Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons English Theses & Dissertations English Summer 8-2020 Critical Language Awareness Pedagogy in First-Year Composition: A Design-Based Research Study Megan Michelle Weaver Old Dominion University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/english_etds Part of the Anthropological Linguistics and Sociolinguistics Commons, Curriculum and Instruction Commons, Higher Education and Teaching Commons, and the Rhetoric Commons Recommended Citation Weaver, Megan M.. "Critical Language Awareness Pedagogy in First-Year Composition: A Design-Based Research Study" (2020). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Dissertation, English, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/ghyt-v912 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/english_etds/106 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the English at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in English Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CRITICAL LANGUAGE AWARENESS PEDAGOGY IN FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION: A DESIGN-BASED RESEARCH STUDY by Megan Michelle Weaver B.A. May 2011, Mars Hill College M.A. May 2013, University of North Carolina at Charlotte A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ENGLISH OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2020 Approved by: Michelle Fowler-Amato (Director) Kevin DePew (Member) Staci Defibaugh (Member) Jori Beck (Member) ABSTRACT CRITICAL LANGUAGE AWARENESS PEDAGOGY IN FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION: A DESIGN-BASED RESEARCH STUDY Megan Michelle Weaver Old Dominion University, 2020 Director: Dr. Michelle Fowler-Amato In this design-based research (DBR) study, I collaborated with two first-year composition (FYC) instructors in designing and implementing Critical Language Awareness (CLA) pedagogy to promote students’ linguistic consciousness while strengthening and enhancing their postsecondary writing skills. I designed and implemented this study by drawing on a critical theory of language, informed by literature on language ideologies (Silverstein, 1979; Irvine & Gal, 2000; Kroskrity, 2010) and raciolinguistics (Flores & Rosa, 2015; Alim, 2016), and a critical theory of pedagogy, informed by literature on critical pedagogy (Freire, 1970, 1973; Giroux, 2011) and critical race pedagogy (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995; Lynn, 1999). After engaging in micro-cycles of analysis (Gravemeijer & Cobb, 2006), modifications were put in place during the second iteration of the study. Modifications focused on embedding activities and discussions within the curriculum to better support students’ linguistic consciousness and to better scaffold writing assignments throughout the course. Additionally, I engaged in retrospective analysis (Gravemeijer & Cobb, 2006), revisiting the entire data set and developing five assertions regarding the study’s local instruction theory and the continued implementation of CLA pedagogy more broadly: (1) Instructors’ articulated and embodied beliefs about language influenced students’ developing linguistic consciousness. (2) Students’ perceived lack of agency in education strongly affected the transformative aims of the innovation as students articulated resignation for or complicity with discriminatory beliefs. (3) Collaborative innovations require ongoing negotiation between instructors and researchers as both parties navigate the influence of past teaching and learning experiences on the current innovation. (4) The iterative process of the collaboration promoted instructors’ agency in designing, modifying, and implementing CLA pedagogy in FYC. (5) CLA pedagogy complicates the national WPA outcomes for FYC by inviting students to question and challenge notions of rhetorical effectiveness. This study contributes to disciplinary conversations about language, race, and education by illustrating the difficulty of not only maintaining a critical stance toward language diversity, but also, at times, even articulating a critical stance given our deeply embedded beliefs about language. Additionally, it contributes to literature on professional learning (NCTE, 2019), illuminating how collaborating with instructors promotes agency in moving language rights theory into praxis. iv Copyright, 2020, by Megan Michelle Weaver, All Rights Reserved. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many people have supported me in making this work possible. I owe my initial interest in linguistic social justice to Hal McDonald at Mars Hill College. To Rebecca Roeder, thank you for helping shape my passion at UNC-Charlotte and encouraging me to pursue my doctoral studies, when I was ready. To Kevin Depew and Staci Defibaugh, thank you for your time and support throughout this process; each of you has impacted my work through your mentorship, teaching, and scholarship. To Jori Beck, thank you for pinch hitting and seeing me to the end of this journey. To my chair, thinking partner, and friend, Michelle Fowler-Amato, I am so grateful that our paths crossed when each of us began our respective journeys at ODU. Thank you for encouraging and challenging my thinking over the past five years. I aspire to be the teacher and mentor for others as you have been for me. To Matthew, Heather, Charlie, William, and Ben, I have missed so many birthdays, basketball games, and soccer matches, but I have greatly appreciated the virtual updates and the unending support and encouragement from afar. To Mom and Dad, your unconditional love and support made this possible. Guess what? I finally finished “my paper.” To Amanda, we did it. In navigating this process together, we came to understand how to best support one another and when we needed to celebrate our successes, both big and small. You understood my focus, completely, especially during the last couple of months. For that, I cannot thank you enough. I love you all so much. Most importantly, to Taylor and Teresa, who volunteered to participate in an interview that turned into a multi-year collaboration. Thank you for opening up your classrooms and inviting me into your lives to learn from and support you in working to make our classrooms more equitable spaces. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………………. ix LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………………….... x Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 OVERVIEW OF METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 6 PEDAGOGICAL GOALS ............................................................................................. 9 RESEARCH QUESTIONS .......................................................................................... 10 JUSTIFICATION OF GOALS .................................................................................... 11 PERSONAL REFLECTIONS ON LANGUAGE AND PEDAGOGY............................ 13 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .................................................................................... 15 DEVELOPING A CRITICAL THEORY OF LANGUAGE ...................................... 15 DEVELOPING A CRITICAL THEORY OF PEDAGOGY ....................................... 21 OVERVIEW OF DISSERTATION ................................................................................. 26 II. RELEVANT LITERATURE ................................................................................................. 28 FIRST-YEAR COMPOSITION AS A GATEKEEPING COURSE ............................... 28 STUDENTS’ RIGHT TO THEIR OWN LANGUAGE ................................................... 30 APPROACHES TO LANGUAGE DIVERSITY ............................................................. 31 MONOLINGUAL APPROACHES ............................................................................. 34 MULTILINGUAL APPROACHES ............................................................................ 39 MULTILINGUAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMPOSITION .............. 48 THE POSITIONING OF TEACHER PREPARATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN COMPOSITION ....................................................................... 49 PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT FOR COLLEGE WRITING INSTRUCTORS .......................................................................................................... 51 SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 55 III. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 56 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ............................................................................... 56 THE CONTEXTS ........................................................................................................ 57 PARTICIPANTS ......................................................................................................... 61 PHASES OF DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................... 65 PHASE ONE: PLANNING FOR THE INNOVATION ............................................. 67 PHASE TWO: THE INNOVATION ........................................................................... 72 PHASE THREE: RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS .................................................... 77 INTENTIONS FOR RIGOR AND TRUSTWORTHINESS ........................................... 78 RIGOR ........................................................................................................................