This presentation for the 8th Intercultural Rhetoric and Discourse Conference discusses work on the Purdue OWL, focusing on the resources targeting L2 writers writing for particular contexts (e.g., Writing for the Chinese Business Context), as these resource-types tend to be some of the early Purdue OWL spaces where the findings of intercultural rhetoric maybe more readily applied. This discussion will also provide an overview of recent research looking at the place of and practitioner attitudes towards OWLs in general and, more specifically, the Purdue OWL. The presenter will conclude by discussing new content development initiatives at the Purdue OWL and how intercultural rhetoric may be used to prepare these resources for deployment to the Purdue OWL. In closing, the presenter will also discuss some of the ways in which intercultural rhetoric can help to inform the creation of OWLs outside of North American—focusing on issues of usability and ESP content development

Paiz, Joshua

English

Purdue E-Pubs

Purdue UniversityPurdue e-PubsPurdue Writing Lab/Purdue OWL GraduateStudent Presentations Purdue Writing Lab/Purdue OWL2014Encouraging the Growth of OWLs Worldwide:Utilizing Intercultural Rhetoric to Inform BestPracticesJoshua PaizPurdue University, jpaiz@purdue.eduFollow this and additional works at: http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/writinglabgradpresPart of the Applied Linguistics Commons, International and Intercultural CommunicationCommons, Other Linguistics Commons, and the Rhetoric and Composition CommonsThis document has been made available through Purdue e-Pubs, a service of the Purdue University Libraries. Please contact epubs@purdue.edu foradditional information.Recommended CitationPaiz, Joshua, "Encouraging the Growth of OWLs Worldwide: Utilizing Intercultural Rhetoric to Inform Best Practices" (2014). PurdueWriting Lab/Purdue OWL Graduate Student Presentations. Paper 10.http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/writinglabgradpres/10Good	  evening.	  My	  name	  is	  Joshua	  Paiz,	  one	  of	  the	  graduate-­‐student	  administrators	  of	  the	  Purdue	  Online	  Wri=ng	  Lab	  and	  a	  doctoral	  candidate	  at	  Purdue	  University.	  I	  was	  both	  honored	  and	  humbled	  to	  come	  and	  share	  with	  you	  today,	  what	  I	  see	  as	  the	  possible	  applica=ons	  of	  intercultural	  rhetoric	  in	  the	  wri=ng	  center.	  As	  my	  posi=on	  relates	  to	  the	  Online	  Wri=ng	  Lab,	  and	  not	  the	  physical	  space,	  I	  will	  focus	  on	  IR	  and	  OWLs.	  	  	  1	  During	  the	  course	  of	  this	  presenta=on,	  I	  will	  provide	  you	  a	  brief	  bit	  of	  history	  on	  the	  Purdue	  OWL,	  to	  help	  contextualize	  the	  rest	  of	  the	  presenta=on.	  I	  will	  then	  discuss	  How	  IR	  can	  best	  inform	  Wri=ng	  Center	  Prac=ce	  and	  OWL	  Content	  Crea=on.	  This	  will	  be	  done	  using	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  as	  an	  example	  and	  by	  focusing	  on	  recent	  L2	  wri=ng	  resource	  developments	  and	  a	  reinterpreta=on	  of	  recent	  OWL	  research.	  I	  will	  conclude	  by	  showing	  how	  IR	  can	  help	  to	  con=nue	  to	  inform	  prac=ce	  at	  the	  Purdue	  OWL,	  as	  well	  as	  to	  encourage	  OWL	  growth	  abroad.	  	  2	  The	  context	  for	  this	  presenta=on	  is	  going	  to	  be	  the	  Purdue	  Online	  Wri=ng	  Lab,	  from	  here	  on	  the	  Purdue	  OWL.	  Please	  note,	  that	  the	  sta=s=cs	  that	  you	  see	  behind	  me	  are	  from	  about	  two	  years	  ago.	  	  Coming	  online	  in	  1994,	  The	  Purdue	  OWL	  celebrates	  twenty	  years	  of	  helping	  writers	  around	  the	  globe	  by	  providing	  almost	  800	  wri=ng	  resources	  to	  users	  from	  around	  the	  globe.	  While	  the	  Purdue	  OWL’s	  original	  mission	  was	  to	  help	  the	  Purdue	  Wri=ng	  Lab	  to	  meet	  students	  where	  it’s	  at	  and	  to	  help	  address	  the	  wri=ng	  lab’s	  contribu=ons	  to	  Purdue’s	  mission	  as	  a	  Land,	  Sea,	  and	  Air	  grant	  University,	  by	  extending	  the	  reach	  of	  the	  Wri=ng	  Lab’s	  support	  to	  the	  local	  community.	  The	  Purdue	  OWL	  has	  gone	  global.	  Since	  it’s	  incep=on,	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  has	  contained	  resources	  for	  L2	  writers.	  However,	  beginning	  in	  the	  spring	  of	  2012,	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  began	  an	  aggressive	  expansion	  of	  these	  resources.	  However,	  in	  order	  for	  this	  expansion	  to	  be	  executed	  in	  a	  meaningful	  way,	  a	  number	  of	  things	  would	  be	  needed:	  skilled	  developers,	  research,	  and	  a	  firm	  theore=cal	  base	  to	  aid	  in	  the	  con=nued	  training	  and	  professional	  development	  of	  our	  content	  developers,	  all	  of	  whom	  are	  graduate	  students—and	  only	  a	  small	  handful	  of	  whom	  are	  second	  language	  users.	  	  3	  Since	  shortly	  aYer	  OWLs	  appeared	  on	  the	  scene,	  they	  became	  the	  object	  of	  a	  concerted	  research	  focus.	  Beginning	  in	  2000	  a	  number	  of	  edited	  volumes	  and	  monographs	  were	  published.	  These	  volumes,	  like	  Inman	  and	  Sewell’s	  (2000)	  Taking	  Flight	  with	  OWLs	  a^empted	  to	  provide	  a	  focused	  and	  comprehensive	  discussion	  on	  OWLs	  including	  their	  space	  in	  wri=ng	  center	  theory	  and	  best	  prac=ces	  in	  OWL	  deployment,	  as	  well	  as	  detailed	  conversa=ons	  of	  the	  fiscal	  and	  human	  resources	  needed	  to	  launch	  OWLs.	  However,	  in	  this	  volume,	  only	  one	  entry	  discusses	  OWLs	  and	  L2	  wri=ng	  support—this	  focusing	  on	  the	  launch	  of	  an	  English-­‐language	  OWL	  in	  Hong	  Kong.	  This	  rela=ve	  lack	  of	  research	  on	  OWLs	  for	  L2	  wri=ng	  support	  in	  general	  and	  the	  crea=on	  and	  content	  development	  for	  OWLs	  as	  L2	  wri=ng	  support	  tools	  is	  problema=c.	  	  	  Turning	  specifically	  to	  the	  literature	  in	  TESOL	  and	  L2	  Wri=ng,	  only	  two	  pieces,	  Rilling	  (2005)	  and	  Tan	  (2011)	  have	  discussed	  the	  space	  and	  place	  for	  OWLs.	  While	  Rilling	  examined	  real-­‐=me	  online	  tutorials,	  Tan	  offered	  a	  more	  comprehensive	  overview	  of	  how	  and	  why	  OWLs	  are	  coming	  into	  being	  across	  Asia.	  Tan	  (2011)	  points	  out	  that	  OWLs	  are	  springing	  to	  birth	  for	  many	  of	  the	  same	  reasons	  as	  they	  came	  into	  being	  in	  North	  America	  and	  Western	  Europe.	  However,	  and	  this	  is	  where	  Intercultural	  Rhetoric	  can	  have	  the	  most	  profound	  impact	  on	  Online	  Wri=ng	  Centers,	  Tan	  reports	  that	  the	  majority	  of	  OWLs	  throughout	  Asia	  are	  imported	  by	  Western	  faculty	  members	  working	  in	  Asian	  universi=es,	  and	  largely	  outsource	  their	  content	  by	  merely	  	  4	  It	  is	  my	  feeling	  that	  IR	  has	  great	  poten=al	  when	  applied	  to	  the	  contexts	  of	  Online	  Wri=ng	  Labs	  in	  the	  US	  and	  abroad.	  While	  this	  may	  appear	  limited	  at	  first,	  OWLs	  con=nue	  to	  be	  on	  the	  rise	  as	  Wri=ng	  Centers	  spread	  across	  Eastern	  Europe,	  Africa,	  the	  Middle	  East,	  and	  Asia;	  and,	  as	  wri=ng	  centers	  specialists	  in	  these	  areas	  con=nue	  to	  hear	  the	  call	  of	  OWLs	  as	  tools	  to	  meet	  students	  where	  they	  are	  and	  in	  their	  =me	  of	  need—for	  some	  of	  the	  students	  that	  I	  have	  known,	  this	  may	  be	  late	  at	  night	  right	  huddled	  over	  their	  keyboards.	  	  	  While	  outlining	  the	  IR	  framework	  Connor	  (2008;	  2011)	  pointed	  out	  that	  some	  of	  the	  assump=ons	  that	  undergird	  the	  IR	  framework	  deal	  with	  the	  interac=ons	  of	  na=onal	  and	  disciplinary	  contexts.	  However	  these	  two	  forces	  impact	  each	  other	  in	  a	  number	  complex	  ways,	  crea=ng	  moments	  of	  tension	  and	  opportunity	  for	  writers.	  This	  may	  relate	  to	  the	  culturally-­‐based	  rhetorical	  expecta=ons	  related	  to	  making	  and	  suppor=ng	  claims	  to	  poten=ally	  culturally-­‐based	  rules	  of	  informa=on	  architecture,	  web-­‐based	  presenta=on,	  and	  informa=on	  literacy	  (e.g.,	  McBribe,	  2008).	  	  	  IR,	  par=cular	  no=ons	  of	  contextuality,	  the	  nego=ated	  nature	  of	  meaning,	  and	  accommoda=on	  may	  help	  to	  inform	  (online)	  wri=ng	  center	  best	  prac=ces	  in	  the	  following	  three	  areas:	  Content,	  Research,	  and	  Expansion.	  The	  remainder	  of	  this	  presenta=on	  will	  focus	  on	  these	  three	  areas,	  using	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  as	  an	  example.	  	  	  	  5	  Content	  represents,	  in	  my	  mind,	  the	  area	  for	  most	  promise	  for	  IR	  and	  OWLs.	  IR	  can	  be	  used	  to	  inform	  OWL	  content	  crea=on	  in	  a	  number	  of	  ways.	  The	  first	  is	  through	  direct	  engagement	  with	  wri=ng	  for	  interna=onal/mul=na=onal	  context.	  For	  the	  Purdue	  OWL,	  this	  has	  led	  to	  the	  weaving	  of	  some	  of	  IR’s	  findings	  and	  assump=ons	  to	  our	  pre-­‐exis=ng	  Wri=ng	  for	  a	  Global	  Business	  Audience	  series,	  which	  focuses	  on	  wri=ng	  for	  the	  North	  American,	  Indian,	  and	  Chinese	  contexts.	  When	  these	  resources	  were	  first	  launched	  in	  2009/2010,	  they	  were	  largely	  descrip=ve	  in	  nature,	  but	  could	  poten=ally	  be	  misread	  as	  an	  overarching	  how	  to,	  which	  could	  lead	  to	  claims	  of	  these	  resources	  being	  reduc=vist	  and	  essen=alizing.	  In	  2012,	  we	  decided	  to	  examine	  how	  IR	  might	  be^er	  frame	  these	  pieces	  making	  them	  more	  useful	  to	  both	  writers	  wri=ng	  in	  English	  as	  an	  addi=onal	  language	  and	  for	  those	  individual	  who	  are	  wri=ng	  in	  English	  as	  their	  first	  language	  but	  wri=ng	  for	  new	  context.	  This	  introduc=on	  included	  explicit	  call	  outs	  not	  only	  to	  IR,	  but	  specifically	  to	  the	  contextually	  sensi=ve	  nature	  of	  wri=ng	  and	  how	  not	  only	  is	  it	  na=onal	  culture	  and	  the	  linguis=c	  and	  rhetorical	  expecta=ons	  of	  the	  natal	  language	  that	  may	  impact	  wri=ng	  for	  these	  diverse	  na=onal	  contexts,	  but	  also	  that	  small	  cultures,	  that	  is	  the	  corporate	  and/or	  ins=tu=onal	  cultures	  in	  which	  one	  finds	  themselves	  embedded	  can	  impact	  wri=ng	  and	  its	  final	  form.	  	  	  Thinking	  again	  to	  root	  cause	  of	  difference,	  keeping	  in	  mind	  that	  difference	  shouldn’t	  be	  viewed	  as	  some	  dirty	  word,	  we	  have	  used	  IR	  in	  various	  forms	  to	  also	  inform	  how	  we	  frame	  all	  of	  our	  L2	  wri=ng	  resources.	  This	  led	  to	  a	  considerable	  expansion	  and	  	  6	  IR	  can	  also	  stand	  to	  inform	  research	  related	  to	  OWL	  by	  being	  both	  a	  framework	  to	  guide	  the	  actual	  instrument	  design	  to	  helping	  to	  group	  and	  interpret	  findings.	  	  	  From	  March	  2012	  to	  March	  2013,	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  engaged	  in	  a	  year-­‐long	  web-­‐based	  research	  project	  to	  gage	  uses,	  needs,	  and	  ahtudes	  of	  our	  OWL	  users	  who	  either	  are	  currently	  teaching,	  or	  have	  taught	  wri=ng	  in	  the	  tradi=onally-­‐defined	  EFL	  context,	  please	  understand	  that	  I	  do	  not	  use	  the	  term	  EFL	  unproblema=cally.	  While	  IR	  did	  not	  play	  much	  of	  a	  role	  in	  the	  original	  project,	  it	  can	  be	  used	  to	  revisit	  and	  to	  reanalyze	  our	  findings.	  This	  is	  an	  ongoing	  process	  and	  one	  which	  we	  have	  just	  started.	  We	  are	  beginning	  by	  examining	  the	  response	  from	  our	  email	  interviews,	  responses	  in	  which	  many	  users	  provided	  sugges=ons	  for	  improving	  L2	  wri=ng	  resources,	  and	  asking	  ourselves	  “how	  do/can	  we	  implement	  this	  in	  a	  way	  that	  is	  in	  keeping	  with	  the	  IR	  assump=ons	  of	  nego=ated-­‐ness	  and	  accommoda=on?”	  Again,	  this	  is	  a	  process	  that	  we	  have	  just	  recently	  begun.	  	  	  Another	  place	  where	  IR	  and	  OWLs	  might	  intersect	  is	  through	  usability	  research.	  Any	  educa=onal	  resource	  should,	  at	  some	  point,	  engage	  in	  usability,	  accessibility,	  and	  informa=on	  architecture/user	  experience	  studies.	  And	  the	  findings	  of	  these	  studies	  should	  be	  reported	  and	  their	  value	  highlighted	  to	  the	  Applied	  Linguis=cs,	  CALL,	  and	  ELT	  communi=es.	  It	  is	  through	  these	  kinds	  of	  studies	  that	  we	  can	  evaluate	  the	  efficacy	  of	  our	  resources	  and	  improve	  them	  to	  lower	  barriers-­‐to-­‐use	  for	  our	  users	  	  7	  By	  way	  of	  closing,	  I	  would	  like	  to	  talk	  about	  the	  poten=al	  of	  IR	  to	  inform	  OWL	  expansion.	  While	  there	  a	  number	  of	  poten=al	  avenues,	  there	  is	  are	  two	  that	  are,	  to	  me,	  immediately	  salient.	  	  	  The	  first	  is	  as	  a	  tool	  to	  encourage	  and	  to	  advocate	  for	  OWL	  growth	  and	  development	  outside	  of	  the	  US.	  At	  many	  of	  the	  conferences	  that	  I’ve	  been	  to	  over	  the	  past	  two	  years,	  when	  my	  colleagues	  discover	  my	  connec=on	  to	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  there	  is	  usually	  some	  discussion	  of	  what	  it	  would	  take	  to	  create	  at	  OWL	  at	  their	  ins=tu=on,	  transla=ng	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  into	  the	  local	  language,	  or	  best	  prac=ces	  for	  running	  pre-­‐exis=ng	  OWLs.	  I	  believe	  that	  IR	  can	  be	  especially	  useful	  for	  advoca=ng	  for	  OWL	  crea=on	  in	  the	  tradi=onally	  defined	  EFL	  context.	  Specifically,	  I	  feel	  that	  IR’s	  approach	  to	  the	  L1,	  the	  L2,	  their	  interac=ons,	  and	  local/disciplinary	  expecta=ons	  could	  be	  a	  useful	  star=ng	  point	  by	  highligh=ng	  a	  unique	  way	  to	  meet	  local	  needs	  at	  that	  university/ins=tu=on.	  While	  the	  Purdue	  OWL	  is	  perhaps	  one	  of	  the	  oldest	  and	  most	  well-­‐known	  con=nuously	  opera=onal	  OWLs,	  it	  cannot	  be	  all	  things.	  IR	  can	  also,	  as	  discussed	  previously,	  be	  used	  to	  inform	  and	  guide	  content	  crea=on	  at	  local	  OWLs,	  helping	  to	  address	  the	  problem	  pointed	  out	  by	  Tan	  (2011)	  that	  many	  Asian	  OWLs	  merely	  mirror	  and	  link	  to	  pre-­‐exis=ng	  content,	  typically	  on	  US-­‐based	  OWLs.	  	  	  The	  second,	  and	  this	  is	  true	  for	  all	  OWLs,	  even	  the	  Purdue	  OWL,	  as	  well	  as	  for	  physical	  wri=ng	  labs.	  IR	  can	  be	  used	  to	  ground	  tutor	  training.	  Connor	  (2011)	  calls	  for	  	  8	  It	  has	  been	  my	  hope	  to	  highlight	  some	  of	  the	  ways	  that	  IR	  can	  be	  used	  in	  online	  wri=ng	  labs.	  I	  see	  this	  as	  a	  presenta=on	  of	  possibility	  and	  would	  welcome	  any	  con=nued	  discussion/co-­‐cogni=on	  on	  this	  topic	  at	  any	  point	  during	  the	  conference.	  Thank	  you	  for	  your	  =me	  and	  a^en=on.	  	  9	  

Encouraging the Growth of OWLs Worldwide: Utilizing Intercultural Rhetoric to Inform Best Practices

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=writinglabgradpres

Encouraging the Growth of OWLs Worldwide: Utilizing Intercultural Rhetoric to Inform Best Practices

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Purdue E-Pubs