[CBW_Exec] Before CBW Workshop 2010 (call for help)

[Shannon Carter]

Thanks, Deborah! Sounds marvelous. I bet you are right about internet
access. I hadn't seen that note, but I think it went to Hannah. We'll ask
when she returns. 

Thanks for volunteering!

That means we have the following table leaders:

Group 1: Deborah (electronic posters/visual essays and/or powerpoint)
Group 2: Barbara (blogs/posters)
Group 3: Susan (protest signs)
Group 4: Hannah (whatever she'd like!)
Group 5: Shannon (I'm digging the idea of puppets and/or posters, but I'm up
for whatever; I'll get with Hannah so I can be sure to bring the right
supplies). 

I'm sure Hannah will follow up with us on this. If anyone else can
volunteer, we'd LOVE to have you. Still room and still time!


See you soon! 
Shannon


On 3/9/10 8:52 AM, "Deborah Mutnick" <Deborah.Mutnick at liu.edu> wrote:

> Hi Shannon,
>  
> The program for the day looks great. I love the idea of having a hands-on
> multi-modal session! One thing I wanted to point out is that I believe Eileen
> Maley sent a message saying all the rooms have internet access. Does anyone
> know for a fact if that's the case?
>  
> Also, especially if there's internet access, I'll volunteer to work on
> electronic posters/visual essays. I can also help out with powerpoint if
> anyone's interested in working in that medium.
>  
> See you all soon!
>  
> Deborah
>  
> Deborah Mutnick, Director of Writing
> English Department
> 1 University Plaza
> Long Island University
> Brooklyn, NY 11201
> 718-488-1110
>  
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> From: cbw_exec-bounces at tamu-commerce.edu on behalf of Shannon Carter
> Sent: Mon 3/8/2010 8:42 PM
> To: Conference of Basic Writing Executive Board
> Subject: [CBW_Exec] Before CBW Workshop 2010 (call for help)
> 
> 
> Hi, all--
> 
> Just days before we all converge upon Kentucky!  Looking forward to it!
> 
> A few items FYI, and a couple of different requests for assistance.
> 
> First, we have a large number of attendees registered for this CBW workshop.
> Three weeks ago that number was close to thirty, and that number doesn't
> include most of the Executive Board. Expect a big crowd!
> 
> Second, a couple of requests:
> 
> 1. Anyone up for taking charge of getting the word out via the list Kelly
> Ritter prepared? (see previous message) We are looking for someone to take
> charge of deciding on a good use for that list and then making it happen
> 
> 2. Can you lead an hour-long, hands-on session during which participants
> actually make something (multimodal composing) in response to some of the
> ideas discussed? We might continue this into the final hour of the day, too.
> I'm asking here about "Exploring Multimodal Writing" (session description
> below) but perhaps even in "Reflection and Application" session at the day's
> end (session description below).
> 
> Additional details:
> Thanks to Hannah's thoughtful planning, the workshop includes an hour of
> "hands-on" options for participants to play with various modalities (session
> description below). Hannah would like for the audience for these multimodal
> projects to be as immediate as the day after, with some of us taking over a
> table or some other space in a high-traffic area of the conference hotel to
> share the projects. A grassroots effort to get the word out.
> 
> What word? Depends on workshop attendees, we think.
> 
> That's where you come in: We'd like to give participants options, with a
> facilitator at each table drawn from you guys.
> 
> 
> What multimodal options would you like to share and lead?
> 
> 
> CCCC can't provide equipment for us, but perhaps we can bring our own?
> 
> A reminder: Multimodal needn't require high-end technology, though it seems
> helpful to include some of those options.
> 
> Can we get each of you to suggest and/or sign up for something you'd like to
> lead? 
> 
> Here's a starter list. We know you guys have much to add.
> 
> I'll bring a large role of brown paper, which can become any number of things.
> I'll also bring my laptop, speakers, and a handful of flip cameras.
> 
> What will you bring? What option(s) can you lead for us?
> 
> We can offer several and see where folks go, so if you can lead more than one
> that'd be great.  No need for extreme expertise in this. We want to push one
> other to take risks by experimenting with other modalities, right? I'm out of
> my comfort zone in a number of these areas. We'll push through this together!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. Posters (scissors, glue, construction paper, markers?)
> 2. Puppets! (paper bags, glue, construction paper)
> 3. Protest signs (I think Susan is all over this; makes sense to me. Perhaps
> others?) 
> 4. Podcast (laptop? audio recorder? Audacity or other easy-to-use program?)
> 5. Video Essay (laptop? flip camera? Movie Maker or other such program?)
> 6. Publisher (laptop? pamphlets, etc.; can we get access to a printer?)
> 7. Comic Life (or one or more of the comic enabling options NCTE provides?
> This may only work if we have internet access, and I'm not sure we have
> internet access. Very cool, though. See www.comiclife.com)
> 8. Xtranormal: Text-to-Movie (http://www.xtranormal.com/). Crazy easy to use
> and all sorts of fun. You plug in the text and the characters come alive to
> speak your words. The problem: need internet access for this too.
> 9. Powerpoint (laptop? Powerpoint?)
> 10. ??
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts? I share the abstract below, as well as some notes from Hannah. I'm
> happy to answer any questions you may have about this portion of the day.
> 
> Hannah's enjoying a much deserved vacation right now, so I offer her words to
> further explain her vision here. They really helped me wrap my mind around
> what she was proposing here:
> "In my intro at the beginning of the day, I will lay out some theory which
> will connect post-process to community engaged (and therefore potentially
> justice-oriented) and multi-modal writing. This will include products oriented
> toward real-world engagement (publication for specific, authentic audiences)
> and process which focuses on collaboration (which makes sense with emerging
> technologies so that people can share what they know and their varying
> expertises and intelligences are valuable, and is also inherently
> voice-enhancing, as collaborative processes mean that folks share experiences,
> even if their final product is poorly done or even a "dead letter"). Okay, so
> given that, for that hour, 11-12, have the participants . . . work
> collaboratively in groups to actually produce some product that goes gout to
> CCCC. It's perfect, because teachers of basic writing are those who are
> marginalized, right? Our students: (from our proposal) "marginalized voices
> disproportionately found in basic writing classrooms. That is, those placed
> into basic writing classrooms are more likley to be low-to-middle income, have
> hidden or visible disabilities, be ethnically and/or linguistically non-white,
> or have English as a second language (Matsuda)." We are disproportionately
> adjunct, women, at community colleges, etc. So have them work to produce an
> actual document that goes out to CCCC-tell our stories." (Hannah Ashley, email
> dated 2/12)
> 
> Perhaps another nice way to complement the "I am Basic Writing" campaign. If
> we are basic writing, who are we? If our students wear these buttons, who are
> they? If our basic writing programs are changing (and some are disappearing),
> who might be denied access to higher education so now are found mute (affixing
> an "I am Basic Writing" button to a ghost of the student who, under different
> legislation, would have been populating our basic writing classrooms but now
> must defer that dream of higher education altogether.
> 
> Session descriptions below.
> 
> Thanks!
> Shannon
> 
> 
> 
> Social Justice, Multi-modalities and Basic Writers
> 
> Session: W.7 on Mar 17, 2010 from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM    Cluster: 106)
> Information Technologies
> Type: Workshop: All-Day Wednesday    Interest Emphasis: race/ethnicity
> Level Emphasis: all    Focus: basic writing
> 
> Institutions across the US are decreasing funds for Basic Writing (BW).
> Education stakeholders describe BW students as â?omarginalâ?? or
> â?oremedialâ?? (Greene and McAlexander), and identify BW students by
> â?odifferenceâ?? in race, social class, ability, and language (Matsuda;
> Sanchez and Paulson). Institutional policies create barriers for BW students,
> indicating a need for equitable conditions for BW students. To address these
> issues, participants explore intersections of social justice, multi-modal
> writing, and BW post-process pedagogy.
> 
> OPENING CONCEPTS: 9-10
> Co-Chair: â?oSocial Justice and Multi-modal Writing for Basic Composition: A
> Post-Process Frameworkâ??
> I suggest a framework for considering intersections of multi-modal writing and
> post-process writing instruction. Multi-modal writing suggests a post-process
> writing pedagogy that includes collaboration, consideration of specific and
> authentic audiences outside the classroo m, and real-world engagement with
> final products and publication (Arroyo; Kessler). According to Heard,
> compositionists have been largely â?osilentâ?? in response to the post-process
> formulation of writing as uncodifiable, not bound by hard-and-fast rules; he
> asserts that one way to practicably engage diverse writers in the
> give-and-take of post-process writing instruction is through community-engaged
> writing. 
> 
> Speaker 1 and Speaker 2: â?oCBW Social Justice Workgroupâ??
> We collaborate with participants to revise the CBW Social Justice Initiative,
> and to provide local context for considering social justice: the ruling
> against the Louisville school district in the 2007 Supreme Court desegregation
> case. The district argued that educational equity could be achieved through
> race-conscious desegregation. Justice Breyerâ?Ts dissent spoke against the
> Courtâ?Ts majority; he stated that the 5-4 ruling would re-segregate schools.
> From this context, participants reflect on! t heir views of social justice and
> collaborate on revision of the CBW Social Justice Initiative.
> 
> KEYNOTE: 10-10:45
> 
> Speaker 3: â?oThe Making of New Literacies: African American Youth and the
> Politics of Placeâ??
> Drawing on a multi-year ethnographic study conducted in New York Cityâ?Ts
> Harlem community, I employ a participatory action approach to engage in new
> directions in literacy research on African American youth in socially
> constructed spaces (i.e., gentrifying communities). I investigate how the
> lived experiences and literacy practices of African American youth are
> affected by public attempts to gentrify their community. This investigation
> reveals the following: the ways in which race and place are connected; how
> African American youth view their role within the gentrification process
> through use of multimodal communicative tools/resources; and how spatial
> narratives (i.e., place-making; community change) should be considered in
> research on youth, school! in g, and multicultural education. Attention is
> paid to how youth write against pervasive narratives that depict their
> communities (and hence their identities) as "inferior" and "marginalized."
> 
> COFFEE BREAK
> 
> EXPLORING MULTI-MODAL WRITING 11-12
> Facilitators: â?oSmall Group Discussion and Hands-On Activities.â??
> CBW facilitators collaborate with participants to explore whether multimodal
> texts provide greater opportunities for students to speak back to
> â?osocietyâ?? in terms of issues of justice. This section alternates between
> discussion and opportunities to experiment with multi-modal composing
> strategies, including technologies of films, graphic novels, blogs, and
> websites.
> 
> LUNCH
> 
> REFLECTION: 1-1:30
> Co-Chair: â?oMulti-modal Writing and Social Justice: The Right Mix or Mixed
> Up?â?? 
> We reflect together on theories and practices encountered in our morning
> activities.
> 
> INSTITUTIONAL DIFFERENCES, EQUITIES AND INEQUITIES: 1:30-3:00
> Sp! ea ker 4: â?oRace, Racism, and the Institutional Status of Basic Writing":
> I examine the dismantling of iconic BW programs and argue that by enacting
> race conscious efforts to reaffirm such historical ties, we might devise new
> strategies for preserving remaining BW programs, and for developing new ones
> to meet the needs of these marginalized students.
> 
> Speaker 5 and Speaker 6: â?oConference on Basic Writing Workgroup on the
> National Status of Basic Writing Programsâ??:
> We present second year results of a national survey on BW programs; we focus
> on what survey results tell us about multi-modal writing and commitments to
> social justice.
> 
> Speaker 7: â?oCase Study of Institutional Change: The Accelerated Learning
> Project (ALP)â??
> I describe our search for a BW model that would justly serve our students, and
> the results: the ALP. This case study is based on five semesters of
> evaluation. I discuss ALPâ?Ts modest costs, and plans for the future.
> 
> BREAK
> REFLECTION AND APPLICATION: 3:15-5
> Facilitators: â?oSmall group discussion: Is Your Program Serving Social
> Justice Ends?â?? 
> Co-Chairs: â?oWhat Does Basic Writing Stand For?â?? Participants revisit the
> social justice initiative and discuss communicating BW needs to the larger
> world.
> 
> 
> Participant    Affiliation    Speech Title (if known)
> Hannah Ashley
> (Chair)    West Chester University    Social justice and Multi-modal Writing
> for Basic Composition, really? A Post-Process Framework
> Greg Glau
> (Facilitator)    Northern Arizona University
> Marcia Ribble
> (Facilitator)    University of Cincinnati
> Barbara Gleason
> (Facilitator)    City College of New York
> Susan Naomi Bernstein
> (Speaker 1)    LaGuardia CC- CUNY    CBW Social Justice Workgroup
> William Lalicker
> (Speaker 2)    West Chester University    CBW Social Justice Workgroup
> Valerie Kinloch
> (Speaker 3)    The Ohio State University    The Making of New Literacies:
> African American Youth and the Politics of Place
> Steve Lamos
> (Speaker 4)    UCB    Race, Racism, and the Institutional Status of Basic
> Writing
> Deborah Mutnick
> (Speaker additional)    Long Island University    Conference on Basic Writing
> Workgroup on the National Status of Basic Writing Programs
> Rebecca Mlynarczyk
> (Speaker additional)    Kingsborough Community College, CUNY    Conference on
> Basic Writing Workgroup on the National Status of Basic Writing Programs
> Peter Adams
> (Speaker additional)    Community College Baltimore County    Case Study of
> institutional Change: The Accelerated Learning Project (ALP)
> 
> 
> 
> EXPLORING MULTI-MODAL WRITING 11-12
> Facilitators: â?oSmall Group Discussion and Hands-On Activities.â??
> CBW facilitators collaborate with participants to explore whether multimodal
> texts provide greater opportunities for students to speak back to
> â?osocietyâ?? in terms of issues of justice. This section alternates between
> discussion and opportunities to experiment with multi-modal composing
> strategies, including technologies of films, graphic novels, blogs, and
> websites.

-- 
Shannon Carter, PhD
Associate Professor of English
Director, Writing Programs
Department of Literature and Languages
Texas A&M University-Commerce
Commerce, Texas 75429-3011
Shannon_Carter at tamu-commerce.edu
http://www.shannoncarter.info