Table Of Content"WITH": ARTICULATING A RESTORATIVE
COMPOSITION
PEDAGOGY
by
CYNTHIA DUGGAN MWENJA
MICHELLE BACHELOR ROBINSON, COMMITTEE CHAIR
DILIN LIU, COMMITTEE CO-CHAIR
JAMES MCNAUGHTON
JENNIFER STOLLMAN
CINDY TEKOBBE
A DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy
in the Department of English
in the Graduate School of
The University of Alabama
TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA
2017
Copyright Cynthia Duggan Mwenja 2017
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ABSTRACT
In this project, I trace commonalities between the fields of restorative practices and
composition pedagogy, then articulate a first-year writing course design to enact the resultant
restorative composition pedagogy. I provide a thick description of the course design, syllabus,
assignment sheets, and daily activities, then I analyze pre- and post-semester surveys from
students who participated in the course. Using information from the student surveys as well as
other artifacts from the semester, I conclude that restorative composition practices can offer a
model for meeting composition pedagogy goals by providing an inclusive, egalitarian, and
respectful classroom experience.
ii
DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to my family—immediate, extended, and chosen—who
stepped in and stepped up to help and encourage me as I worked and wrote. In particular, I
dedicate this work to Mwenja, Janine, Suze, Marian, Rosalyn, Lillian, and Mama—it may not
have always been graceful, but we got through it together. Much love to you all.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am happy to have the opportunity to thank those who have helped me to complete this
research project. Thanks first of all go to Michelle Bachelor Robinson, who championed my
work before we ever met, and continued to remind me of my purpose throughout my coursework
and this project. Thanks also to Dilin Liu for agreeing to co-chair and for modeling an engaged,
supportive teaching and mentoring style. Additionally, I would like to thank all my committee
members—Cindy Tekobbe, James McNaughton, and Jennifer Stollman—for their kind attention
to and support of this project, and for agreeing to work with me on a very tight time schedule so
that I could accept the job of my dreams. I would like to thank Sara Whitver for being a
fabulous, helpful sounding board as I developed this project. Thanks also to Luke Niiler, Amy
Dayton, and James McNaughton for responding thoughtfully and critically to early versions of
this work; their collective comments helped tremendously as I developed and revised this
project.
I very much appreciate the support and friendship of my fellow graduate students—
thanks go to all of them for their friendship and willingness to engage with my ideas. Lastly,
thanks to the students in the Fall 2016 English 102 class at the University of Alabama who
participated in this study; I literally could not have completed the project without them.
iv
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii
DEDICATION .............................................................................................................................. iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... vii
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................1
Restorative Practices .......................................................................................................................2
The Project ....................................................................................................................................10
A REVIEW OF RESTORATIVE PRACTICES AND COMPOSITION PEDAGOGY
LITERATURES ............................................................................................................................14
Create Community .........................................................................................................................15
Repair as Needed ..........................................................................................................................20
Transform When Possible .............................................................................................................22
Extending Restorative Practices ...................................................................................................25
TOWARD A RESTORATIVE COMPOSITION RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................30
Positionality ...................................................................................................................................32
Pre-research....................................................................................................................................34
Gathering Data ...............................................................................................................................37
Teacher Research ...........................................................................................................................42
Writing It Up ..................................................................................................................................45
Chapter Conclusion ........................................................................................................................51
v
RESTORATIVE COMPOSITION PRACTICES IN ACTION: A THICK DESCRIPTION
OF THE FALL 2016 SEMESTER ................................................................................................53
The Setting .....................................................................................................................................55
Syllabus ..........................................................................................................................................59
Assignment Instructions, Unit Plans, and Unit Arcs .....................................................................71
Daily Routine .................................................................................................................................75
The Arc of the Semester ................................................................................................................78
Restorative Grading .....................................................................................................................103
Moments ......................................................................................................................................108
AN ANALYSIS OF FALL 2016 PRE- AND POST-SEMESTER SURVEYS ..........................112
Pre-semester Survey Results ........................................................................................................113
Post-Semester Survey Results......................................................................................................133
Chapter Conclusion ......................................................................................................................161
CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................................................163
Reaching Restorative Composition Pedagogy Goals ..................................................................164
Room for Improvement................................................................................................................170
Implications..................................................................................................................................175
Future Research ...........................................................................................................................176
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................178
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................183
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Social Discipline Window ...................................................................................................... 4
2. Writing Process Chart ........................................................................................................... 86
3. Grade Distribution, Fall 2016 English 102 Class ............................................................... 108
4. Pre-semester Survey Question One ............................................................................... 115-16
5. Pre-semester Survey Question Two .................................................................................... 118
6. Pre-semester Survey Question Three .................................................................................. 121
7. Pre-semester Survey Question Four.................................................................................... 123
8. Pre-semester Survey Question Five ............................................................................... 125-26
9. Pre-semester Survey Question Six ................................................................................. 127-28
10. Pre-semester Survey Question Seven ................................................................................. 129
11. Pre-semester Survey Question Eight .................................................................................. 132
12. Post-semester Survey Question One ................................................................................... 137
13. Post-semester Survey Question Two .................................................................................. 140
14. Post-semester Survey Question Three ................................................................................ 143
15. Post-semester Survey Question Four ............................................................................. 145-46
16. Post-semester Survey Question Five ............................................................................. 147-48
17. Post-semester Survey Question Six ............................................................................... 149-50
18. Post-semester Survey Question Seven ................................................................................ 154
19. Post-semester Survey Question Eight ................................................................................. 157
20. Post-semester Survey Question Nine .................................................................................. 160
vii
INTRODUCTION
At their best, first-year composition classes enable students to improve their abilities to
participate in an essential part of the human experience: communication. To take part in civil
society and in the work force, people around the globe must now master an incredible array of
communication skills and tools. First-year composition classes can help university students to
learn these skills, which are vital to professional success as well as to effective participation in
local and national affairs. According to the Council of Writing Program Administrators, students
should emerge from first-year writing classes proficient in “rhetorical knowledge,” “critical
thinking, reading, and composing [including source evaluation],” “composing processes,” and
“knowledge of conventions” (“WPA Outcomes Statement”). Effective first-year writing classes
can help students develop these proficiencies, as well as help them to see how to apply the skills
in many other rhetorical settings in their lives.
First-year composition classes do not always reach their full potential in helping students
learn these skills. Many students respond to the content with claims of uselessness and dullness,
and oftentimes this response is a result of some instructors not making clear the connections
between class work and other composition tasks. As Mike Rose discusses in Lives on the
Boundary, students from many socio-economic and cultural backgrounds do not see themselves
represented in their readings or in the academy. As I have seen in my own teaching, some
students believe that they are irredeemably “bad” writers or that there is only one “proper” way
of writing that applies in all circumstances. Many English instructors focus mainly on the
1
“errors” in student writing, so students may feel defeated and unable to improve. Such
experiences stand in the way of students receiving the full benefit of first-year composition
instruction.
The field of composition pedagogy does provide insights into more effective strategies
that instructors can use to work with their students. Composition researchers such as Patricia
Bizzell and Lisa Delpit have explored avenues for welcoming students from many socio-
economic and cultural backgrounds into the classroom, as well as for providing course content
that the students will perceive to be relevant and useful. Composition scholars such as Asao B.
Inoue are re-evaluating grading practices so that assessment is more transparent and fair. The
composition classroom can be an inclusive setting which mentors writing development, no
matter who the students are and what the venue is. When students develop a wider array of
composition skills, they can enter a larger number of discourse communities and use their
composition and communication skills to improve their workplaces and the larger society. If our
students are to have access to the vital tools of communication, we must realize that, as
composition instructors, how we teach and communicate with our students matters. We can
provide an inclusive and egalitarian classroom space where they can learn to improve their
methods of communication and to transform themselves into capable rhetoricians. When we do
provide such spaces, they reflect the ideals of Restorative Practices.
Restorative Practices
Within the field of composition studies, scholars have long examined multiple ways to
include the full spectrum of students who enter the composition classroom; however, much of
this scholarship remains contained in the small world of composition scholars and has not been
2
Description:CYNTHIA DUGGAN MWENJA answer these questions, I taught the RCP course I had developed to a second-semester English 60. Stakeholders, Zehr says, should have input in decision-making, and both the FWP and the university fill this role in first-year writing classes offered by the school.
