2022 WEC Institute: Overview and Agenda
The institute is composed of topical clusters of concurrent sessions. Sessions geared to the interests of participants who are new to WEC are offered alongside sessions geared to the interests of participants that are experienced in WEC implementation. Still other sessions are geared to the interests of participants whose interest in WEC is primarily research-oriented. Each day, the schedule of sessions is punctuated with brief opportunities for participants to meet and discuss ideas in teams.
Overview:
Designed for: WAC/WID professionals, faculty members, researchers, and administrators from universities and colleges in the US and abroad including those who are already implementing WEC initiatives*, those who are interested in launching a WEC initiative, and those who are interested in researching the approach. We invite registration by institutional teams composed of WAC administrators and faculty members. Individual registrants can be organized into teams by institute hosts to ensure information sharing across concurrent events. Participation in team discussions is always optional and always encouraged.
Purposes: to consider theoretical and pragmatic components of the Writing-Enriched Curriculum (WEC) model, celebrate its diverse context-specific applications, adapt implementation efforts to new and changing circumstances (pandemic-related and otherwise), scrutinize direct and indirect assessment data, and discuss pragmatics involved with programmatic launches, implementation, assessment, and sustainability.
Program: a sequence of lively and interactive discussions, panels, and small group consultations will be punctuated by opportunities for teams to debrief and for individuals to network. Discussion topics will range from the pragmatic to the theoretical.
Logistics: The institute will take place May 5-6, 2022, 9:00 am–5:00 pm Central Daylight Time. We’ll use a combination of Zoom and Google Workspace (sites, slides, docs, etc.) to meet, discuss ideas, and exchange resources.
*For more information about WEC, see Writing-Enriched Curricula: Models of Faculty-Driven and Departmental Transformation (2021) and the University of Minnesota’s Writing-Enriched Curriculum website
Day 1: May 5, 2022 (9 am–5 pm CDT)
1. Getting Started
9:00–9:45 am
1A. Welcome and overview (interactive presentation): What are the aims and objectives of this institute? Who's participating? How do the online logistics and files work? How are events organized? Who can be contacted if we have questions?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
1B. Team meet-up (breakout room discussion): Who is on which institute team? What do team members hope to learn and do during the institute? Which members plan to attend which sessions?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
2. Writing Plans
9:50–10:50 am
2A. Creating departmental Writing Plans (interactive presentation): What is the Writing Plan? Who generates them and who are they for? How are they assessed? What contextually relevant adjustments and adaptations might be made to the template?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
2B. Sustaining departmental Writing Plans (interactive presentation): What tactical moves promote productive, ongoing Writing Plan implementation? What circumstances can present challenges to sustained plan implementation and how might these challenges be mitigated?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
2C. Analyzing Writing Plans (facilitated discussion): What are we noticing in and across writing plans? How do plans compare across disciplines/departments and institutional contexts? Any noteworthy parallels and differences?
Facilitated by Kathleen Blake Yancey, Florida State University.
3. Data Collection and Analysis
11:00 am–12:00 pm
3A. Collecting and using baseline data in departments (interactive presentation): How does writing related data drive the WEC process? What forms of data can be collected and presented back to departmental faculty groups for interpretation and discussion? With whom are WEC data shared?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
3B. Data collection logistics (interactive presentation): What administrative procedures and permissions relate to WEC data collection practices? Is an IRB necessary? What sorts of consents and identity redaction is necessary? How can data be stored for use by departmental faculty groups?
Facilitated by Heidi Solomonson, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
3C. Analyzing cross-curricular data (facilitated discussion): Much of WEC's focus is on presenting data back to departments for their interpretation and discussion, but what do we see when we compare WEC data across departments and disciplines? Across institutions?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
4. Writing Abilities and Criteria
12:30–1:30 pm
4A. Identifying (and scrutinizing) desired writing abilities (interactive presentation): What facilitative processes are used to encourage faculty groups to name and interrogate their locally held writing expectations? What data can contribute to this process? What are the advantages and disadvantages of working backward from graduation-level writing abilities?
Facilitated by Stacey Sheriff, Colby College.
4B. Translating writing abilities into viable assessment criteria (interactive presentation): What affordances and limitations are inherent in identifying department-wide writing criteria? How can departmental faculty members be engaged in translating expected writing abilities into menus of useful grading criteria?
Facilitated by Matthew Luskey, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities and Sara Eddy, Smith College.
4C. WEC, reading, and information literacy (panel): How might identifying key reading and information literacy abilities integrate into the WEC model?
Facilitated by Nelson Graff and Rebecca Kersnar, California State University Monterey Bay. Panelists: Susanmarie Harrington and Daniel DeSanto, University of Vermont.
4D. Investigating anti-racist, equitable, and/or inclusive writing assessment (panel): In what ways might WEC methodologies be leveraged to advance discussions of antiracist, equitable, and inclusive writing assessment?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Malinda Lindquist, Deanna Koepp, and Daniel Emery; University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
5. Curricular Integration of Writing Instruction
1:40–2:40 pm
5A. Integrating writing and writing instruction into departmental curricula (panel): How does WEC move writing-related discussions beyond individual courses and into departmental curricular systems? How are Writing Intensive initiatives addressed by WEC? What does WEC look like in both vertical and flat curricula?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Pamela Flash and David Orser, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; Elizabeth Carroll, Appalachian State University.
5B. Working backward from capstone-level courses (panel): How and why have some departments focused WEC implementation activity on capstone level courses? What has been the impact on capstone courses and on courses that precede the capstone course?
Facilitated by Robert Scafe, University of Oklahoma. Panelists: Jennifer Marshall and Leslie Schiff, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
5C. WEC and the transfer of learning (facilitated discussion): In what ways might WEC's practice of curricular surveying, mapping, and matricizing help departmental faculty advance learning transfer between courses?
Facilitated by Kathleen Blake Yancey, Florida State University.
5D. WEC and threshold concepts (facilitated discussion): How might WEC's practice of identifying and curricularly locating critical writing abilities relate to identifying, locating, and addressing department-relevant threshold concepts?
Facilitated by Linda Adler-Kassner, University of California-Santa Barbara.
6. Implementing Writing Plans
2:50–3:50 pm
6A. Writing Plan implementation (interactive presentation): What sorts of activities do departments engage in as they implement their writing plans? What's worked well? What hasn't worked so well? How are these activities assessed?
Facilitated by Matthew Luskey, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities and Sara Eddy, Smith College.
6B. Assessing Writing Plan implementation (interactive presentation): What sorts of formal and informal assessment activities might departments use to help them measure the impact of Writing Plan implementation?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
7. Team Debrief and Discussion
4:00–5:00 pm
7A. Team debrief and discussion (breakout room): What are your reactions, next-round questions, and thoughts?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
Day 2: May 6, 2022 (9 am–5 pm CDT)
8. Facilitating Engagement
9:00–10:00 am
8A. Facilitating WEC discussions (panel): What do WEC facilitators do to engage ideas and conceptual changes? What questions do they ask? How do they understand their roles? How are these abilities learned, honed, assessed?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Stacey Sheriff, Colby College; Robert Scafe, University of Oklahoma; Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
8B. Partnering with departmental liaisons (panel): What roles do Faculty Liaisons play in enabling local departmental ownership of WEC processes and data? Who is best suited to fill this role? What does an optimal WEC team-department relationship look like? What are some of the challenges involved with serving in this role?
Facilitated by Matthew Luskey, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Phillip Barry, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; Benita Jackson, Smith College.
8C. Theories informing WEC facilitation methods (facilitated discussion): What theories and adjacent practices inform WEC's approach to embedded facilitation? What research questions does this practice and stance provoke?
Facilitated by Crystal Fodrey, Moravian University.
9. Assessment: Writing Plans
10:10–11:10 am
9A. Conducting iterative rounds of direct writing assessment (interactive presentation): How can direct assessment of student writing fit into the WEC model? How have these assessments been conducted? What benefits and limitations are inherent in this mode of assessment?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
9B. Assessing and publishing Writing Plans (panel): What sorts of committees are best situated to approve writing plans? What sorts of processes and criteria can be used? What publishing venues are appropriate for approved plans?
Facilitated by Mary Vavrus, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Mary Vavrus, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; Melissa Glenn, Colby College; Julio Alves, Smith College.
9C. Direct writing assessment: comparative methods/theories (facilitated discussion): What a benefits and challenges are associated with iterative, direct assessment of student writing (as a tool to assessing WEC initiatives)? What alternatives might we consider?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
10. Assessment: Programmatic
11:20 am–12:20 pm
10A. Measuring WEC's impact on student learning (facilitated discussion): What impact does the WEC model have on student learning? How might we measure this impact?
Facilitated by Kathleen Blake Yancey, Florida State University.
10B. Assessing faculty reactions to WEC (facilitated discussion): What do data generated by focus group discussions tell us about faculty members' reactions to the WEC model?
Facilitated by Facilitated by Matthew Luskey and Heidi Solomonson, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
10C. Leveraging WEC processes and data for accreditation (panel): How can the WEC process contribute to institutional accreditation efforts? How might this use of WEC processes and data compromise or complicate the faculty-driven nature of the WEC model?
Facilitated by Daniel Emery, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Steven Hawks, Will Durfee, and Peter Hilger, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
11. WEC-in-Action
1:00–2:00 pm
11A. WEC in Humanities and Social Sciences departments (panel): Why did your department/program enroll in WEC? What highlights from Writing Plan creation, implementation, or assessment provide insight into your department's experience with WEC? What discipline-relevant questions do you think we might fruitfully consider as we move forward with WEC initiatives?
Facilitated by Julio Alves, Smith College. Panelists: Allison Brenneise and Caprice Niccoli, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
11B. WEC in STEM departments (panel): Why did your department/program enroll in WEC? What highlights from Writing Plan creation, implementation, or assessment provide insight into your department's experience with WEC? What discipline-relevant questions do you think we might fruitfully consider as we move forward with WEC initiatives?
Facilitated by Will Durfee, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Will Pomerantz and David Orser, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; Ali Lynch, California State University-Monterey Bay.
11C. WEC in arts and design departments (panel): Why did your department/program enroll in WEC? What highlights from Writing Plan creation, implementation, or assessment provide insight into your department's experience with WEC? What discipline-relevant questions do you think we might fruitfully consider as we move forward with WEC initiatives?
Facilitated by Jennifer Marshall, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Lucy Dunne and Margaret Werry, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
11D. WEC in pre-professional departments (panel): Why did your department/program enroll in WEC? What highlights from Writing Plan creation, implementation, or assessment provide insight into your department's experience with WEC? What discipline-relevant questions do you think we might fruitfully consider as we move forward with WEC initiatives?
Facilitated by Crystal Fodrey, Moravian University. Panelists: Heather Bastian, University of North Carolina-Charlotte; Peter Hilger and Carol Flaten, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
11E. WEC in international settings (facilitated discussion): What elements of the WEC model are and are not portable to international settings? How might differences in conceptions of major programs, curricular design, and instructional approaches be understood and addressed by a WEC initiative?
Facilitated by Chris Anson, North Carolina State University and Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Ingerid Straume, University of Oslo; Ghada El Shimi, American University in Cairo.
12. Launching and Sustaining WEC Initiatives
2:10–3:10 pm
12A. Launching and scaling a WEC initiative (panel): What initial moves can be made to start a WEC initiative? How can we motivate departments to engage in WEC processes? What incentives can be offered? What degree of curricular saturation should be desired and how quickly should implementation scale?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Will Durfee, University of Minnesota; Sara Eddy, Smith College; Ben Levy, University of San Francisco.
12B. Funding a WEC initiative (panel): What sources of grant funding have been successfully tapped by institutions interested in launching WEC initiatives? What sorts of objectives, assessments, and timelines might potential funders expect to see in proposals?
Facilitated by Julio Alves, Smith College. Panelists: Julio Alves, Smith College; Nelson Graff, California State University Monterey Bay; Wolfe Molitor, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
12C. WEC and Writing Centers (panel): How have (and how might) WEC initiatives involved Writing Center consultants? How might Writing Plans be incorporated into writing consultation practice and training?
Facilitated by Kirsten Jamsen, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Kirsten Jamsen, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities; Heather Bastian, University of North Carolina-Charlotte; Robert Scafe, University of Oklahoma.
12D. Talking with deans about WEC (panel): What are senior administrators' reactions to launching, implementing, and scaling a WEC initiative?
Facilitated by Leslie Schiff, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Robert McMaster, Ascan Koerner, and Malinda Lindquist, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
13. WEC Facilitation Revisited
3:20–4:20 pm
13A. Online adaptations to WEC methods (panel): What sorts of online adaptations to WEC have been used during the pandemic? Which may be preserved post-pandemic? What did the period of online-meetings teach us about WEC models and methods?
Facilitated by Matthew Luskey, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Panelists: Matthew Luskey, Mary Brakke, and Jaye Thompson, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
13B. Approaching antiracist facilitation (facilitated discussion): In what situations might WEC's inductive and responsive approach to facilitation be directly or indirectly challenged? How might the WAC facilitator's roles ("curious and amicable interlocutor," "departmental thinking partner") need to flex to meet these situations?
Facilitated by Rebecca Kersnar and Ibrahim Shelton, California State University Monterey Bay.
14. Wrapping Up
4:30–5:00 pm
14A. Team time (breakout room): Which initial questions about the WEC model have been answered? What new questions have arisen? What are your next steps?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
14B. Closing (interactive presentation): What ideas and plans do we take from the institute?
Facilitated by Pamela Flash, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.
This institute, like previous institutes, has been designed to address questions and insights forwarded by participants. Please take a moment to share your impressions on this brief feedback form. Thanks in advance!