What I consider to be the foundation of my practice as a writing teacher is a “rule” that I introduce early and that we as a class continuously return to throughout each semester. That rule is: There is no “good writing” and there is no “bad writing.” “Good” and “bad” are moral qualities, not types of writing. Instead, there is “effective writing” for an audience and purpose, or “ineffective writing” for an intended audience and purpose. This rule helps all students to unlearn the idea that any ability or inability to meet criteria in this or a previous writing experience (e.g. high school courses) is not attached to their value as a person, a student, or a communicator.

Given that the majority of my gen ed classes are developmental (i.e. using additional practice with writing to prepare for the BC course – ENG 1020/first-year writing), I teach many students whose dispositions toward writing classes are rarely positive. So, diversity and inclusivity in my classes begins with re-framing writing as existing outside of solely meeting the expectations of Standard Academic English. Instead, I encourage students to confront and embrace the diversity of language and ask critical questions about what type of discourse (writing) works for a given situation.

This work begins with the practice of reflection (sometimes referred to as metacognition, sometimes as “thinking about thinking”). Specifically, in my own reflective assignments, I ask students to develop a P.L.O. or “personal learning objective.” The P.L.O. is designed for students to understand these objectives as no less important than those set out by the University. Further, these assignments [are] designed to give students ownership over their learning to determine whether and to what extent the course and their learning [aligns] with their academic goals. These personal learning objectives (PLOs) are a means through which students can begin to build self-efficacy through monitoring their own learning. In addition to a student’s monitoring of change/growth in a static learning objective (e.g. “Compose persuasive academic genres, including argument and analysis…”), they also have the opportunity to monitor evolving, personal goals that can be revised and built upon across an entire semester.

The P.L.O. honors where students have been, what they intend to do with their time in our classroom, and affords space for growth, reflection, and introspection as students touch base on their P.L.O multiple times a semester. This approach highlights each student’s unique contribution to the classroom and gives them a concrete connection to the value they bring to the University and any community they are a part of. Further, it shows students that even among shared goals (the course learning objectives we are all working toward) our own individual pursuits and personal and/or cultural language/dialects are just as if not more important in an academic setting.