discuss the five training principles first articulated in Preparing Educators for Online
Writing Instruction: Principles and Processes: investigation, immersion,
individualization, association, and reflection. The connect each of these principles with a
training scenario and potential research avenues and practical strategies. They end the
webtext with a call for program administrators and online instructors to share their
experiences and join together “to articulate, define, and theorize online training processes
for both writing instructors and other educators.”
Hewett, Beth L., and Christa Ehmann Powers. "Online Teaching and Learning:
Preparation, Development, and Organizational Communication." Technical
16.1 (2007): 1-11.
Hewett and Ehmann Powers focus on the need for training and professional development
opportunities for online instructors at all levels of OWI in a guest editors' letter of the
“Online Teaching and Learning: Preparation, Development, and Organizational
Communication” special issue. Arguing that a relative dearth of scholarly articles written
to assist with training and professional development may stem from a lack of a shared
vocabulary for such needs, they introduce three articles that address training,
development, and organizational communication: Kirk St. Amant's “Online Education in
an Age of Globalization: Foundational Perspectives and Practices for Technical
Communication Instructors and Trainers”; Lisa Meloncon's “Exploring Electronic
Landscapes: Technical Communication, Online Learning, and Instructor Preparedness”;
and Kelli Cargile Cook's “Immersion in a Digital Pool: Training Prospective Online
Instructors in Online Environments.” Altogether, these authors provide perspectives on
preparing educators for a global educational setting, self-selecting for teaching in online
environments, and--in keeping with the principles of immersion and reflection--using
course archives as “constructive hypertext” for training and development.
Hocks, Mary E. "Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital Writing Environments."
College Composition and Communication
54 (2003): 629-656.
Hocks applies principles of visual rhetoric to two professional academic hypertexts and
student work written and designed for the Internet. She argues that writing teachers need
to consider features like audience stance, transparency, and hybridity as they teach visual
rhetoric for the web; as they do, she claims, they can show their students that such visual
rhetoric can be a “transformative process of design.” Writing in digital environments
offers an important new application of visual rhetoric, and we must incorporate these
applications into a new pedagogy of writing as design.
Jafari, Ali, Patricia McGee, and Colleen Carmean. "Managing Courses, Defining
Learning: What Faculty, Students, and Administrators Want." EDUCAUSE
41.4 (2006): 50-70.
Jafari, McGee, and Carmean examine the “next generation of e-learning environments …
the complete set of technology tools that students and faculty members will need for
support of their day-to-day learning, teaching, and research, whether in face-to-face,
online, or hybrid courses.” Based on a study of faculty, student, and administrator
stakeholders, they first look at the advantages and shortcomings of current
learning/course management systems (L/CMS) in three key areas: compatibility and
interoperability; usability; smartness and dumbness. The authors then turn to what the
three sets of stakeholders would like in a L/CMS: smart systems; environment; archives
and storage; multimodal/multimedia communication channels; collaboration tools; and
mobile computing. Finally, Jafari, McGee, and Carmean analyze the outcomes of their
study from the perspectives of a pedagogist, a learning researcher, and a systems
Jones, Marshall, and Stephen Harmon. "What Professors Need to Know About
Technology to Assess Online Student Learning." New Directions for Teaching
2002.91 (2002): 19-30.
Jones and Harmon provide a quick tutorial on assessment and technology, explaining
how the technology can and should be used to make assessment as effective (and
painless) as possible. Assessment can be especially difficult for faculty who are not as
technologically savvy as the students, so the authors connect and translate standard face-
to-face assessment practices with options and opportunities in the online classroom.
Knowlton, Dave. "A Theoretical Framework for the Online Classroom: A Defense and
Delineation of a Student-Centered Pedagogy." New Directions for Teaching and
2000.84 (2000): 6-14.
Knowlton examines the differences between teacher-centered and student-centered
classrooms, argues in favor of the student-centered approach for the online classroom,
and explains how a student-centered online classroom can work. He believes online
classrooms are most effective when students “determine the direction of a course through
their active engagement,” but he also argues teachers must be aware of and able to react
to the directions students are taking the course.
Kynard, Carmen. "’Wanted: Some Black Long Distance [Writers]’: Blackboard Flava-
Flavin and Other Afrodigital Experiences in the Classroom." Computers and
24 (2007): 329-345.
Kynard examines the digital communication of students of African descent in a
predominantly black college in order to understand how the students construct their
identities. He explains how they “revocabularize” the academic setting to reconstruct
knowledge about writing and about themselves. Kynard concludes with a discussion of
his own vocabulary in the classroom and an analysis that places the students in reference
to the work of John Oliver Killens.
Miller, Susan. "How near and yet How Far? Theorizing Distance Teaching." Computers
18 (2001): 321-328.
Miller maps out the theoretical principles that will help teachers think critically about
C# Word - Document Processing in C#.NET
GetDocument(); //Document clone IDocument doc0 = doc.Clone(); //Get all picture in document List<Bitmap> bitmaps = doc0.GetAllPicture(); Create, Add, Delete or how to add image to pdf acrobat; add jpg to pdf file
distance learning. She focuses on the ways in which students’ and teachers’ identities
must shift in these new contexts. She identifies the changes that tend to occur when
writing courses move online and argues that Composition Studies needs “a theorized
preparation for shifts in pedagogy that distance courses make visible.”
Miller, Susan. "A Review of Research on Distance Education in Computers and
Composition." Computers and Composition
18 (2001): 423-30.
Miller reviews research on teaching writing via distance-learning published in Computers
and Composition between 1994 and 1999. She is identifying trends in the research, and
her analysis of the twelve relevant articles from this period leads to her to identify two
main categories: (1) articles that theorize distance education in the context of writing
instruction and (2) articles that describe distance education in practice. She concludes by
offering suggestions for further research that would build upon the foundation of the
Miller-Cochran, Susan K., and Rochelle L. Rodrigo. "Determining Effective Distance
Learning Designs through Usability Testing." Distance Learning: Evolving
23.1 (2006): 91-107.
Miller-Cochran and Rodrigo present the results of the usability testing they conducted to
assess the design of their online first-year composition courses. They offer two
generalizable results: (1) their tests offer a model for conducting usability testing of
online writing classes to anticipate and alleviate design problems, and (2) their analysis
provides an understanding of approaches for course design in online writing courses. The
former offers an indication of how to design the tests, gather the data, interpret the
results, and implement their findings. The latter are guidelines developed after examining
a number of writing classes and applying design principles from usability engineering.
This article can be a valuable resource for first-time teachers of OWI.
Olson-Horswill, Laurie. "Online Writing Groups." Teaching English in the Two-Year
30 (2002): 188-197.
Olson-Horswill argues that, if used well, “discussion forum technology connects online
students in interactive, real-life writing groups,” with results that “can be even more
interactive and personal than in a traditional classroom.” Drawing from a case study of a
freshman composition course that followed the process model of reading, discussion,
writing, writing groups, and writing workshops, Olson-Horswill found that the online
groups, once trust was established, were equally as cohesive as face-to-face cohorts. In
addition, because these groups were not bound by the space and time of the classroom
nor governed by body language or facial expressions, they were even more “pulled
together by real thoughts and voices in writing.”
Palmquist, Michael, Kate Kiefer, James Hartivigsen, and Barbara Goodlew. "Contrasts:
Teaching and Learning About Writing in Traditional and Computer Classrooms."
Computers in the Composition Classroom: A Critical Sourcebook
. Ed. Michelle
Sidler, Richard Morris, and Elizabeth Overman Smith. New York: Bedford/St.
Martin’s Press, 2008. 251-270.
Palmquist, Kiefer, Hartivigsen, and Goodlew recount two empirical studies (the
“Transitions Study” and the “New Teachers Study”) designed to assist educators as they
cross boundaries between teaching in traditional and online settings. These studies, which
compared classroom settings and student behaviors/attitudes over time, led to a number
of themes: (1) differences in classroom settings impacted daily planning; (2) teachers
adopted more “take charge” roles in the traditional setting and more decentralized roles in
online settings; (3) computer classroom students talked more often with teachers; (4)
students used computer classrooms as a worksite whereas traditional classroom students
resisted writing activities; (5) teachers were able to transfer more successful activities
from computer to traditional settings; (6) even when they believed in the pedagogical
benefits, teachers who were less familiar with technology resisted using it; and (7)
students in the two settings differed in their attitudes about writing, writing performance,
previous writing instruction, and interaction.
Palmquist, Michael E. "Network-Supported Interaction in Two Writing Classrooms."
Computers and Composition
10.4 (1993): 25-57.
Palmquist recounts an early empirical study of two asynchronous, CMC-based
composition classes to better understand the nature of the talk occurring in the on-line
environment. He indicates that computer classrooms offer researchers an important tool
for learning how student writers in peer groups address each other’s writing. The
research, designed to answer whether and how networks “shape curricular and classroom
content,” he analyzes the conversations that students have in two classes. One is the
“information” class where students independently researched topics of their own choices;
the other is the “argument” class where students shared both a topic and a knowledge
base. Palmquist's findings suggest that students’ on-line discussions in the “argument”
class revealed a stronger group cohesion and deeper critical skills, indicating that subject
matter affects critical commentary in on-line peer groups.
Peterson, Patricia Webb. "The Debate About Online Learning: Key Issues for Writing
Teachers." Computers and Composition
18 (2001): 359-370.
Peterson addresses the fears of students and teachers regarding changes that occur in
distance-based classrooms, focusing on teacher roles, education goals, and student
learning. She claims that the increase in distance education, which occurs through the
written word, will make writing teachers' expertise more valuable. She notes the potential
clarity problems in written messages, because, in an online course, the student's only
option is to seek further understanding using the written medium. Peterson urges
educators to think critically about potential problems with distance learning, but also to
look for and consider the potential benefits of the medium.
Ragan, Tillman J., and Patricia R. White. "What We Have Here Is a Failure to
Communicate: The Criticality of Writing in Online Instruction." Computers and
18 (2001): 399-409.
Ragan and White stress a need for new writing skills to meet the learner in the online
environment, and they offer some specific, practical examples that are developed
primarily for e-mail communication. They explain that the speed of online
communication opens the “enormous potential” for miscommunication between teachers
and their students. They suggest using the “Golden Triangles of Online Communication”
as a model for communication: looking to the learner, the context of the interaction, and
the task to be discussed online as relevant to writing a comprehensible message.
Selber, Stuart. "Reimagining the Functional Side of Computer Literacy." College
Composition and Communication
55 (2004): 470-503.
Selber argues that students need functional computer literacies in addition to the critical
literacies that have received the most focus in the past decade. Functional literacy has
been considered as repressive “indoctrination into the value systems of the dominant
computer culture” and insufficiently “self-reflexive.” He provides five functional, yet
socially complex, areas that functionally literate students understand: (1) using computers
to achieve educational goals; (2) understanding the social conventions that help
determine computer use; (3) making use of the specialized discourses associated with
computers; (4) effectively managing their own “online worlds”; and (5) resolving
technological problems that interfere with communication.
Selber, Stuart. Multiliteracies for a Digital Age
. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2004.
Selber offers a three-fold framework as an approach to helping postsecondary students
develop functional, critical, and rhetorical literacy. Using these categories, he argues that
these particular heuristics can enable educators to take part in “a larger, ongoing
conversation about the special responsibilities of humanities teachers in a digital age.” He
forms his argument around what he believes students of higher education need if they are
to be computer literate users, questioners, and producers of technology. Selber’s approach
to the literacies that students need is aimed at addressing “one-way literacy models as a
foundation for computer initiatives,” wherein “many teachers of writing and
communication simply transfer wholesale to the screen their existing assumptions, goals,
Selfe, Cynthia L. Technology and Literacy in the Twenty-First Century: The Importance
of Paying Attention
. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 1999.
Selfe argues polemically that educators and scholars in the English studies field and
subfields must “pay attention” to the intersections of technology and literacy, or the “new
literacy agenda.” More specifically, she calls for such educators and scholars to “bring to
bear” their skills and knowledge to technological literacy as Americans will need
assistance in preparing for the technological challenges of the twenty first century. She
notes that the broader political agenda of expanding technological uses might not match
what humanists see as the most pressing needs of technology/literacy education in this
country. This oft-cited monograph remains current for OWI scholars despite its age
because technology is becoming even more inextricably intertwined with literacy than it
was in 1999.
Sidler, Michelle, Richard Morris, and Elizabeth Overman Smith. Computers in the
Composition Classroom: A Critical Sourcebook
. Boston, MA: Bedford/St.
Sidler, Morris, and Smith present previously published research in six sections: (1) the
earliest theoretical frameworks for the field of computers and writing; (2) literacy and
access; (3) writers and identity; (4) writers and composing; (5) institutional programs;
and (6) upcoming “New-Media” multimedia composition writing and pedagogies. The
text, available free to educators through the publisher, is a potentially valuable collection
that will assist with program development and teacher training regarding OWI.
Stine, Linda. "The Best of Both Worlds: Teaching Basic Writers in Class and Online."
Journal of Basic Writing
23.2 (2004): 49-69.
Stine begins this article by noting that although there is general agreement on the place of
computers and word processing in basic writing pedagogy, that agreement “is harder to
find … on the question of whether online instruction is equally justifiable for basic
writers.” The author proceeds to report on a hybrid course that she taught by first raising
some of the problems associated with basic writers online, and then turning to many of
the opportunities for this constituency in a distance learning setting. In the final analysis
Stine argues for a flexible approach, since “the more options we consider, the more likely
we are to find the match that best fits our students’ needs, our institutional resources, and
our own individual teaching strengths.”
Sugimoto, Taku. "Non-Existence of Systematic Education on Computerized Writing in
Japanese Schools." Computers and Composition
24 (2007): 317-328.
Sugimoto points out an apparent paradox: Japanese schools, especially at the level of
higher-education, typically own sufficient numbers of computers and technological
resources; however, Japanese writing instruction rarely incorporates computers.
Sugimoto’s article seeks to resolve the paradox by examining the Japanese culture. He
concludes that writing instruction has not been traditionally taught in the higher education
system and was taken for granted, although this is now changing. Additionally, he points
out that writing is, for many Japanese people, a collaborative effort and a social activity,
whereas writing in academic settings is largely individualistic.
Takayoshi, Pamela, and Brian Huot, eds. Teaching Writing with Computers: An
. NY: Houghton Mifflin, 2003.
Takayoshi and Huot provide a text with currency for new instructors in OWI settings.
Although they value the relevancy of earlier compiled scholarship, they present more
current technological and theoretical discussions to meet the realities of online writing
classrooms in 2003. Selected authors discuss (1) writing technologies for composition
pedagogies; (2) learning to teach with technology; (3) teaching beyond physical
boundaries (or, distance learning); (4) teaching and learning new media; and (5)
assigning and assessing student writing. The editors stress that “a notion of pedagogical
practice grounded in the theory, reflection, and inquiry that drive our practices is an
important component of this volume.”
Thatcher, Barry. "Situating L2 Writing in Global Communication Technologies."
Computers and Composition
22 (2005): 279-295.
Thatcher argues for a shift in a researcher’s methodological approach to the interaction
between technology and culture, away from a focus on how local communities are
affected by technologies toward a broad, intercultural perspective that considers the
complexities of how different technologies affect various religions, political systems, etc.
He argues that this shift will help avoid naturalized assumptions about how any single
culture might react to a certain technology and allow the intercultural researcher and
instructor to situate any specific group within global cultural patterns.
Tornow, Joan. Link/Age: Composing in the Online Classroom
. Logan, UT: Utah State
University Press, 1997.
Tornow provides a narrative description of online writing instruction to demonstrate the
possibilities for building communities in online classrooms. She studies the way students
talk to each other in online classrooms and discovers that the process of composing
online is leading to a new notion of literacy. Rich with textual exchanges between
students who never met face-to-face, Tornow presents online writing instructors with an
informative and potentially positive vision of the future.
Tuzi, Frank. "The Impact of E-Feedback on the Revisions of L2 Writers in an Academic
Writing Course." Computers & Composition
21 (2004): 217-235.
Tuzi explores the benefit of combining both electronic feedback (e-feedback) and oral-
feedback in the American freshman composition classroom. Focusing on second
language (L2) writers, he examines the e-feedback of twenty L2 writers and concludes
that e-feedback proves more beneficial than oral feedback in stimulating global revision.
However, Tuzi argues that students enjoy oral feedback more and generally prefer that
method. He concludes with implications for L2 writing instruction.
Writing in Digital Environments Research Center Collective. "Why Teach Digital
Writing?" Kairos: Rhetoric, Technology, Pedagogy
10.1 (2005). 11 September
The Writing in Digital Environments (WIDE) Research Center Collective, working under
the premise that “networked computers create a new kind of writing space that changes
the writing process and the basic rhetorical dynamic between writers and readers,”
addresses the need to teach writing digitally in digital spaces. Among the implications
they see for digital writing are (1) traditional print-based rhetorical theory is not adequate
for digital rhetoric, (2) it is not possible to teach writing responsibly or effectively in
traditional classrooms, and (3) we must shift our approaches to accommodate writing
instruction in digitally mediated spaces. The uniqueness of this webtext resides in its
multidimensional approach to responding to the question asked by the title, and in that it
argues with the primary intention of assisting educators in responding to this question in
their own institutional settings. Overall, this webtext provides tools for practitioners and
administrators who face the question of why they would or should teach digital writing.
Yancey, Kathleen Blake. "The Pleasures of Digital Discussions: Lessons, Challenges,
Recommendations, and Reflections." Teaching Writing with Computers: An
. Ed. Pamela Takayoshi and Brian Huot. Boston, MA: Houghton
Mifflin Company, 2003. 105-117.
Yancey outlines the uses, advantages, and disadvantages of e-mail, listserves, and other
forums for digital discussions in writing pedagogy. She argues that “these digital forums
offer teachers new ways to connect with students, new ways for students to communicate
with each other and the world at large, and, not least, new genres in which to learn.”
Yancey is a proponent of these technologies, though in her view their inclusion in the
“classroom is both exciting and frustrating.” She cautions, however, that we must use
common sense informed by “planning … experience … review, analysis, [and]
reflection.” The essay closes with a rubric of questions that Yancey created for planning
the incorporation of “ediscourse” in composition courses.
Documents you may be interested
Documents you may be interested