This paper shows the development of an innovative teaching project conducted with students of two different degrees: Hispanic studies and modern languages and translation, at the University of Alcalá. This interdisciplinary experience sought to connect students taking their initial steps into poetry writing with translators approaching poetic translation for the first time. With this in mind, the creation of a bilingual collection of poems was proposed. Firstly, students in Hispanic studies would create some poems that could be translated, or rather recreated by the translation students. The main objectives of this interdisciplinary project were to promote creative writing, encourage group work, and increase students’ motivation – as well as to reinforce both the use of English as a foreign language and the practice of literary translation by crafting and subsequently translating original texts created by the students themselves. Moreover, the project is also beneficial for the enrichment and refinement of the education process in general and of poetry translation teaching practices in particular.

Published writers of fictional or semi-fictional works entering the academy as doctoral candidates express surprise at the requirements of formal human ethics reviews. Admitting an element of the autoethnographic exists in their writing, they may insist that they possess what Freeman called ‘narrative integrity’. This paper considers the ethics of autoethnography as they apply to both the academy, chiefly within the PhD by artefact and exegesis, and the world of published writers, seeking possible solace from such scholarly concepts as ‘relational ethics’, or ‘ethic of care’. Drawing methodologically on our experience as doctoral supervisor and student and with the permission of writer/students whose stories are inseparable from this work, this study unpacks in ethical terms the problems reported by students whose methodology involves evocative or performative autoethnography. As interpretatist methodologists, autoethnographers maintain it provides insights into the interplay between the personally engaged self and mediated cultural descriptions. Methodologically, it enacts the self and others as data. This connection between the personal and the social makes it difficult for autoethnographers to speak of themselves without speaking of others. Examining autoethnography involves a close scrutiny of the boundaries between the self and the other, a process that is both enlightening and essential for supervisory dyads in creative writing methodologically informed by autoethnography. These aspects of the ethics of autoethnography are crucial, but little attention has been paid to the problematic notion that practiceled research is emergent in practice and that its autoethnography requires a retrospective approach, looking backwards as well as forwards. The reality of applying this methodology in practice-led research clashes with the pro-active nature of ethics procedurals required by universities. The paper identifies nine praxical problems that arise from such clashes, and considers best-practice principles for responding to these problems, drawing strongly on indigenous research. Finally, it offers conclusions relating to consent, transparency and the need to open a dialogue around best practice in autoethnographic research in the academic field of Writing.

There has been little scholarly work looking at the use of creative writing pedagogy within non-creative writing courses. However, ‘Outside the box: Incorporating high stakes creative writing assignments into non-major literature courses, a case study’ demonstrates promising findings when incorporating high stakes creative writing assignments into the curriculum for core English literature courses. This article gives an overview of the Progressive history of ‘creative’ writing in the academy and then outlines contemporary sources that reference the burgeoning field of Creative Writing Studies and how creative writing pedagogy may be used more broadly in classrooms in a variety of disciplines. Then the case study details the assignments and experience of teaching a high stakes creative assignment in a non-major literature course at an undergraduate liberal arts institution. Using 25 representative student responses from among 50 total students over multiple semesters, the article concludes by asserting the findings that the inclusion of a high stakes creative assignment – in this case an original short story that is workshopped by peers and then revised – results in students who note increased confidence and creativity, and who state making connections between the relevance of writing instruction and workshopping to their lives outside of the classroom. While further, more formalized study would be beneficial on this topic, this study provides a useful perspective not just to teachers within the English department but also has ramifications for interdisciplinary scholarship.

The Pecha Kucha talk is an effective way to encourage the composition process; to promote the use of effective visuals to explain and engage; and to distribute the expertise in the classroom away from the teacher as the central expert and to the students. In this paper, we describe and give an example of what is called a Pecha Kucha (Japanese for ‘chit chat’). When examined within the frameworks of theorists in the areas of composition, pedagogy, and literacy, this emerging presentation genre is promising for both composer and audience. With this in mind, we first discuss ways that the creator of the Pecha Kucha may benefit from the specific composition space. We then share how this composition exercise is an effective teaching tool. Next, we show ways that this presentation style maximizes learning with image and speech coordination and skills of analysis and synthesis. Then we introduce how Pecha Kuchas give students the opportunity to teach and to work with technological tools in authentic ways. Finally, implications for future practice in developing compositions using oral delivery with visuals are discussed.

Screencasting is a technology that enables the user to record screen activity on video while also capturing audio or video narration of the lecturer demonstrating that screen activity. This technology has improved over the years, and has now become streamlined enough to be integrated easily in popular learning platforms like Blackboard, Desire2Learn, and Moodle. The technology’s high usability factor and the varieties of screencasting software now available as open source makes screencasting appealing to writing instructors, not only as a means to improve teaching, but also as a tool for students to create and engage with multimedia texts that facilitate the acquisition of contemporary literacy skills. In the United States, the National Council of Teachers of English proposes that 21st century definitions of literacy must, among other things, include the ability of writers and readers to analyze, create, and interact with multimedia texts and to gain proficiency with the use of modern technologies. I argue that screencasting is a practical and creative technology that can be used for a variety of purposes: to address 21st century literacy requirements in writing classes, to improve teaching effectiveness in both online and “flipped classroom” learning, and to enhance the instructor’s social presence in online learning environments. I give examples from my own teaching experience using Camtasia and ScreenFlow software, as well as review some popular applications of screencasting technology currently in use in academic environments.

Common Core Standards involve an increased emphasis on non-fiction reading and writing. Across grade bands, students are expected to read and compose a variety of non-fiction texts as well as develop age appropriate research skills. With this in mind, the author worked with a 1st grade teacher to use Jerry Pallotta’s Who Would Win? series in a class non-fiction writing project that was standards-based. The class consisted of a wide range of ability levels, so the author and teacher frequently used cooperative learning strategies throughout the entire process. Using the series as a model, the students were guided through the writing process, from pre-writing to publishing, with the culminating activity being a meeting with Pallotta where students presented him with their class authored Who Would Win? book. As a result of the writing unit, students were able to experience non-fiction texts on a variety of levels and craft a quality piece of literature that was authentic, relevant, and personal.

Rethinking Creative Writing in Higher Education Programs and Practices That Work Stephanie Vanderslice (2011) Ely, U.K.: Professional and Higher Partnership Ltd. pp.143 ISBN-13, 978-1907076312

Negotiating the Personal in Creative Writing Carl Vandermeulen (2011) ISBN-13: 978-1-84769-437-9. Pp. xx + 229 The Creativity Market Creative Writing in the 21st Century Dominique Hecq (ed.) (2012) ISBN-13: 978-1-84769-709-7. Pp. xiv + 229 Key Issues in Creative Writing Dianne Donnelly and Graeme Harper (eds.) (2013) ISBN-13: 978-1-84769-846-9. Pp. xxvi + 182

The pedagogical technique of “extreme puppet theater” is posited as a collaborative and novel learning tool for motivating students to study texts by creating new ones. Examples are provided of how this approach has worked in university courses in literature, composition, and creative writing. By extension, extreme puppet theater can be applied to other subjects, at all levels of academia, in order to offer an effective and engaging alternative to traditional teaching conventions.

This article explores the prospects for internationalizing the Master of Fine Arts (MFA) in Creative Writing, a degree that has gained considerable popularity in the United States in the past half century but has yet to gain much of a foothold in other countries. As part of this exploration, we describe the experiences of establishing the first low-residency Master of Fine Arts in Creative Writing in Asia at City University of Hong Kong, explaining the justification for setting up such a program with reference to the history of teaching creative writing and the current conditions for literary writing in English in Asia and globally. We also reflect upon the processes of planning, curriculum design, and administrative negotiation and that went into setting up the program and report on feedback from the first cohort of students. The experience of setting up this program is used as the basis for raising a number of more general issues regarding the teaching of creative writing in English in international contexts.

Writing trips overseas are recalled and proposed as a valuable source of inspiration for budding writers when they are thrown into a new context. The focus of discussion is on a program that takes a creative writing class abroad as part of the university curriculum.

This article integrates a research foundation in creativity with practical applications to writing pedagogy. A creativity assessment based upon the work of Torrance and Guilford and designed for diagnosing rather than predicting individual creative thinking strengths is presented along with tools and techniques for enhancing creative writing pedagogy and an analysis of student comments from an online Master’s program in Creativity and Innovation.

This article discusses creativity within the classroom with a focus on creative writing. First, it reviews concepts of creativity in the educational literature and a previous study on how science teachers fostered “small c” creativity in their classrooms. Small-c creativity values the kind of thinking that produces new ideas in learners but is not necessarily historically important to any field or domain. It can be argued that when educators help their students excel at thinking creatively every day, it assists them in more frequently producing creative products. Using this theoretical lens, an analytical study framework was developed from a review of the literature stating that teachers who foster small-c creativity: (1) support divergent thinking; (2) accept learning artifacts that are novel; (3) nurture collaboration in which individual kinds of creativity are supported; (4) provide choices in what is an acceptable response; and (5) include lesson guidelines that enhance learning and self-confidence. Findings of the science study were applied to the writing classroom, as five poet-teachers were interviewed regarding their beliefs about small-c creativity. The themes that emerged within the teacher interviews are discussed. The piece concludes with recommendations for writing teachers geared to help them foster small-c creativity in their classrooms.

Olivia Archibald's essay ("Representation, Ideology, and the Form of the Essay") arguing for a turn away from the formal, Baconian essay and towards the more creative and personalized Montaignian form of writing that was the original essai, and, in the most recent issue (volume 4.1), Douglas Heil's essay ("TV Writing and the Creative Writing Workshop: Shaping Practice across Disciplinary Boundaries") arguing for a meshing of the approaches of creative writing in English departments and scriptwriting pedagogy in mass communication. The current issue brings together the perspectives of creative writers, writing teachers, and creativity scholars to offer a novel examination of creativity for writing pedagogy. In combining reflections on the nature of

More than mere mathematical form, the fractal and other processes of chance can be used to help spur creative writing in new directions. From the inception of the I Ching, some form of constraint and the use of chance operations have been employed for centuries to free the creative impulse from overdetermination. This essay explores how one writer uses the flux of chaos both in the classroom and in his own writing, from collaborations to specifically designed writing exercises that help free the unconscious mind while still providing a sturdy architecture for perception.

Many writers begin as avid readers: reading can be the impetus and inspiration for their own work. In addition, many writers teach in undergraduate creative writing programs where they are confronted with students who do not share their relationship to reading or to language. This situation creates two problems: students aren’t engaged enough by language to make creative use of their reading and they lack a sense of authority that might allow them to be helpful critics of one another’s work. This essay explores and explains one strategy I have used in my undergraduate creative writing courses to address both issues. By asking my students to write creative responses to each other’s work, they learn to read more closely and carefully and also gain a sense of authority and competence in providing constructive criticism.

This essay argues that creative writing and mass media programs have much to learn from each other. In its use of roundtable writing and serialized storylines that parallel 19th century literature, prime-time television writing is a natural fit for programs that intertwine creative writing workshops with the study of literature; institution within the curriculum is urged. Mass media programs – while perhaps already offering TV writing – can bolster this subject through the incorporation of creative writing workshop traditions.

This study focuses on how teachers enrolled in a graduate level, online English Education course perceived formulaic or thesis-driven student writing, commonly associated with the traditional “five-paragraph essay.” One goal of this course, “Writing, Reading, and Teaching Creative Nonfiction,” was to engage teachers in reflecting about the uses of this “new” genre in their own classrooms. Living in several states, the participants included one science teacher, four Special Education teachers, and ten middle and secondary Language Arts teachers. We analyzed 12 separate prompts posted to the discussion board over a six-week period. Also, participants were required to post one “thread” into each discussion board, with follow-up comments to threads from at least two other participants. Approximately 75 out of a total of 800 coded comments dealt with formulaic writing. The following patterns of participants’ perceptions emerged from these comments: (1) student benefits of formulaic writing; (2) a hierarchical sequence for teaching writing; (3) obligations to teach formulaic writing; (4) resistance to formulaic writing; (5) the constraints of formulaic writing on students; and (6) the constraints of formulaic writing on teachers. Based on this study, we recommend that teachers engage in writing themselves which includes risk taking, modeling writing and significant revision for their students, and sharing models of writing; ensure that their students write in many forms and genres, including, but not limited to, the five-paragraph essay; develop realistic views of the expectations and obligations they face daily; and internalize effective writing practices. In the process of exploring the genre of creative nonfiction, teachers also had to grapple with old debates, as almost all of this study’s participants changed their views, discovering that the chains they had felt actually were not as tight as they had originally believed.