflection journals. The intent is to create a public document (can be written as an article or blog post but could also use some sort of digital presentation tool such as Wiki, Squidoo, Prezi) that contributes to the knowledge of our field and then shared with a broader audience. What was the prevailing theme/central idea of our work for that week and what did we learn about it? These reports are intended to be an Open Educational Resource for the Morehead Writing Project and the National Writing Project and will be Tweeted using hashtags #ENG608 #MWPSI #NWP to connect with those audiences.

(2) READING AND DISCUSSION REPORT II, teams of two or more will prepare and share an overview and summary of the key points culled from our weekly reading and discussion as well as reflection journals. The intent is to create a public document (can be written as an article or blog post but could also use some sort of digital presentation tool such as Wiki, Squidoo, Prezi) that contributes to the knowledge of our field and then shared with a broader audience. What was the prevailing theme/central idea of our work for that week and what did we learn about it? These reports are intended to be an Open Educational Resource for the Morehead Writing Project and the National Writing Project and will be Tweeted using hashtags #ENG608 #MWPSI #NWP to connect with those audiences.

(3) CREATIVE WRITING ACTIVITIES

1. Starts, share at least six early drafts (in addition to those created for 608) with class via Google docs by attaching to designated page. These should be the result of a simple free write response to a prompt or an idea of your own. These should not be the result of a great deal of time (probably less than an hour). The intent is for you to get in the habit of writing to build your writing muscles. As a part of this process you must also pay it forward by reading your classmates writing prompt responses. You are encouraged to comment but keep these comments positive and encouraging as this work is very preliminary (ie. I would love to see you continue with this piece, your writing made me laugh, cry, etc.). Do let people know if a particular image, phrase, etc. is intriguing or ask questions (but what happened to the baby bluebird?).
2. Drafts, continue to work on at least two selected early drafts (in addition to those created for 608) (using the same Google doc so we can track your progress). These do not need to be final, polished drafts but they should be complete (even if some sections might be a bit thin). The intent is for you to have something that can be used in writing workshop to start/continue a conversation about writing. On the designated Google doc indicate your particular worries, struggles, and/or concerns for your drafts. Ask for feedback but give your peers some guidelines so it is more meaningful and helpful. As a part of this process you must also pay it forward by reading your classmates drafts and responding to their requests. Your feedback should not focus on surface-level issues (grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc.) but deeper writing issues. What is your response to this piece (emotionally, intellectually)? Provide the feedback your peers request but also put some serious thought into the strengths and weaknesses of the piece – help the writer play to their strengths! Give them advice that will help them develop, improve, and finally polish this piece.
3. Polished, experienced writers will tell you that no piece of writing is ever “done” but your goal here is to bring at least one piece of writing to a polished, complete form that you can proudly share/publish. Repeat the draft process (using the same Google doc so we can track your progress) with one selected piece (in addition to the one created for 608) as necessary to move it toward that polished final draft.     

(4)  ARTICLE, 20-24 page article (including page count for 608) about the teaching of writing. You will share your article in Google docs with the instructor and class.   You will receive public feedback from the instructor as well some of the other students.  All students are required to read their classmates articles and are encouraged to comment.   

CONTRACT:   By agreeing to this contract for an A in English 609, I agree to all of the terms above (satisfactory completion of #1-4).   
 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONTACT FOR A GRADE OF B IN ENGLISH 609
I wish to earn a grade of B in English 609.   To fulfill my contract for a grade of B, I will complete satisfactorily #1, 2, and 4 above.
  

-------------------------------------------------

 
CONTACT FOR A GRADE OF C IN ENGLISH 609
I wish to earn a grade of C in English 609.   To fulfill my contract for a grade of C, I will complete satisfactorily #1 and 2 above.  
 

2012 CCCC Acceptance

Very excited to receive the news that I was accepted to present at the 63rd Annual Convention of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, which will be held in St. Louis, MO, March 21-24, 2012.

I am presenting as part of a panel "Tranfer: The Gateway to Writing in Multiple Contexts" which includes Heather Hill and Misty Winzenried of the University of Washington and Elizabeth Fogle of Penn State Erie. Our panel will present research results on the transferability of writing in several disciplinary and workplace contexts. It will discuss pedagogies that may possibly aid students in transferring what they know and suggest possible solutions to the problem of transfer.

My specific presentation will share the results of research exploring the impact of recent pedagogical theories focused on helping writers understand how writing works and the implications of these theories for assessment and transfer. The speaker will use results from three mixed-methods studies to address the impact of the pedagogy on writing self-efficacy, or the belief that the individual possesses the skill and knowledge to successfully perform a specific task. Research data will be shared concerning the short- and long-term effects of this pedagogy utilizing case studies generated from three mixed-methods studies including students in first- and second-semester undergraduate writing as well as graduate writing classes.

The Evolution of My Writing Workshop

I intended to blog about my philosophy of grading re Prof Hacker but I just couldn't bring myself to do it. Isn't grading painful enough without thinking about it when I don't have to do so? Then another Prof Hacker post about grading (grading contracts that is) made me think again about how I manage grading. My philosophy of teaching is focused on fostering the growth of the writer and so I really do not like to dwell on the product of writing as I see it as a means to an end (the growth and development of the writer) rather than the end in itself. However, the workshop process that has evolved in my classroom is something that I could write about – and in fact have been asked to write about – and so here it is.

I have always set up my writing classes around some version of a writing workshop. For me, a writing workshop classroom means focusing on the writer and the writing rather than the teacher and the lecture. I believe writers learn and grow when they are actively engaged in writing and participate in a feedback loop that supports revision and fosters self-regulation. I believe the timely administration of a mini-lesson is far more effective than a lecture. But this post is about grading or feedback – not teaching. And so, back to my writing workshop. What does it look like? My writing workshop incorporates drafting and revision as well as a feedback loop. It uses reflection and self-regulation as well as working toward a final portfolio or some other final project.

These elements have remained constant but not static as they have evolved over the course of a decade of teaching writing. Back when I taught modes my students wrote five rough drafts and then after receiving feedback revised four essays and then after more feedback completed three final drafts for a portfolio. Today my students collaborate on a number of small projects before drafting papers that go through workshop before submission for a final grade and more feedback then they use those pieces as part of a larger final project (a blog).

My feedback process has also evolved over time. During my first years of teaching I graded even rough drafts but as I was teaching as many as five sections of writing (with a total of 125 students) at a time that was an incredible burden. Plus, I found that it actually interfered with the revision process as some students would take the attitude that the paper was “good enough” and did not always realize that the grade assigned to a rough draft did not translate into the same grade for a final draft. Around the same time I began teaching writing online and so I moved my workshop into a discussion board. Students posted their drafts in the discussion board and received feedback from me as well as their peers. I really loved this model as it allowed me to focus on helping students improve their writing – and not on grading. I also discovered that the transparency of sharing writing and feedback in this way fostered conversations with and among students about writing that would not have occurred under my old workshop model. I also learned that making the entire workshop process visible in this way made these conversations a resource for all students. I became so enamored of the online writing workshop that I began to use it even with my face-to-face classes.

Then I initiated a collaborative grading research project with two of my colleagues that involved the use of rubrics and I soon found that my blissful workshop model could not seamlessly integrate the use of rubrics. It took a semester to work out how to use rubrics in a way that still offered substantive feedback that supported revision. After the research project was over I asked my students about continuing the use of rubrics (secretly hoping I could abandon them) but students overwhelming responded that they liked the rubrics and found them useful when drafting as well as revising. And so rubrics continue to play an important role in my writing workshop as well as of course my grading.

I have always believed that reflection plays an important part in the growth and development of a writer and that belief has been reinforced by my experience as a teacher, a writer, and a researcher. In fact, my most recent research project reinforced this to an extent that surprised me. At various points during my teaching career I have used writing journals as well as portfolio reflections. I have required that students write a “grade note” when submitted papers that explains how their work meets or exceeds the criteria for a particular grade. My current writing workshop asks students to reflect on their process for each writing assignment and then to metawrite at the end of the semester about their growth and development as a writer. In addition, my students are required to Tweet thoughts about writing which may or may not be further developed in their writing reflections and metawriting.

I hope my writing workshop helps my students grow and develop as writers but my research on that is still pending. You know that pesky dissertation has taken a lot of my time.

My 2010 CCCC Experience -- Remixing and Rethinking in Progress (Part Two)

I started the day with G.14 "Theorizing Agency in Writing Studies" and was interested by Clayton Walker's "The Embodied Act of Writing: Toward a Theory of Affects and Agency" and its connection of agency and classroom discourse.

Then on to H.21 "Research on Learning Transfer, and How We Use That Research to Improve Classroom and Institutional Success". Was particularly interested in Anne Balay's study of transfer at her institution and her call for more longitudinal research on transfer.

That brought me to preparing for my own presentation as part of J.26 "Daring to Remix, Renegotiate, and Reassess Writing Assessment" with Rebecca Rickly, Fred Kemp, and Ronda Wery. I talked about "Negotiated Assignments and Rubrics" and am more than happy to provide notes etc. for any interested in my experience with collaboration and negotiation.

After rehashing our talk and chatting with others following our talk it was too late to attend the last session of the day. Had intended to see K.08 "Revising Genre Theory: Reporting on the Emergence of Online Health Communication Genres" to be a supportive friend.

Enjoyed a leisurely dinner with Ronda Wery and Liz Pohland and then on to celebrate Rebecca Rickly's 50th birthday party at a party hosted by Joyce Locke Carter. Very exciting combination of folks and lots of fun.

Saturday morning meant dealing with business of checking out and finding car in huge underground garage beneath Galt House then having a very productive meeting regarding Morehead Writing Project with Tom Fox.

Managed to squeeze in one last session -- O.12 "Web 2.0: Problems and Possibilities". Was interested in John Alberti's discussion of power and pedagogy as well as Annie Mendenhall and Elizabeth Brewer's discussion of interactivity and power.

Then was called away by family emergency so I couldn't attend P.10 "Creating Narratives for Technical to Professional Communication" which promised to include very interesting work by Christina Low, http://www.faculty.english.ttu.edu/dragga/, and Alissa Barber Torres.