2024 Case Studies

Case Scenario #1: Training Writing Center Consultants, Ashley Beardsley

The University Writing Center at Western Illinois University is staffed by 20 consultants (16 graduate students and 4 undergraduate students). Some consultants are in the English program; however, we hire outside of the department because we believe that having writing experts from across the university is essential to building a collaborative space for writers from any class at all levels. Although the director can modify tutor training as needed, the variety of programs and degree levels means that requiring consultants to take a semester-long tutor training course is out of the question as it does not fit in most students' degree plans.

Our current model uses a three-day pre-semester training (one in-person day, two asynchronous) to prepare consultants to open the writing center on the first day of classes. Then, after receiving everyone’s availability, the director finds one hour when all consultants are free for staff meetings in the fall. Staff meetings aim to go over day-to-day operations and build on the tutoring skills introduced during orientation. While this model seems to work, it poses a few problems:

1. Sometimes, the only available hour is before the writing center opens (8 a.m.) or after we close (9 p.m.). We’ve tried both options; however, engagement and retention are low.

2. Splitting day-to-day business with professional training doesn’t allow for much conversation (60 minutes is not a lot of time). Consultants do complete training activities after meetings, but it’s challenging to create a collaborative learning environment when consultants have so little time to learn from one another and discuss their experiences.

3. At this time, we do not have the budget to incorporate a formal tutor training certificate like those offered by the College Reading and Learning Association. Additionally, most tutors are only employed for one or two years, so quick training models are needed.

Case Scenario #2: Inconsistencies in Training & Experience/s for gWPAs, Brie Duloz

Problem: When I first applied to be the assistant director of composition (ADOC) at the start of my third year in a five year PhD program, I didn’t make it, and not because my cover letter wasn’t good enough. It was because this was during/immediately after COVID and my department was in the midst of a lot of transitions.

My Actions: I emailed the incoming DOC and the graduate student advisor (who didn’t know much about the work of DOC/ADOC does which introduces another problem, the invisible or unknown expertise and work that WPA’s do) and explained that I felt it would be fairer if next year they announced the upcoming position to all MA/PhD students, or especially the ones in the rhetoric and composition strand.

Solutions/Results: The following spring, the DOC announced the role, attached a job description, and requested interested students apply. He added a second graduate WPA role, too, so each graduate student works with the DOC for two years, first as an ADOC shadow, then as the “official” ADOC.

Questions to consider:

Framing: Blalock asks, “How many institutions have formal programs with designated WPA work? How many WPAs serve more than rotations in and out of the position? How many programs have administrative infrastructure that would enable the regular updating of ‘our’ documents in the WPA archive?” (qtd. in Finer & White-Farnham, 2017, pg. 8)

What was/is your WPA experience in your Master’s or PhD program? What are some of the responsibilities? What is the application process or hierarchy like?

In hindsight, what would you change about your access points and/or experience as a graduate WPA? In what ways did your graduate program prepare you for the market and/or your first WPA job? If you’re already working as a WPA, what are two changes you plan to make during your time in this role? If you’re on the way to becoming a WPA, what are a couple of things you plan “to take with you” to your future institution?

Case Scenario #3: Balancing Act - Considerations for New WPAs, Kristi Costello

Interviews with new WPAs (N-WPAs) and long-term WPAs (LT-WPAs) during the COVID-19 pandemic lock-down (see “The Quiet Revolution: How New WPAs are Shifting the Profession”) suggested that while LT-WPAs were struggling with life-work balance, field conversations regarding the importance of boundaries and self-care have extended beyond field lore to becoming an important, intentional, and consistent consideration for N-WPAs as they negotiate and navigate their roles. However, preliminary follow-up interviews suggest that while those who were N-WPAs are still practicing some boundaries, they also struggle with conflicting forces and oxymorons of administration (Ratcliffe & Rickly 2010), in particular, the pressures — both internal and external — to build and dream BIG and work QUICKLY while also practicing slow agency, sustainable planning, self-preservation. What questions do we ask ourselves? Can we develop a heuristic for approaching these considerations?

Does this sound familiar to you? What are the competing forces at work in these situations? How can WPAs negotiate the expectations of stakeholders and balance short-term and long-term planning?

What conflicting forces or oxymorons have you experienced or do you foresee in WPA work? What is your experience navigating these? What strategies have you used or might you use to negotiate these conflicting forces and oxymorons strategically and in healthy ways moving forward?

Case Study #4: Race & FYC Course Learning Outcomes, Iris Ruiz

You are the WPA, Associate WPA, or Assistant WPA — you could be a graduate student, an adjunct, junior faculty, or asst, assoc, or full professor. The title matters here, so the scenario is multifaceted.

Your program just received a daunting program review in which it was pointed out that your FYC course learning outcomes are outdated and/or antiquated. They are based upon current traditionalist ideas about language, discourse, and objectivity of their usage informed by classist, racist, and gendered norms.

You might approach the idea of doing this task as either daunting or exciting or a combination of both.

1) You want to do this, but don’t know how:

You knew this might happen, but you were actually dreading this outcome because you admittedly don’t know how you would approach such a task. You’re not necessarily well-versed in social justice rhetoric, literature, Ethnic studies, or contrastive linguistics and rhetorics. You don’t want to seem like you don’t know what you’re going to do about this task, but you know that there are some people (1 or 2) who know about these fields of knowledge than you do. So, what do you do?

2) You don’t want to do this:

Here’s another possibility: You just don’t want to change the current FYC course learning outcomes. You think they are just fine. You think that the field is possibly just going through a phase. You think that doing the work of changing course learning outcomes and then performing the task of implementing them would be 1) too hard, 2) too expensive, 3) somewhat traumatizing and divisive, and 4) going against norms that you are somewhat or strongly invested in.

3) You want to do this, and you know exactly how (unlikely).