we need research focused on suchstudents’ success, retention, and learning as an essential part of ournational agenda.

graduates with MAsor PhDs who leave their degree programs with minimal or non-existent coursework in pedagogy, composition theory, and assess-ment.

being effective in the ever-changing writing class-room is most likely to occur when such creative or literary studyis supported by principles and pedagogical content knowledge incomposing, critical reading, rhetorical knowledge, and knowledgeof processes.

Efforts to rebuild board- andstate-level documents that allow for faculty layoff in the case of pro-gram discontinuance or closure have been achieved or are under-way in Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Wyoming

It stands out that the MA credential underprepares mostgraduates who plan to enter a teaching position in which first-yearwriting courses are likely to be their primary responsibilitie

he MA degree curriculum is “littledifferent from what might have been found fifty years ago: Britishand American literature surveys; period course requirements; majorauthors; the three standard genres of fiction, poetry, and drama;and an occasional special topics course” (9).

the absence of atten-tion to systematic research on pedagogy and first-year writing (aswe will demonstrate later in the book) has particular exigency forthose instructors whose prior graduate preparation is not alignedwith the intensive work they will do in college writing classrooms

nstructors who have responsibilities for teachingwriting courses as well as other areas of English are discouragedfrom seeing relationships between those areas of their professionalpreparation and their daily classroom work. This is a mismatch, weargue, that calls for a shift in the scholarship we call knowledge.

Many two-year-college instructors have graduate preparation atthe master’s or doctoral level focused nearly exclusively on litera-ture and creative writing. As a result, their primary research andcreative work, for those whose institutions reward such efforts, fallsin those related areas that are significant to their professional identi-ties within English studies, even though writing courses make upmost of their teaching responsibilities.

These are all expectations for tenure-line faculty but nota usual component of the workload of instructors working off thetenure track, meaning that the glue that holds our collective worktogether is weakening

The importance of faculty who aretrained in administrative and program issues, especially specific toopen-admissions and -access institutions and changing educationalstructures, is even more evident.

faculty preparing for theacademic life of teaching-intensive schools need a different kind ofgraduate school experience than the ones we currently have.

In the context of this real-ity, to integrate the knowledge production in writing studies withthe focus of the work people do—and in the actual places they doit—is to create the center, the core, that offers an avenue into thepublic discourse around writing. Yet such discourse is increasinglylegislated and mandated by external stakeholders (see Adler-Kass-ner’s CCCC chair’s address, 2017).

what would happen to our students andcommunity. All I could think about was the UW Colleges Mis-sion that attracted me to my position

We ar-gue that the ease with which our programs, structures, and poli-cies were discarded in favor of those of many of the four-year hostinstitutions is not unlike the way that writing studies scholarshipovervalues the experiences of a specific echelon of students and fac-ulty while devaluing the expertise built from years of curriculum,instruction, and assessment work in first-year composition studies

“We would prefer people with real world experience and academic proficiency in the core subjects when they’re teaching English, math, science, not saying, ‘Oh, I got I went to the School of Education somewhere and they taught me kind of how to teach,’” DeSantis said. “Because I’ve seen that, and I’ve been very underwhelmed by it.”

Q5: Lastly, what’s one resource you’d highly recommend for those looking tolearn more about social annotation in the classroom?

Amanda Licastro’s (2019) “The Past, Present, and Future of SocialAnnotation” outlines her approach to first-year and upper-level writing courses thatuses social annotation to study how technology shapes reading and writingpractices.

the desire to share ideas and hear the thinking of others that is part ofreading. It’s why English was my favorite class in high school, why I became anEnglish teacher myself, and why I love what I do at Hypothesis.

One of our biggest challenges now as literacy educators is to strengthen the human-to-human relationships in our virtual courses. Social annotation provides animportant opportunity for students to engage

Social annotation positions students as agentive meaning-makers, allowingthem to engage with course material, their peers, the instructor, and an even broaderintellectual community, both in real time and asynchronously.

ocial annotation is just as much about learners becomingmore metacognitively aware of what it takes to write, read, and think effectively

In an essay called “The Transition to College Reading,” Robert Scholes writes,

I now perceive students’ discussions, rough drafts,and revision processes as sites of mutual effort and group meaning-making, withsocial annotation my window into the back-and-forth-and-back-again emergenceof quality writing

Rarely dolearners in particular think of their peer’s ideas or feedback as potentiallycontributing to their own.

I think annotation helps both instructors and learners re-orient the writing around abroader sense of writing as a process. Writing really begins while we are reading,

Q2: How does social annotation create new opportunities for literacyeducation and, more specifically, the teaching of writing?

These annotation platforms are bringing new value to the educational technology landscape, new ways of achieving prompt and valuable feedback that is often dialogic in nature, may lessen instructor burden, and increase instructor and student motivation. The task we now face as educators is to make the annotation trails as useful as possible as we engage in the team sport of reasoning in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities.

publication systems.

The instructor and the student can “meet at the text” via collaborative online annotation, and engage in critical exchanges.

As the annotation platforms are relatively new to the education technology scene, instructors are now starting to consider what scaffolding is needed in order for students to write high quality annotations.

annotations can be temporarily lost if the article URL changes.

low quality annotations were a relatively minor concern, but could be a greater concern with larger class sizes, or for classes where some subset of students approach the source material in superficial way (i.e., required class outside of student’s main interests, unreasonable difficulty for students in grasping the source material, or desire to troll/abuse other students in the class)

Both platforms have the ability to divide a class into smaller subgroups.

Some students were daunted by the vast amount of annotations on a given paper in a group of approximately 20 students and one instructor annotating.

only text annotation was possible with Hypothes.is.

Furthermore, the student viewpoint regarding collaborative online annotation remains relatively unexplored in prior publications, and pedagogical best practices are still emerging

In a collaborative synchronous annotation setting using Google docs in English literature classes, annotation was viewed as a technique that allowed instructors to effectively highlight what good performance in literary analysis looks like, and students also felt greatly aided by reading the annotations of others in understanding a given text (Clapp et al., 2020).

and occasionally even in real-time if multiple students are active on the platform simultaneously.

For this reason, collaborative annotation has been suggested as a signature pedagogy for literary criticism courses, as it embodies the routines and value commitments in that field (Clapp et al., 2020); the sciences and social sciences can surely follow suit.

which can provide information, share commentary, express power, spark conversation, and aid learning

By mimicking the flexibility and ease of paper-based annotation practices, such tools suggest a future where readers will find electronic documents as easy to annotate as paper documents.

New technologies can also enhance annotation practices through multimedia features unique to online environments.

The ability to cull metadata from annotations and conduct large-scale searches of annotation databases thus can provide great benefits to students, scholars, and writers.

modern database technologies have advanced search and filter capabilities

Online annotation programs can facilitate annotation-sharing practices by storing comments in a file or database separate from the primary document where later readers can read, add, and respond to them. Much as medieval scholars were able to converse via marginal commentary

annotations provide a good way for instructors to discuss different reading strategies, but they can also help students see their reading as taking place within the rules and conventions of a larger discourse community.

Because there is no central repository where annotations can be stored and shared, members of print cultures have limited opportunities for dialogue and learning through observation of others’ interactions with a text as compared to medieval readers (Wolfe & Neuwirth, 2001).

Medieval scholars were able to make such extensive use of annotations because multiple readers typically had access to the same material copy of a text, which then became a public resource for sharing information. In print cultures, however,

Parents, students, and policy-makers should expect reading, specifically reading actively, collab-oratively, rhetorically, and with an eye toward one’s own writing, tobe a significant part of writing instruction at all levels.

Create a mechanism for students

Explicit writing instruction that makes students aware of theinterconnected nature of reading and writing benefits students innumerous ways

is a recursive process, meaning that the act of reading is notlinear or straightforwardly sequential but instead demandsthat readers revisit

hat exactly should read-ing instruction involve? To demystify reading and support studentsin learning to read like writers, writing teachers must:

teaching students to think like writers. An important partof that is teaching students how to read like writers, as Mike Bunnillustrates in “How to Read Like a Writer.”

Third, there is a lack of recent research on reading in the fieldof composition studies and a gap in teacher training, particularly atthe university level.

Finally, there have been unrealistic demands placed on FYCinstructors charged with preparing students to conduct researchand write in all disciplines.

in the process of definingourselves, we lost sight of how very important reading instructionis to the teaching of writing.

uneasy relationship between FYC and literature.Distancing the composition classroom from literature left readingout in the cold, resulting in less attention to reading instructionin the FYC classroom.

even thoughthis kind of rhetorical reading was, as evident on a teacher webpage,identified as a course-level expectation

longstanding debates in the fieldof composition studies about the purpose of first-year composi-tion (FYC), the writing course required of almost all universitystudents, including what role reading should play in the teachingof writing.

Standardized tests often rely on

an educational culture that privileges test-ing over sustained and meaningful encounters with texts

Through acknowledging that there are, in fact, particular ways that readersapproach texts, it might be possible to make these spaces less mysterious

patterns within these pedagogical materialsthat led us to outline three relatively clear purposes for reading

e have not asked how students read—that is, we are not asking how students interpret or use readings� Rather,we are interested in how “directions” for reading attempt to shape the rolesthat students play in reading and what ideological implications accompanythose attempts

e was doing the work of the readingfor them—asking questions to which he knew the answer, telling studentswhat readings were about, and elaborating on their responses when they didspeak

itical need for composition instructors to carefully definehow we want students to be as readers, and why, within the framework ofreading and writing in our classes, programs, and profession, participatingin these ways is important for them as readers and writers� Leaving thiswork undone, undefined, unstated leaves yet another gap into which otherscan come and say, “here’s how you should do your work�

he representations of readersthat many first-year writing instructors expect students in first-year writ-ing classes to play (perhaps because they themselves have occupied thoseroles

the assumption by teachers that their role is totell students what reading is about—and the concomitant assumption bystudents that their role is to be told what reading is about (20-24)

ut at the same time that programs like ours strive to create an activereader and include “activity” in our definitions of a “good reader,” publicrepresentations construe writers as almost entirely passive� Concurrently,the concept of the passive reader is pervasive in mainstream culture

conceptions of reading andreaders’ roles that are foundational in composition studies, especially theidea that to produce a successful reading, readers must engage in a dia-logue between genre conventions and their ideas (see, for instance, Bahktin;Miller; Bazerman; Freedman and Medway; Bawarshi)�

ithin our own program outcomes, too, reading and students’ roles asreaders are blended

n studying the ways we askedstudents to read, we also were querying the degrees to which we were (andare) perpetuating larger values

ronically, in fact, the majority of work focused on attemptingto articulate various strategies for active, engaged reading is found in theprefaces and supporting material within composition readers

ven though reading is ‘one of the central activi-ties’ of English studies, their graduate preparation has omitted explicitdiscussion of ‘making sense [...] of what happens when we read’” (410)

eading pedagogy, that pedagogyis rarely included in composition research, graduate composition courses,or first-year writing program development materials�

Studies that focus on contexts that instructors create for students’ read-ing, though, are few and far between�

we needed to devote the same attentionto identifying components and conventions of reading and reading pro-cesses as we did with writing

But carefully considering what we ask stu-dents to read, how we ask them to read it, and why, is an essential aspectof writing program administration�

Writing instructors like the one quotedabove know that teaching writing is closely intertwined with teaching read-ing, yet many are stymied by how to engage productively with reading inthe classroom

Such a science has implications in a range of fields where there is a need to understand patterns of human discourse (e.g. national security and defense, terrorism studies, disaster management, healthcare) in a world where communication has been radically transformed through advances in digital technology. In this respect, semioticians have a major role to play with regards to modeling, tracking and understanding intersemiotic translation as the basis for cultural communication.

he student’s highlighting of the passage, then circling of the word ‘civilized’, communicates that she is capable of attending to contentious points in text, and that, in this particular instance, she is reading against the grain, offering a counter-reading of the passage. Unlike in preceding examples where the semiotics employed in the annotations were seen in relation to the semiotics in the main text, in the current example, it would seem that it is a strong emotion triggered by the text that is resemiotised in the annotation as pink highlighting and circling.

A participant qualified this by claiming they would typically endeavour to annotate an English text in English, ostensibly to make their passage from annotation to written tasks in English a lot easier.

Overall, annotations were reported to serve a number of functions: understanding the structure or organisation of a text and making connections between passages evident; translating/explaining words; drawing attention to key points; making it easy to respond to guiding questions; supporting the rapid recall of text contents when, after some time, the text has to be revisite

seldom annotated digital texts.

The role of annotation in supporting critical reading alone, or, in addition, how critical reading then translates into critical writing, has also been studied (e.g., Jensen and Scharff 2014; Liu 2006), with one study finding that “skillful annotators produced more critical and analytical writing samples than did verbatim annotators. Verbatim annotators recycled information rather than analyzing it” (Liu 2006, p. 205).

However they present, annotations have been associated with a range of functions, including: improving the comprehension of the source materials; interpreting and commenting upon the text; facilitating reflective thinking; recording affective responses to text; calling attention to topics and important passages for future use. In the case of successive readers of the same physical text, the functions include eavesdropping on the reactions of other readers, especially expert readers, for clues of important points, controversial points, etc.; and facilitating conversation (Antia and Mafofo 2021; Wolfe and Neuwirth 2001; Wolfe 2000).

Theoretically, the study is undergirded by the notion of text movability. Data suggestive of how students journey through text are argued to have implications for understanding and teaching how they manage attention, use dictionaries, own text meaning, and appraise text.You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimerNeither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer Longer documents can take a while to translate. Rather than keep you waiting, we have only translated the first few paragraphs. Click the button below if you want to translate the rest of the document. Translate All

replacing liberal/general studies tracks with pre-major transfer programs in fields of interest to students and value to the local economy.

English.

empathize with our students while we develop practical ways to teach them how to rewire their brains so they can read more effectively both others' texts and texts of their own making, as they move from novice to advanced beginner to competent to proficient to expert reviser.

not until I had converted my slide-by-slide narrative into traditional essay format-and printed it as such-was I able to more effectively read, annotate, and revise it. But being a "novice," even if only for a short while, made me realize- again-the struggles students may go through, and while it's not a comfortable feeling, it's one I think all writing teachers should experience to remind themselves what their students feel as they equate those struggles with "failure."

ive stages of "clinical competence," whereby nurses move from novice to expert stages-stages that distinctly call to mind Vygotskian learning theory. That is, what Benner describes are how nurses learn in the zone of proximal development, the "zone" that describes the distance between the problem-solving capacities of what students are able to perform on their own and those they are able to perform with the help of a teacher or peer (86).

we are going to move students from novice to expert revisers, we surely need to start teaching reading strategies that will give students the ability to revise effectively "whole"-instead of fractured-essays, and scholars need to start focusing on revision-as-reading.

Revision is reading. And I'm not sure it's often regarded as such, even though Ann E. Berthoff, again almost forty years ago, argued that "the writer as reviser is a writer reading" ("Recognition" 27). The concept seems to get lost in the scholarship.

they are perpetuating their reading in fractured bursts because the distraction contributes to students' reading of texts as though they are parts and not wholes, hindering their ability to read with the kind of sustained, deep focus required to analyze texts effectively.

I have argued before that when we talk about "college-level" writing, we have to remember that there is entry-level college writing and exit-level college writing (Smith, "Botched" 213), and I would add now that we have to remember the difference between entry-level and exit-level readers.

when they revise their own writing, they are engaging more in an act of reading than they are of writing, and reflectively annotating, summarizing, and paraphrasing their own writing can help them better analyze their own texts-if, that is, they revise on printed copies.Yet students often revise their papers directly on their computers, which is a disheartening fact considering Kaufman and Flanagan's argument about superficial online reading. In fact, Wolf advocates that students write by hand, which "encourages them to explore their own thoughts at closer to a snail's pace than a hare's" (Reader 173), which can only help them think more deeply about the texts they both write and read.

I hoped that the act of annotating would encourage them to slow down throughout the reading process and to notice specific details rather than reading only for plot and comprehension.

disagreed or strongly disagreed that they still lacked the technical skills to integrate digital media into their writing by the end of the semester

most students recognized that using digital media, such as annotation software, has significant advantages in the writing classroom

1% of students agree or strongly agree that using digital media in the writing process is too time consuming

several expressed anxieties about changing any part of the reading and writing process

agreed that incorporating digital media and writing produced a more creative final product than a traditional close reading analysis

he inevitability of using digital media like annotation software to aid in the writing process was a theme among most of these Cornell student responses

In addition to believing that digital media helped them organize and communicate their ideas, students also reported that it helped their creativity overall

3 questions specifically about their experience with Genius

6 statements about using digital media in their writing practice, which they responded to via a Likert scale

created a survey to analyze how Cornell undergraduates experience the use of digital media in the writing classroom. In addition to asking them general questions about incorporating digital media and writing practice, this survey also asked students to discuss their experience with annotation software specifically. The survey was administered in class on paper, and students were given 10 minutes to complete their responses.

obvious to me as an instructor why annotations were useful for students, I was interested in studying how they themselves perceived the differences between traditional reading responses and digital annotations

With the annotation software, the majority of students said that they read slower—rather than thinking generally about the text’s narrative or its overarching meaning, they focused instead on specific lines and passages.

students are practicing new techniques for reading and analysis

Genius allows (and even requires) students to answer each other and collectively build an analysis of each text

asked to do two types of annotations throughout the semester: 1) annotate freely, marking questions or close readings as they saw fit throughout the text, and 2) answer specific questions that I posted throughout the readings and also respond to their peers’ answers.

encouraged my students to use pseudonyms if they were at all concerned with issues of privacy—I simply asked them to email me their screenname on Genius so that I could effectively grade their contributions.

create more dynamic discussions—students would be able to collaborate outside of the classroom so that our in-class discussions could be more holistic and inclusive.

created a course website

students used Genius to annotate our texts in low stakes weekly assignments, replacing the traditional reading responses I have assigned in the past.

Critically analyzing and interpreting our readings. This includes recognizing and evaluating style, narrative structure, and literary devices.2.Conveying ideas and arguments clearly and persuasively.3.Collaboratively creating interpretations, and explaining connections between texts, ideas, genres, and media.

examine the relationship between reading and writing;

A typical FWS course

caffold assignments, breaking them into smaller tasks, to negotiate this particular concern about time management

perceived learning curve for using digital media and digital methodologies is not too steep

incorporated these digital tools into low-stakes assignments first so that students could learn to use them without fearing any hiccups would drastically affect their grade—

students will need more structured discussion requirements for annotation homework

mandating a certain level of discussion during digital annotation assignments where students must respond to at least two other peers

Using digital annotation thus helps students to think of close reading as gathering data that they can consolidate later within their long-form writing.

read through their profiles as we developed arguments for essays, which in turn allowed them to see consistent themes or patterns that they were interested across our course texts

Genius succeeded in motivating the majority of students to read texts closer—most students reported that they read slower and focused on specific passages rather than reading only for comprehension or big-picture ideas

annotating as they read could encourage students to think at the micro level by examining specific lines as they work through a text, while annotating after they read could encourage them to think at the macro level by recognizing more holistic themes or patterns that occur across the entire text

enjoyed being able to read their peers’ ideas before class discussions, and that they came to class more prepared to interpret our primary texts.

each student could create an online archive of their ideas throughout the semester

medieval period, the margins of a text were often communal

hoose a digital platform that does not have a steep learning curve

encouraging more participation from the very beginning of class made the tool more successful overall

requiring a minimum level of participation for all students

history of annotation

I chose to study how students experienced and used digital annotation software because it best connected with my FWS learning outcomes, which were to teach the basics of literary analysis, close reading, and communicating data in a logical manner

to examine how students experience and perceive digital tools so that we, as instructors, can more smoothly integrate technology and writing practice.

increased individual group members’ contributions and resulted in more metacognitive activity among groups and higher assignment scores overall.

especially if instructors provided access to previous course annotations after the current course annotates a text themselves

My study thus follows in the wake of other work in composition and rhetoric like Wolfe (2008) that has investigated the relationship between collaboration and digital tools like annotation software.

students gravitated towards used textbooks that contained notes and annotations in the margins already

1) that current technologies often do not fit with the goals and learning outcomes that instructors desire in their composition courses; 2) that both instructors and students must set aside time to conquer the learning curves of new technology; and 3) that despite the extensive benefits to public-facing writing, using digital resources can also raise questions of privacy and audience.

the majority of students view digital annotation, and digital tools in general, as a productive tool within the composition classroom, despite some concerns that digital software is too time-consuming, too complicated, or requires too many new skills. While students recognized these concerns, they still believed that using digital tools in writing assignments produced a more creative final product, and also made it easier to both organize and communicate their ideas.

value in archiving what I learned in clearer ways so that I could track the transferable ideas. Even just remembering what ideas made an impression on me or changed my view of the world would have been interesting for me to consider

But how do we ensure that all of the work we’re doing around a text survives? How do we keep track of all of those notes, readings, documents, and conversations in ways that can make sense to us later? How do we ensure that we all maintain records and archives of our reading so that all of that labor doesn’t just disappear? And how do we be deliberate in allowing certain ideas to disappear if we want them to?

Socrates’s primary concern with writing was that it would undermine our ability to remember what we know?

I often couldn’t quite track the notes I had taken on my readings or what they meant and, more often than not, I wound up simply throwing away the stacks upon stacks of papers I had stored