• Students reported better understanding of writing with screencast assignments. • Students reported technology gains from screencast and screen recording assignments. • Students reported screencast and screen recording assignments were not complicated. • Blending spontaneous speech with the writing process helped students. • Students may feel self conscious when recording their screens and voices. Inexperienced writers often resist meaningful revision, which underscores the need for pedagogical approaches that foster deeper engagement. This study explores the use of student-led screen recordings and screencasts as pedagogical tools to promote students’ ownership and confidence in their writing processes. Our study surveyed 76 student writers in First-Year Writing classrooms to investigate this approach. The findings suggest that these assignments are easy to use, focus writers’ attention on the writing process, and leverage learning opportunities afforded by the transmodal blends of writing, video, and speech. Specifically, students reported more benefits from screencast assignments that allowed them to blend spontaneous speech into the writing process. Additionally, students reported that their technology skills improved after completing either the screencast or screen recording assignment. One downside was that students tended to feel self-conscious when recording their screens and voices. Overall, these student-led assignments are worth exploring in composition classrooms as they can lead to a deeper, more hands-on understanding of the writing process.

This article describes five first-year writing instructors’ experiences with personalizing shared curriculum across three different course delivery formats (face-to-face, hybrid, online). The data is drawn from teaching journals that the co-authors, a non-tenure track, part-time Lecturer and a tenured Writing Program Administrator, and three Graduate Student Teaching Associates completed throughout Fall 2022. The findings illustrate both benefits and drawbacks related to shared curriculum: discussing and troubleshooting curriculum in a community of practice is highly valuable, but separating course delivery from course design is challenging. In our study, those challenges manifested as disconnects between course content and disciplinary identity, as well as personal feelings of failure. On the other hand, the need to personalize shared curriculum across multiple delivery formats proved productive, especially when instructors used asynchronous online materials as a starting point to develop hybrid and face-to-face lesson plans. Ultimately, we advocate for more conversations about how writing programs can support contingent faculty as they personalize shared curriculum through both course delivery and design, and we offer an example of a successful community of practice that revises shared curriculum in response to community members’ experiences with teaching in multiple modalities.

Our First-year Writing program began intentional student engagements with generative AI in the fall of 2022. We developed assignments for brainstorming research questions, writing counterarguments, and editing assistance using the AI tools Elicit, Fermat, and Wordtune. Students felt that the tools were helpful for finding ideas to get started with writing, to find sources once they had started writing, and to get help with counterarguments and alternate word choices. But when given the choice to use the assistants or not, most declined. Generative AI at this stage is unreliable, and many students found the tradeoff in reviewing AI suggestions to be too time consuming. And many students expressed a preference for continuing to develop their own voices through writing. Our experience in engaging AI led to the creation of the DEER praxis, which emphasizes defined engagements with AI tools for specific purposes, and generous use of reflection.