In "Conversation at a Crucial Moment" I argue that all composition
professionals not just writing program administrators and those who
consider themselves technology specialists need to engage in published
debate about the potential for hybrid writing courses to transform
traditional, on-site writing programs. I propose that we currently have
the opportunity to share our various institutional perspectives; to
consider what might be the value and innovation afforded by Lee Jeans
hybrid courses and programs; and to get involved proactively in
conversations already taking place on committees outside of our
departments, committees that are influencing policies about technology
and other resources. Though some productive debate has occurred
informally at conferences and in electronic discussion forums, I call in
the article for more published debate because full-length articles can
be effective vehicles for extended explanation, framing, and analysis.
My primary goal is to call for and, I hope, energize this published
conversation.
As an administrator of an online writing program, I understand the
substantial commitment and dedication required of WPAs, so it is my
sincere hope that published articles that analyze and critique program
claims will not undercut those programs or the abilities of WPAs
responsible for those programs. I also want to emphasize that, having
been through the extensive process of program development as both an
administrator and a regular faculty member, I absolutely assumed as I
was writing "Conversation at a Crucial Moment" that program leaders at
each of the institutions I mention were engaged in a great deal of
discussion with a variety of stakeholders along the way. Though my
article does analyze the claims made in public materials by some Texas
Tech faculty who are associated with their institution's hybrid writing
program, the purpose of my article is not to discount any program. As I
state in Diesel Jeans
the article, because Texas Tech's pioneering hybrid writing program
represents one possible future for such programs at any of our
institutions, I devote a portion of the article to analyzing one
particular aspect of Texas Tech's hybrid program that is often cited as
central to the program's innovation: objectivity in assessment.
It is important that, as we look forward to the future of writing
programs and the role of electronic course venues in otherwise on-site
programs, we reconsider established theories of writing instruction and
administration. "Hybrid writing courses may or may not be," as I
conclude in my article, "the most significant writing program innovation
in the next decade, but, like any new controversial pedagogical
opportunity for change, hybrid instructional methods present us with
exciting opportunities to rethink and literally re-vision our program
designs and instructional methods". As a starting point for this
reflection, I suggest that we (re)consider the following questions: What
principles of writing instruction and program administration do we want
to prioritize What values do we want to guide our programs What might
be some of the consequences of choosing to include or not include hybrid
course elements in our writing programs What kinds of resources and
support will we need for faculty and students (both graduate students
who teach and any student who takes a hybrid writing course) What might
administrative structures look like in writing programs that are, to
some extent, hybrid programs.