I work to ensure the scholarship I produce is as accessible as possible, both in terms of it being open-access when possible to remove economic barriers and in terms of it being scholarship aimed at a generalized audience to remove esoteric language barriers. To that end, many of my publications are online or in the form of podcast episodes, and my presentations are designed to engage teachers beyond the writing-studies field.
Details appear in the narrative that follows, but highlights of my scholarship, following the Boyer (1990) model adopted by the College of Arts & Sciences, include:
Scholarship of Teaching
Revised curriculum for eng 121/122 four times in response to faculty feedback; approved by department Sep 2019, with implementation planned Fall 2020, pending anticipated approvals from ueac (Oct 2019) and scc (Dec 2019)
7 workshops on technology, publishing, pedagogy, and sound editing
2 week-long seminars on Critical Digital Pedagogy
Implemented Safe Zone Ally training program; trained 47 Allies
Much like my teaching here at Saint Leo focuses on welcoming students into the institution and into my discipline by making rhetoric and writing more accessible, my scholarship also works to make pedagogy more accessible. Much like my position at this institution embraces the hybrid nature of our course offerings, my scholarly work embraces the hybrid nature of academic discourse. While I do publish traditional works to deeply engage in disciplinary knowledge generation, my nontraditional scholarship augments those efforts by expanding pedagogical discourse to a broader, interdisciplinary audience. Each form of scholarship enhances and informs the other, allowing me to engage a variety of scholars in conversation about education.
While working at Saint Leo, I have discovered that one of my greatest strengths is making people—students, conference attendees, workshop participants—feel welcome and respected, even while challenging them to re-evaluate their assumptions about writing and teaching. I have used that ability to help me become a more genuine and compassionate educator both in the classroom and in my scholarship. I remain actively engaged in the scholarship of Critical Digital Pedagogy (cdp), which applies Paolo Freire’s ideas of Critical Pedagogy to digital spaces and teaching practices. More than anything, cdp advocates for student agency and teacher compassion. In other words, I preach what I practice—presenting talks, writing articles, co-authoring chapters, conducting peer reviews, and recording audio interviews—all with the intention of disseminating the principles and practices of my teaching praxis. Engaging deeply in scholarship about teaching creates an iterative loop in which my dialogue with other academics influences my pedagogy, and vice-versa.
The scholarship in which I have engaged has been designed to benefit a broad range of academics, and its impact can be seen through some rather unusual sets of metrics—engagement totals on Twitter, page views on open-access articles, and episode download counts for a scholarly podcast, for instance. Each of these metrics is further explained in the Scholarship of Application section. My profile on Google Scholar lists twenty publications cited twenty-three times—the 9th-highest citation count for anyone from Saint Leo University listed in Google Scholar. Despite arguably low numbers of citations, it is clear I have established connections between my texts and other publications, and that other scholars find my work worth referencing.
The College of Arts & Sciences has adopted the Boyer (1990) model for categorizing scholarship. In the sections that follow, I include the cas descriptions of each category, and then I address how my scholarship in each activity type contributes to the wider discourse and enhances my teaching here at Saint Leo.
The scholarship of teaching requires knowledge of one’s field to be reflected in the content of courses and in the composition of program curricula. The scholarship of teaching also includes an understanding of the ways in which students learn in different fields. The scholarship of teaching is defined as active intellectual engagement with a field of study that results in the application of disciplinary knowledge and expertise to curricular and instructional analysis, innovation, development, and evaluation.
My most significant contribution to the Scholarship of Teaching here at Saint Leo has been my complete overhaul of the Academic Writing Foundations courses. The new courses will help our students understand writing as a subject of study in and of itself, teaching rhetorical and composing strategies in line with national standards and current trends in higher education. After five years of work and four complete revisions to the proposed curriculum in response to faculty feedback, I have developed an updated set of courses that will re-brand our existing eng 121/122 classes as wri 121/122 courses, clarifying their role as fundamental writing courses that function separately from the English major. This rebranding effort is the curriculum proposal packet. Our new program moves Saint Leo’s writing curriculum into the 21st century, better prepares students for the diverse writing expectations they face across the institution, directly aligns with the current qep wac initiative, and leverages the lived experience of our students to make our writing courses relevant to their careers. The amount of labor expended on this proposal likely cannot be overstated, as it has been an iterative, multi-year process of responding to faculty feedback and adjusting the curriculum to meet the needs of our entire academic community at Saint Leo. Details of this complex process, and its outcome, can be found in recommendation letters from Lis Aiken and Chantelle MacPhee, the “Response to Prior Feedback” section of the curriculum proposal, and an email from Brian Camp, ueac member. These documents show the extensive work entailed in revising the academic-writing curriculum here at Saint Leo, as well as the impact this work will have on academics across the institution. My curriculum development will help improve the preparedness of all students arriving at Saint Leo starting in Fall 2020, and I am eager to see the benefits of this new curriculum as it is implemented across the institution.
Another scholarship opportunity that shapes my teaching occurred back in 2015, when I was an invited speaker for a Digital Pedagogies panel at the University of Chicago’s graduate-student professional conference, GradUCon. That conference connected me with digital pedagogues who later became guests on a two-part podcast episode, discussed in Scholarship of Application. That panel and resulting podcast conversations have ensured I continue to critically evaluate the use of digital tools in my classes here at slu. For instance, in the panel I referred to my “Learning to Let Go: Listening to Students in Discussion” article, which details a teaching strategy I developed at Saint Leo. The essence of this teaching method involves releasing control of an in-class conversation, allowing students to drive the discussion with the teacher serving as notetaker and observer. This home-grown method of guiding classroom conversation initiated a cascade of events that led to me re-evaluating the way I incorporate digital tools in my classes.
In addition to the “Digital Pedagogies” panel, I have presented or led 7 workshops—ranging from one-hour hands-on sessions to half-day intensive sessions—on topics such as Critical Digital Pedagogy, digital publishing, and audio editing. I have also coordinated an “unconference” session—panel discussions with emergent topics selected by participants—at a national convention for users of the Canvas lms. In short, I have built a reputation for presenting discussions of pedagogy and publishing to an array of audiences in accessible ways. For the past five summers, I have contributed to Digital Pedagogy Lab, a week-long institute held at the University of Mary Washington in Fredericksburg, Virginia. In summer 2018, I facilitated a week-long introductory course about Critical Digital Pedagogy. In 2017, I co-facilitated a similar course with Sean Michael Morris, dividing equally the work of planning and executing the course content. This course has given me the opportunity to extend the work I do with Hybrid Pedagogy to colleagues participating in a large-scale training event. Furthermore, I facilitated a three-day “Digital Storytelling” course at Digital Pedagogy Lab Toronto in February 2019, and I am scheduled to again co-facilitate the week-long Intro to Critical Digital Pedagogy course in August 2020. I intend to leverage my involvement with the broader conversations about critical digital pedagogy as we continue to develop our online academic-writing classes, looking for ways to creatively employ digital teaching methods that will keep our course designs fresh and not beholden to our current lms of choice.
And lastly, the curriculum development about which I am most excited relates to Prism, Saint Leo’s gay-straight alliance (discussed in greater detail on my Service page). Working with a local team of students and staff members, and getting insight and recommendation from diversity and inclusion offices at more than four other universities, I created a three-hour training program that teaches faculty, staff, and students about how sexuality, identity, and faith interact. This training program allows certified faculty and staff to designate their offices as “Safe Zones” where students can comfortably and openly discuss matters of sexuality and identity without fear of judgement or rebuke. Our faculty and staff Safe Zone Allies identify themselves with a distinctive placard placed outside offices, allowing students to locate necessary resources when needed.
While Safe Zone training is a common concept for gay-straight alliances nationwide, ours is distinctive. To the best of my knowledge, we are the only institution whose Safe Zone Allies program directly addresses the intersection of faith and identity, explicitly working through the way Catholicism and the lgbtq+ community can (and should) interact through mutual respect. This training program follows the “recommendations to strengthen or increase protective factors and to reduce risk factors among lgbt youth” from the Suicide Prevention Resource Center (2008), which suggest that schools “incorporate program activities to support youth and their family members throughout the development of sexual orientation and gender identity, including awareness, identity, and disclosure.” Widespread awareness of how to handle and discuss matters of gender and identity has been shown to significantly reduce both drop-out and suicide rates. Our Safe Zone Allies training program may quite literally save student lives.
Because the intersections of faith, sexual orientations, and gender identities are often fraught, developing our specialized Safe Zone Allies training took significant delicate and strategic work, and the recommendation letter from Karen Hannel speaks to the coordination it took to create this training and its significance for the Saint Leo community. Looking beyond our institution, though, the respectful, intentional, and self-aware design of this program has the potential to make Saint Leo stand out as a national exemplar of Catholic/lgbtq+ relations as we demonstrate how such training programs can function successfully within environments like ours.
Overall, my Scholarship of Teaching serves to strengthen the Saint Leo community with respect for students’ identities and faith traditions through our Safe Zone Allies program, by enhancing our students’ academic and personal development through the revised composition curriculum, and by bringing issues of cdp into the classroom and our discussions of pedagogy.
The scholarship of discovery is the closest to what is meant by the term “basic research.” Each faculty member should establish credentials as a researcher. The capacity to carry out the scientific method and to conduct meaningful research is an important aspect of learning. The scholarship of discovery can be defined as investigation and research in a field of study that results in a contribution to the body of knowledge in the field, and the dissemination of that knowledge in the professional community.
In addition to the Scholarship of Teaching evidenced above, I have also made sure to disseminate my work through various print and digital publications these past five years. As seen in my publications list, I have published five peer-reviewed articles and seven peer-reviewed book chapters since joining the Saint Leo faculty. One of those book chapters, “Writing at Scale: Composition moocs and Digital Writing Communities,” has received at least two notable reviews: One review was published in the prominent disciplinary journal Computers and Composition; the other was published open-access, allowing greater attention and broader dissemination. Co-authored book chapters work well for the pace of research available as a faculty member with 4/4 (or often greater) teaching loads.
I have engaged in ten other conference presentations beyond the invited panel presentation mentioned in Scholarship of Teaching, each of which are listed and documented on my Presentations page. These conferences have ranged from regional pedagogy-centric conferences to international conferences focused on composition. Needless to say, I have ensured that my scholarship has not stayed locked within the walls of Saint Leo. I use conferences as opportunities to stay connected with the fields of both composition and digital humanities, as I am to the best of my knowledge the only faculty member from this institution who routinely operates within those fields. Another way I remain connected with the broader scholarly discussions is through providing my services as a peer reviewer. Since starting at Saint Leo, I have been peer reviewer for eighteen published articles, listed and documented on my Publications page. Additionally, I have also served as second reader for one senior honors thesis. I find this review work rewarding, as it helps me see where disciplinary conversations are going while also allowing me the opportunity to help teach authors how to become better writers. These projects give me the opportunity to shape the nature of future research and help developing scholars think through their projects and understand their influence.
Though I tend not to engage in traditional, empirical research, I have ensured that I remain deeply engrained in the process of producing scholarship. My efforts here will absolutely continue in the future, and I look forward to even more opportunities to guide developing scholars with the journal I manage, as well as Saint Leo’s student researchers as our population grows.
The scholarship of integration seeks to interpret, to draw together, and to bring new insights to bear on original research. The scholarship of integration means fitting one’s work into larger intellectual patterns. The scholarship of integration is necessary in dealing with the boundaries of the human problems of today, which do not always neatly fall within defined disciplines. It is essential to integrate ideas and then apply them to the world in which we live. Therefore, the scholarship of integration can be defined as the interpretation, synthesis, and connection of theories, ideas, and concepts across disciplines that result in new insights, broader perspectives, and a more comprehensive understanding of those disciplines.
The definition of Saint Leo’s core value of Personal Development states that we “stress the development of every person’s mind, spirit, and body for a balanced life.” The integration required to find balance in life often gets overlooked in higher education. However, as one who was graduated from an interdisciplinary PhD program, I have grown accustomed to doing the work required to find common ground and ensure that disparate groups or disciplines benefit from the perspectives each has to offer. The recommendation letters from Karen Hannel and Melissa McLargin speak directly to my ability to use diplomacy and negotiation to find commonalities, even in adversarial conditions. I have applied those skills to two specific examples of the Scholarship of Integration: an overseas student trip for a Saint Leo course and annual interdisciplinary seminars.
Perhaps most significatly I have been attending the Digital Humanities Summer Institute (dhsi) in Victoria, British Columbia, each year for more than a decade. This conference, known colloquially as “summer camp for nerds,” gives academics in the Digital Humanities a place to congregate, share ideas, and teach a new generation of scholars. For the past four years, I have been teaching the “Critical Pedagogy and Digital Praxis in the Humanities” course. Through this intense five-day program, I introduce participants to Critical Digital Pedagogy and get them to apply it to their own work in the form of an open-access online course. Each year’s course participants have brainstormed, designed, built, published, and assessed a massive open online course (mooc) in only five days, with these results:
Support for the importance of this work can be seen in my recommendation letter from Ray Siemens and the unsolicited comments of 2016 participant Lucia Pawlowski and 2019 participant Jess Fenn. This work takes up relatively little space on my CV, but I am convinced it, more than any other work I do, changes the way teachers work at the intersections of DH and pedagogy. I intend to continue offering these courses, partnering with a changing selection of co-facilitators to promote diverse perspectives and respond to changing trends in digital pedagogy.
Closer to home, I have three times contributed articles to rebus, the annual interdisciplinary publication from the College of Arts & Sciences. In this publication, I present a rhetorician’s perspective on shared lived experiences, such as current events, science fiction, food and beverage packaging, and even the mystery of a kiss. With each of my submissions, the editorial staff of rebus has commended my work for having an implicit understanding of the audience for which the publication is created. My articles in rebus help show how my discipline applies in everyday life and how a liberal-arts approach to education helps shape our thinking about the world around us. My articles are routinely used in Marissa McLargin’s classes (see her letter of recommendation), thus enhancing the content of her composition courses.
One other example of my Scholarship of Integration bears mentioning. In November 2017, I served as chaperone for Kathryn Duncan’s Harry Potter literature course as the students traveled abroad to Europe. During this trip, one student presented a disciplinary challenge and ultimately had to be sent home early. As the only faculty member on the trip with international calling and data available on my mobile device, I became the coordinator of disciplinary proceedings, parental contact, and flight scheduling. Throughout the situation and its resolution, I made sure to be open and honest with all students on that trip while continuing to be discreet and respectful of everyone involved. The important point to note is that, while I was dealing with the student’s situation, other students were watching. They saw how their chaperones responded to changes in plans, to problematic behavior, and to professional discourse at a distance. They also saw how a well-traveled adult navigated transit, planning, and the everyday pleasantries of interacting with tour guides and the like. Many students on that trip experienced wholly novel situations—one had never been on a plane before boarding our trans-Atlantic flight. By providing an example of responsible, calm, and firm behavior, I took a routine journey and turned it into an opportunity to educate Saint Leo’s students and reinforce their personal development through genuine life lessons.
The scholarship of application moves toward the active engagement of the scholar. It focuses on the responsible application of knowledge to consequential problems. The scholarship of application must be tied directly to one’s field of knowledge, and relate to and flow directly out of creative professional activity. Consequently, the scholarship of application can be defined as intellectual activities related to a field of study that flow directly out of scholarly investigation and research in the field, and involve the application of disciplinary expertise to the analysis and solution of significant practical problems, leading to new intellectual understandings and contributions to human knowledge.
I go out of my way to make my scholarship accessible because I believe academia needs to matter in the eyes of the public (or the parents) who fund the majority of research done in our society. To that end, I stay focused on creating scholarship that can be accessed by, and be useful for, as broad a range of people as possible. I spend a good deal of my time developing conversations about cdp, mostly through my roles as Director of the journal Hybrid Pedagogy, Producer of its podcast The HybridPod, regular facilitator at the related annual Digital Pedagogy Lab seminars, and regular instructor at the Digital Humanities Summer Institute. That involvement has kept me active in the public discourse about pedagogy and efforts to get educators to find ways to empower students and increase their agency over their learning. Managing these platforms allows me to influence the discipline of pedagogy by contributing to and shaping the conversation surrounding it. The writing I do for Hybrid Pedagogy mostly involves calls for papers that invite further dialogue and prompt conversation on topics relevant to the journal. I have also published two other peer-reviewed articles there, and those articles have been viewed 2,652 times as of October 2019 (see Table 1 below for details), demonstrating the broad influence of those articles. Furthermore, my work as a journal editor allows me to easily bring the Scholarship of Teaching back into my classroom, and I frequently ask students to work with material published on the pages of the journal I run because the topics so directly apply to the work we do in class. The scholarship I write and the journal I manage both challenge me to keep current with principles of cdp in my own praxis here at Saint Leo.
Since January 2015, I have produced The HybridPod, an occasional podcast that brings the conversation around Critical Digital Pedagogy to the aural environment. This show currently includes fifteen episodes, each of which brings the ideas, pedagogy, and voice of progressive scholars to the audience’s attention. The strength of this work lies in the nature of the guests I bring to the audience. Scholars who appear on The HybridPod represent diverse scholarship from across disciplinary borders. Asao Inoue, Stephanie Vie, Estee Beck, and Cheryl E. Ball represent leadership within rhetoric and composition; Jesse Stommel, Sean Michael Morris, Lee Skallerup Bessette, Amy Collier, and Kevin Hodgson represent Digital Studies; and Chris Gilliard, Robin DeRosa, and Kris Shaffer represent Open Education. Such a list could expand to include each of the 15 episodes and 27 guests presented to date. Ultimately, my work with this show serves to make pedagogy accessible and available to a broader audience than traditional alphabetic texts published to academic journals. I give teachers a platform to share their passions, and I frequently “push back” on their thinking, asking questions on behalf of the audience to help dig deeper into the rationale behind my guests’ pedagogical stances. This podcast series has been quite successful, with episodes being heard over 19,000 times since its inception, and feedback via Twitter calling the episodes “thought-provoking,” “fantastic,” “inspiring,” and “intellectual music”; episodes have been used as core resources in OpenLearning17 Conference and as source material for class projects across the country. The best measure of the show’s reach, influence, and success, however, can be seen in detailed episode-download totals, shown in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Listening Statistics, Jan 2016 – Oct 2019
Learning to Let Go: Listening to Students in Discussion (self-narrated article)
Sep 11, 2014
Listening to Students (with Martín Kutnowski, Kris Shaffer, and Jonathan Sircy)
Jan 27, 2015
Compassion (with Maha Bali / ﻣﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻲand Asao B. Inoue)
Feb 24, 2015
Assessment and Generosity (with Kris Shaffer, Asao B. Inoue, and Lee Skallerup Bessette)
Mar 21, 2015
Play in Education (with Stephanie Vie, Kyle Stedman, and Jesse Stommel)
May 20, 2015
Digital Pedagogy, Part 1 (with Cori Anderson, Estee Beck, Molly Hatcher, Cecilia Lo, Sean Michael Morris, and Kristy Rawson)
Aug 8, 2015
Digital Pedagogy, Part 2 (with Cori Anderson, Estee Beck, Molly Hatcher, Cecilia Lo, Sean Michael Morris, and Kristy Rawson)
Sep 13, 2015
Collaboration (with Maha Bali /ﻣﻬﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻲ, Sarah Honeychurch, and Kevin Hodgson)
Oct 30, 2015
Networks (with Bonnie Stewart)
Jan 22, 2016
Responsive Teaching (with Janine DeBaise)
Apr 21, 2016
Questioning Learning (with Amy Collier)
May 19, 2016
Openness (with Greg B. Curran and Paul France)
Aug 5, 2016
Access (with Robin DeRosa)
Mar 8, 2017
Asking the Right Questions (with Bonni Stachowiak)
Jun 22, 2018
Platforms (with Chris Gilliard)
Dec 6, 2018
Publishing (with Cheryl E. Ball)
Jun 13, 2019
My work on this podcast also led to an Honors internship in which I used my professional experience to train a Saint Leo student in audio editing work. By the end of the semester, that student had single-handedly done all the editing for a published episode. A regular listener of the podcast, who hosts her own weekly show, later remarked that it was “flawlessly edited” as she complimented his work publicly. Furthermore, the conversations I have with scholars around the word ensure my teaching here at Saint Leo stays informed with current pedagogical trends and developments, and helps me maintain access to diverse perspectives from a variety of educators.
My other major contribution to the Scholarship of Application takes a bit of explanation to ensure the quantitative data make sense, as I suspect my metrics may not be familiar. When I attend conferences, even if only as an audience member, I maintain an active presence at the conference by engaging in conversations about the conference on Twitter. I take notes on panels I attend, sharing conclusions and major points with those not in attendance, which helps distill the presentations and document the discussions of the conference in real-time. Today’s conferences typically choose a “hashtag”—a short, distinctive text sequence preceded by a hash symbol (#)—to help distinguish, discover, and connect messages tagged as related to that conference. Twitter users or those without an account who browse Twitter’s website are able to see all tweets that contain a given hashtag with a single click. In other words, when I send a tweet about a conference and use that conference’s hashtag, my tweet joins all others from the same event in a searchable database, and my messages can become an entry point for others to discover more messages from the conference that share the same hashtag.
My obsessive conference tweeting has earned me a bit of a reputation among my colleagues, particularly those who attend Computers and Writing (#cwcon) and the Digital Humanities Summer Institute (#dhsi19 most recently). In 2017, I earned a tongue-in-cheek “award” for my activity on Twitter because one of my messages became extremely popular, drawing a lot of attention to one aspect of the conference. While none of my tweets has really “gone viral,” I still ensure my voice contributes to the larger conversations at conferences. Details of those contributions can be seen in Table 3, below. In that table, you will see the various conferences and their associated hashtags, along with statistics for my involvement with each one. First I present the number of tweets I sent using each hashtag. Then I display the number of “impressions” those tweets made—the number of times the tweet was viewed on someone’s device, thereby making an impression on them. This number increases as the message gets shared (retweeted) and seen by other people’s digital professional networks, as well as when more people search for the message or watch the conference’s conversation at the time the tweet is sent. Finally, for each conference, I also list the number of “engagements” my tweets have garnered—the number of times someone else clicked on something in my tweet, be it a link, a picture, my profile, the conference hashtag, or the tweet itself to read more detail. Engagements also count the act of retweeting (sending the message along to a new network) or liking (marking the tweet much as posts on Facebook can be “liked”).
All told, my tweeting at thirteen separate conferences has made 321,815 impressions and engaged others 5,646 times. Twitter may not be a typical metric of scholarly performance, but I believe those numbers show that I successfully engage in the Scholarship of Application by bringing the content of a conference to a broader audience and helping those at the conference understand key points to apply to their work. This form of digital scholarship shows my active engagement with academic discourse and my ability to bring those conversations to a broader audience in ways that resonate broadly. Experience working in these digital spaces influences and strengthens my ability to develop academic-writing courses that leverage digital technology to show students how rhetoric works in the 21st century. What may at first seem like superfluous chatter can indeed serve to connect scholars, broaden ideas, and widely disseminate scholarship, in ways that complement my traditional scholarship. In addition, having a broad, accessible network of scholars means I can easily bring outside voices into the classroom, as I did in Fall 2019 by posing student questions to authors of class readings and using their responses to enrich our classroom discussions.
Table 3: Twitter Impact by Conference
And lastly, in June 2018, I engaged in Scholarship of Application of which I am most proud: I presented an invited conference keynote at a small but international conference, essentially providing consultation services to the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (ntnu) in Trondheim. In my presentation, “Getting Critical,” I asked the faculty of ntnu to consider the question, “How can the use of technology help support student agency and voice?” My talk prompted discussion, challenging questions, and follow-up feedback over the course of several days. The opportunity to present to an audience of engaged faculty allowed me to further establish myself as a key voice in the conversation about cdp, a position I use to inform and enrich my teaching here at Saint Leo.
Professional activities are defined as activities related to a faculty member’s recognized area of disciplinary expertise for the purposes of providing professionally-related service to individuals or organizations in the public or private sectors; developing, maintaining, or enhancing content expertise, skills, or professional standing; or supporting professional organizations.
Throughout my time here at Saint Leo, I have taken nearly every available opportunity to engage in professional development and practical training. I consider the occasional seminar and pre-service meeting to be such an integral part of teaching that, unfortunately, I dismissively failed to keep documentation of many of the sessions I attended. With the exception of Fall 2017 and 2018, where I had scheduling conflicts arising from facilitating workshops at Digital Pedagogy Lab, I have attended all sessions of each Faculty Development Day, hoping to stay informed about the latest developments and trends at Saint Leo. When I attend training, I make sure to contribute to the class discussion, especially in webinars, where conversations can easily be strained at best, nonexistent at worst. The training sessions I attend ensure I continue to develop my technical skills (see Courses training), my cross-disciplinary understanding (see qep and wac training), my disciplinary knowledge (see cccc and other conferences), and my connection with the Saint Leo community (see Faculty Development Days at both main campus and the Virginia centers).
Professional Development sessions and conferences (non-presenting) I have attended include, but are not limited to, these:
Fall 2014 Faculty Development Day
“Measuring What Matters”
“Bringing Social Justice into Your Classroom”
QEP Scoring Guide Webinar
Spring 2015 Faculty Development Day
“Social Justice and the Question of Privilege”
OpenCon (November 2014)
CCCC (March 2015)
Fall 2015 Faculty Development Day
DHSI 2015—“Pragmatic Publishing Workflows”
Copyright & Fair Use webinar
Examining How We Think About What We Think webinar
Copyright & Fair Use webinar
35th International Conference on Critical Thinking & Educational Reform (with qep Faculty Fellows)
Spring 2017 Virginia Region Faculty Development Day
I also use membership in the following organizations as a means of staying connected with a variety of disciplines and to bring current thinking in those fields back to my teaching and leadership at this institution. I have been a member of these national and international organizations during my time here at Saint Leo:
A detailed narrative of my teaching goals follows, but in brief, I have set these targets for the years ahead:
Continue publication of podcast episodes, with the help of new student interns
Increase activity intensity with Hybrid Pedagogy, returning to a weekly publication schedule
Continue offering monthly Safe Zone Ally training sessions
Resurrect publication workshop at Computers & Writing conference
Establish routine of writing about pedagogy on Hybrid Pedagogy
Adapt Safe Zone training to the online Saint Leo community
Expand the range of regular workshops and seminars I facilitate
Build reputation as creative pedagogue; make keynotes a regular aspect of my work
Position our local Safe Zone Allies program as a national model for effective training across modalities
My work with Hybrid Pedagogy gives me ample opportunity to engage with critical pedagogues from across the globe. The interviews I conduct for The HybridPod allow me to interact directly with notable figures in the broader discourse of pedagogy in the digital age. The most prominent goal I have for my scholarship is to better leverage that exposure into connections that grow into publication and presentation opportunities. I intend to increase the journal’s publication schedule—weekly journal articles and monthly podcast episodes—to help build an audience and create additional scholarly connections. I have already migrated the journal over to a new submission-management platform, ojs, to help achieve that goal.
Publishing short pieces on an open-access journal creates a vital source of energy and connection with the broader world of scholarship. In order to feel less isolated among a small faculty, I will devote more attention to building connections online, which I most effectively do through Twitter and the journal. By combining efforts on both of those platforms, I can more strategically generate meaningful connections and content.
Now that Saint Leo has a Safe Zone training program, I want to share it with as many people on campus as possible. An immediate goal of mine is to continue offering Safe Zone Allies training on a monthly basis and reach as many members of our community as possible. Beyond the campus community, I want to make Safe Zone training available to the entire university by developing an online version of the training appropriate for our needs, leveraging Saint Leo’s experience in, and reputation with, online instruction to ensure success. Using our unique curriculum to extend Benedictine values to online students would make our program—and our university—stand out. I intend to position our Safe Zone training program as a standard model to be emulated by other institutions. Much as I reached out to other schools when developing our program, I will make myself available to assist other schools while they build theirs.
And finally, the Computers and Writing annual conference is what I consider to be my “home conference”—the conversations and perspectives at that event, more than any other, align with my interests and priorities as an educator. I intend to resume my involvement and feel more connected with the current conversations in the field. My first step will be to re-start an old Computers and Writing tradition: the publication pre-conference workshop. This workshop gives graduate students and other authors a chance to meet face-to-face with editors and directors of a variety of composition- and pedagogy-related journals. That workshop has not been offered in three years, and by offering it again, I will enhance the sense of community within my discipline and provide greater access to authors for my journal. Ultimately, this plan, like all my other scholarship goals, will enhance the conversation around what interests me most: effective teaching.