8th Annual Naylor Workshop for Undergraduate Research in Writing Studies

Plenary Address by Dr. Megan Schoettler

West Chester University

This year’s speaker represents the work of undergraduate research in our field both personally and professionally, and this role creates for her something of a coming home. Megan Schoettler is an alumna of York College of Pennsylvania, where she pioneered with us both the growth of undergraduate research at our institution and the development of the inaugural Naylor Workshop. In spring 2022, Megan will earn her Ph.D. from Miami University and she has accepted a position as Assistant Professor at West Chester University. In her talk, she will describe the trajectory of her research, beginning from her undergraduate research at York College to her dissertation research on the rhetorical strategies of feminist activists and advocates, with the goal of helping current undergraduate researchers envision their own paths. Megan is also the co-author of Chapter Four of The Naylor Report on Undergraduate Research in Writing Studies, “Circulation: Undergraduate Research as Consequential Publicness.”

This year’s group of undergraduate researchers responded to the call for topics that have “consequential publicness.”  Not only in their topics, but in their commitment to issues of social justice that require applied research—research that, in this case, can ameliorate social ills and move toward equity—these researchers brought with them both the minds of serious researchers and the hearts of social justice warriors.  Their energy and commitment was palpable in both sessions and in their end-of-workshop pitches.  Along the way, mentors and undergraduate researchers worked together toward methodologies that most suited their research goals.

Undergraduate Research Participants

Max Anderson, University of Denver

Steven Anderson, Western Michigan University

Gabby Bunko, Montana State University Bozeman

Maryann Byram, Florida State University

Kalea Carter, University of Denver

Marilyn Damord, York College of Pennsylvania

Jalil Dixon, York College of Pennsylvania

Sophie Forcier, University of Denver

Leivys Garcia, Hofstra University

James Gathings, Clayton State University

Cody Gee Sheridan Hmelar, Hofstra University

Candice Harding, University of Texas Permian Basin

Menatalla Kamel, University of Texas Permian Basin

Anusha Kothari, Oxford College of Emory University

Rachael Lucero, University of Texas Permian Basin

Iain Magruder, University of Denver

Rylee Mehr, Florida State University

Christopher Mendoza, University of Denver

Mackenzie Quinn, York College of Pennsylvania

Zoë Rein, Elon University

JoAnna Ricaurte, Hofstra University

Megan Sauers, University of Texas Permian Basin

Shayna Sengstock, Hofstra University

Jaalah Simpson, Colorado State University

Alexis Stewart, York College of Pennsylvania

Katherine Wagner, Allegheny College

Hope Walborn, Juniata College

Santiago Zea, Hofstra University

Kinnery Chaparrel, University of Guelph

Rebecca Pechmann, Allegheny College

Students used their experience in this year’s Naylor Workshop to refine or clarify their research focus. As you’ll see below, the questions students are asking push us ever closer to one goal of the workshop: to produce work of consequence—work, ultimately, that matters to the publics they occupy.

• My research goal is to explore the ongoing youth mental health crisis and possible solutions through mindfulness. My guiding research question is as follows: How might mindfulness and Eastern thought help cure and empower students going through the mental health crisis?
• I'm investigating modern re-tellings of Shakespeare's plays, and how they depict diverse characters to say something new. By examining modern minority characters in Shakespeare's work, as well as how modern casts play with these characters, I'd like to answer the question: how can we use Shakespearean material to comment on modern-day social justice issues?
• Often, students only major in one concentration (literary studies / writing studies) or the other, so they either get a strong focus on the production of writing or the written product, but rarely both. I'm curious about how these differences influence student literacy education both at the college and high school level. What effects do these differences of approaches have on students in either English concentration and how do the gaps that result from these different approaches to writing and the written word affect the way Writing, Literature, and English studies are perceived and interacted with by both faculty and students as well as the larger general population?
• My research question centers around theatrical adaptation of animated and graphic works in TYA (theatre for young audiences) practices. I am trying to learn if there is any kind of specific benefit in merging these two mediums when providing inspiration and platforms for learning and growth in young individuals. What kind of writing compliments or constraints would there be in scripting/rehearsing/producing a live, embodied performance of 2-D illustrations?
• How is the yoga community and journey directly influential to combating social injustices? Here I go in depth about African American studies and the yoga community and how their practices are very similar.
• I am hoping to look into how neurodivergence—mostly autism, ADHD, and "AuDHD" (dual-diagnosed autism and ADHD)—affect language use in poetry. Traits of pattern recognition, attention, and association are non-normative in neurodivergent people; I am especially interested in how these neurodivergent traits affect poetic diction and analogies.
• In what ways could the writing major be improved? Why is there a stigma associated with the writing major?
• How is the writing center, as a space for mavericks against the system, attempting to break stereotypical barriers regarding multilingualism when it has stayed so 'conservative'?
• As a non-traditional college student and a 25-year-old peer academic mentor/writing consultant, I would like to know how other non-traditional students tutor in writing centers. I am interested in researching the experiences that they bring to their consultations and the guidance that they feel they can offer to students that will help them in college and upon graduation.
• With the disappearance of attention spans in younger generations, how does writing change through the use of blogging, micro-blogging, etc. Do apps and services such as TikTok serve as a micro-blog and does it give a more equitable access to underrepresented voices in the world?
• This research focuses on the issue of reading speed being affected by font type. The objective of this study will be to explore if perceptual manipulations, such as the change of certain physical characteristics of to-be-learned stimuli, as seen in Bionic Reading, affect reading speed.
• Why do online platform readers gravitate toward romantic works depicting toxic relationships and what does it say about what they find appealing in relationships?
• I hope to investigate the social function of mental health recovery narratives within the South Asian community, including people from South Asia itself and from the diaspora. Within a community where mental health is largely taboo, I am interested in exploring the role of a genre that talks about mental health so candidly and confessionally.
• What are students' perceptions of the drop-off essay review in York College of Pennslyvania's Writing Center and what might they suggest that can be improved to make this option more useful for students, particularly concerning the video feedback portion?
• How accommodating are universities or higher level education institutions at succeeding towards helping individuals with traumatic brain injury, or also known as TBI, to obtain an education at scholarly levels for a better future.
• My research question is: What are the effects of purpose and focus on an individuals life, success, and wellbeing?
• I am interested in researching the role that race plays in language and professionalism, especially in transitional periods of life. It's no secret that minority students are fundamentally at a disadvantage seeking higher education, and I am interested in looking at how the college admissions essay contributes to this.
• As a group we are trying to learn more about auto-ethnography as a valid form of research. In my specific case I am writing about mental health within the Latinx community and how yoga works to counteract that, talking about machismo and the idea of identity struggle causing an impact on mental health and how yoga comes into play.
• My research question: Why is it important to read/consume childhood and young adult media through a critical feminist lens? I want to explore books that are considered to have a positive representation of girls, negative representations of girls, the impact of both, as well as how reading critically can positively impact even negative representations. 
• My research project investigates the use of creative, personal, expressive, and reflective (CPER) writing as an intervention to promote learning and identity strategies in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Two questions emerge to guide the research: 1. How might CPER writing support many under-represented members of the STEM community in identity-affirming ways? 2. How may CPER writing assist STEM students’ learning, critical thinking, and creative problem solving?
• More research is necessary to better understand how divorce can and does positively affect children coming from negative familial environments. The negative relationship between parents can be associated with children's negative financial, academic, and behavioral outcomes later in life, rather than the divorce itself. Can divorce be a benefit to parents and children in this modern age?
• My main research question is: “how can the way in which individuals write themselves, or others, aid and harm communities that are not holistically represented in the media?” As a Venezuelan, my research focuses on the Venezuelan community and how presented and perceived by the media.
• We are hoping to learn how collegiate writing consultants (peer tutors) can more successfully help writers who struggle with social skills. In order to do this, we would like to develop strategies that consultants can use to efficiently identify a writer's needs, and to subsequently best tailor their communication with the writer. Specifically, we will likely focus on how to tailor communication around boundary setting, expectation setting, and sensitive feedback giving.
• My research aims to look at Asian adoptees and their struggles with and search for identity. I will look at three main reasons for identity issues: mis/underrepresentation in media, racial struggles, and psychological effects of adoption. Both representation and research on Asian adoptees is limited, which leads to stereotypical and misguided perceptions.

As with this year’s researchers, the mentors who supported them were chosen for their commitment to topics, methodologies, and modes of presentation that supported advocacy. Since language, its uses, its abuses, and its power structures are often at the heart of human interactions, our field and this group of mentors helped to frame language as central to justice. Comments by the participants made it clear that once again, the main reason for the success of this workshop is interaction with mentors who are generous, thoughtful, and deeply knowledgeable.

Matthew Davis, University of Massachusetts Boston

Methods: Qualitative research, Using Technology/Digital Humanities Methods

I’m interested in how we learn to write, how we teach others to read and write, how technology changes how we read and write, and how we use and transform what we know about reading and writing for new communicative situations. In more academic terms, that means I study composition theory and pedagogy, technology and multimodality, and writing transfer. At present, I'm a co-editor of an academic journal called Composition Studies, which means I also get to work with writers and find ways to improve on and publish their work!

Suzanne Delle, York College of PA

Methods: Public Advocacy and Social Justice, Qualitative research

Suzanne Delle, Associate Professor of Theatre at YCP, has partnered with a psychology colleague at St. Anselm College in NH to have theatre students write scripts based on their research to create games that help First Responders deal with PTSD. This research was presented at the 2022 College Education Association conference and 2021 Institute for Social Healing and the Mid-Atlantic Council on Family Relations. Performance skills can be used to expand ways to translate our writing and research to others.

Doug Downs, Montana State University

Methods: Qualitative Research, Mixed Methods, Resources for doing a lit review in writing studies, Discourse analysis

I research in two overall areas: 1) public conceptions of writing, research, and reading, in order to understand how such conceptions influence the way people learn and do those activities; and 2) ways of facilitating public deliberation (especially on science/tech subjects like sustainable energy) that help opposing discourses hear one another and negotiate shared understandings. I do my research by interviewing and surveying students, teachers, and members of whatever discourses I’m studying, and conducting discourse analysis on collections of texts (such as news media reports). I am increasingly interested in research that doesn't get published in academic journals but instead is written for the communities of people it's trying to help.

Laura Feibush, Penn State Harrisburg

Methods: Qualitative research, Mixed methods, Public Advocacy and Social Justice

I'm a professor of English (Rhetoric and Composition) at Penn State Harrisburg, where I teach first-year composition, writing studies, writing across media, and public and professional writing. In my research, I use qualitative methods such as questionnaires, filmed observations, and follow-interviews to capture listening behaviors in classrooms and tutorials. Why do we embody our listening the way we do? Whose listening behaviors are valued, and whose are marginalized? My work on listening and embodiment has been published in Praxis: A Writing Center Journal and Composition Forum.

Cantice Greene, Clayton State University

Methods: Public Advocacy or Social Justice, Qualitative research

I am a mid-late career English writing teacher-researcher with training in both ESL and rhetoric and composition. I have also worked on student success initiatives, primarily through teaching basic writing but also by teaching in a bridge program at my current institution. My research interests have varied over the years. In the past I have investigated ELLs' perceptions of the writers' studio, and in more recent years I have studied student attitudes toward engaging faith and secularism in writing programs and writing studies. I am also interested in investigating students' attitudes toward African-American English instructors. In my research, I have used both primary and secondary research methods that include designing and administering surveys and connecting those findings to theories in writing studies, women's studies, and Christian studies.

Alexis Hart, Allegheny College

Methods: Qualitative research, Archival research, Veterans and writing

I have focused much of my research in the last decade on how writing classes, writing centers, and writing practices in general impact student veterans’ transitions to higher education. My co-researcher, Roger Thompson, and I have administered surveys, conducted interviews, done archival research, collected samples of living veterans’ professional and academic writing, and read lots of other scholars’ research. Roger’s and my co-written book Writing Programs, Veterans Studies, and the Post-9/11 University: A Field Guide was published in 2020 and our work has appeared in other journals and edited collections. Along with other members of the CCCC’s Standing Group on Writing with Current, Former, and Future Members of the Military, I have participated in local outreach programs. In addition to my research on student veterans, I have published work on women in the military, ePortfolios, undergraduate research in writing, and writing centers. I am currently a participant in Elon’s Writing Beyond the University Research Seminar and am working with a team of international researchers to consider how undergraduate writers see recursivity in the various "spheres" of writing in which they engage (classroom/academic, co-curricular, self-motivated, work, internship, civic). Our team collected data through surveys, student mapping, and semi-structured interviews during which we specifically discussed samples of students' writing.

Ethna Lay, Hofstra University

Methods: Using Technology/Digital Humanities Methods, Quantitative research

I regularly include opportunities for students to work and compose in new media in my writing classes, so students have the opportunity to craft arguments about texts and ideas in digital formats. By inviting students to compose in new media, I recognize students' sense that composition is more visual than what has been traditionally believed by instructors. Inasmuch as writing operates as a cultural technique, those responsible for writing instruction must cope with the digital culture of contemporary students and their status as digital consumers and producers. So, perhaps notions about the academic essay or the composition should shift with the medium. This change warrants a careful investigation of the literacy practices of the other ways students read, write, and make meaning in digital spaces. The affordances of digital writing spaces invite such investigations. To this end, I have employed a variety of digital strategies and quantitative methods to investigate how students read and write together.

Kim Peck, York College of Pennsylvania

Methods: Qualitative research methods, Discourse analysis, Using Technology/Digital Humanities methods

I am a writing center director. My research focuses on student, tutor, and instructor interaction in online environments like online writing classes or tutoring sessions. I use methods including interviewing and qualitative coding analysis as well as discourse analysis of interactions in class or tutoring sessions in my research.

Gwendolynne Reid, Oxford College of Emory University

Methods: Qualitative research methods, Mixed methods, Using Technology/Digital Humanities methods

Gwendolynne Reid is an assistant professor of English and directs the writing program at Oxford College of Emory University. Her research focuses on how disciplines, like scientific disciplines, use writing to produce and communicate new knowledge. Because genres and writing practices have changed in response to new media environments and communication technologies, her special focus is on digital writing in the disciplines. She most often employs rhetorical genre theory and qualitative methods like text-based ethnography in her work. Her research, for example, has examined how scientists use digital media to engage citizens and how this impacts their scientific writing. Most recently, she has examined citation practices in the medical journals JAMA and JNMA to examine how the history of racism in American medicine is reproduced in citational relationships and therefore in digital tools based on citation like impact factors and search results.

Michael Rifenburg, University of North Georgia

Methods: Qualitative research, Mixed methods, Case studies 

I am fascinated by how people use writing to get work done. Over the past decade or so, I have had the chance to study how student-athletes use writing in their sport and how U.S. Army cadets use writing in their military training. I tend toward qualitative longitudinal studies, which allows me to talk with people about writing and to talk with them over an extended period of time--sometimes years! Through my fascination with writing and how writing works, I have had the chance to publish several books and deliver presentations across the U.S. and abroad.

Myra Salcedo, University of Texas Permian Basin

Methods: Feminisms, Veterans and Writing

My research "paintbrush" spreads a wide swath upon the canvas of academia. Thus, I have presented papers on everything from mitigating military stress via graphic novels (co-presenting a paper with a student Marine at Comic Con International 2019), gender disparities in the play "I Am My Own Wife," Chicana playwright Cherrie Moraga--gender and religion, Virginia Woolf and her echo of Victorian paintings (in contract for publication today), rhetoric, religion, and civil discourse and more. I find that research is significant in any area and that it is like engaging in a treasure hunt. I have participated in undergraduate research projects, stressing that students take the lead and see where the journey leads them.

Megan Schoettler, West Chester University

Methods: Qualitative research, Feminisms, Digital humanities, Public Advocacy or Social Justice, Ethnographic narrative

My research focuses on rhetorical strategies and literacy practices of intersectional feminist activists and advocates, with a focus on how they flip social and emotional scripts. I’m particularly interested in how advocates at a rape crisis center fight back against rape culture. My other research investigates how feminists use digital tools to make social media “work for” them, the development of college writers’ self-efficacies, and how to support international teaching assistants. I primarily use interviews to learn about the lives of my research participants, as well as ethnography (which includes observations, surveys, and textual analysis). I have published two book chapters and have a forthcoming article in Computers in Composition.

Kara Taczak, University of Denver

Methods: Qualitative research, Mixed methods,

I’m currently conducting a multi-institutional, transnational study seeking to understand how three forms of Work Integrated Learning — internships, teaching practicums, and capstone courses—affect diverse populations of undergraduate students’ recursive transfer of writing knowledge and practices. To figure this out, my research team designed a qualitative study and used interviews, surveys, and writing samples as data points, coded inductively (“ground-up” approach of coding where codes come directly from your data) and deductively (“top down” approach where you develop a codebook with your own set of codes) and then read the data looking for themes. From there we used something called triangulation to ensure viability of the data. We won a research grant to help us with the research, have published two articles and have an upcoming book chapter from this research (with another article out for review), have been accepted to present at three conferences, and have been asked to co-edit an international journal on this topic. And all of this has come from one year-long research study.

Jessi Thomsen, Western Kentucky University

Methods: Qualitative research, Archival research, Public Advocacy or Social Justice

Jessi Thomsen, PhD, is beginning her first year at Western Kentucky University as an Assistant Professor of Professional and Technical Writing. Her research has considered reflection as a practice in sustainability that affects our writing and our relationships with the world around us. She is developing her research in new directions, considering how reflection opens possibilities to affirm difference and to recognize the materiality of our engagements. Jessi has experience with archival methodologies, pedagogical studies, and interviewing/oral histories, and she is interested in the ways we can make our scholarly work public-facing, interactive, and accessible to a wide audience.

This year’s workshop continued our focus on the relationship between literacy issues, writing, pedagogy, and social justice. Like all social justice work, one key is the development of caring communities of practice.  Comments about this year’s workshop focused on feelings of belonging, rejuvenation, inspiration, and building a community of practice within Writing Studies.  Part of this was finding like-minded individuals; part was about the generosity of spirit that mentors and undergraduate researchers brought to this work. A sample of comments that demonstrate the community that this workshop forms follows:

• I found myself in a group of “my” people—people who are so passionate about writing and social justice that they came from all corners of the country.
• As an undergraduate, there are few opportunities like this for those of us with limited financial resources.
• The mentors and workshop leaders were impassioned about this work.
• It was so useful to meet others in my field and network with them. It will provide me with opportunities for my future.
• Serving as a mentor, it was so encouraging to see the fine research—and commitment—of our undergraduate students.
• Lives are changed at this workshop. It reminds me why we do this work.
• This was an immersive, collaborative experience with people with whom I share a great deal. As a first-generation Columbian student from NY, this was a great opportunity.
• The workshop greatly boosted my confidence.
• It was so good to work together with folks who are seeking a better world.
• This was a fascinating, encouraging and supportive community.
• This workshop provided opportunities for so many young writers.
• It was wonderful to meet so many other like-minded researchers.
• This weekend is going to help me so much in my future.
• Attending the workshop has helped me to understand and appreciate my aptitude for research.
• The weekend rejuvenated and inspired my work as a mentor to undergraduate researchers.
• Learning and language is the future, and we were building it at this workshop.
• I have been teaching for twelve years, and I have never felt as edified as I do now after attending the Naylor Workshop.

This year’s program continued to focus on providing point-of-need time for undergraduate researchers, giving them plenty of time to do collaborative work with both fellow students and mentors.  The flow of the weekend experience moved from experiences that allowed researchers to share their initial ideas with others and also to form real human bonds with others attending.  This helped to support the advocacy theme as well as our continued focus on respect for all ideas and their value. 

The early stages of the program were heuristic and generative, helping researchers and mentors to think deeply about the implications of their research and the methods of study most likely to be valid, reliable, and ethical.  Researchers worked within affinity groups part of the time, but were also encouraged to seek out others at the workshop who might support their efforts.

The program proceeded as follows:

Friday, September 30th

After getting settled in, feel free to spend some time relaxing and/or mingling with others in the hotel lobby or other public spaces at the Wyndham Garden York (2000 Loucks Rd, York, PA 17408). Representatives from York College will be there to greet you by about 4:00p.m.

5:30–6:45p.m.

Opening Reception and Networking Exercise (Wyndham Garden, Outdoor Courtyard)

• We know that you will be arriving at different times, but beginning at 5:30 p.m., we’ll have some refreshments available as you meet other attendees, including those within your research working group. You’ll participate in a semi-structured exercise in which you can share your topics, your goals, and get to know each other’s backgrounds and priorities for research.

6:45p.m.

Opening Remarks, followed by dinner and conversation (Wyndham Garden, Crystal Ballroom)

• As we sit down for dinner, we’ll hear some brief opening remarks to set the tone for this year’s Workshop. You’ll also be able to continue the process of getting to know those in your working group and goal setting for the busy day ahead.
• After dinner, feel free to continue conversations. (But be sure to get some rest—we start early on Saturday!)

Saturday, October 1st

7:00–7:45a.m.

Continental breakfast available at the Wyndham with some opening conversations before leaving for York College’s Center for Community Engagement (59 E Market St, York, PA 17401) for the day’s activities. We’ll make some announcements at about 7:20.

8:00a.m.

Leave for York College Center for Community Engagement (CCE) (carpooling and shuttle)

• We’ll have a shuttle available for those who have arrived by air or train; we may ask those who have driven here to use their private cars to drive to the CCE, and perhaps take a few others with you to avoid an overcrowded shuttle bus. Free parking available in the multi-tier parking garage at 41 East Market St., York, PA 17401 (right next door to the CCE).

8:30–10:00a.m.

Story Time and Opening Exercises, led by Dominic DelliCarpini (CCE, Community Room)

• We’ll start with some self-introductions by undergraduate researchers. Each researcher will have two minutes to tell a genesis story about their research and what inspires them to want to do this work—as well as the impact it could have on the field, their institution, and/or their community. No pressure, just an informal “here’s what got me hooked, why this interests me, what I’m thinking about, and why I think it could be ‘consequential.’” This is a chance for us all to learn more about the range of topics and goals you have brought with you and what drives your research impulses. It will also help researchers to gravitate to others with similar interests and help mentors learn more about participants who they think they can serve—so listen and look for collaborators. Finally, you will be introduced to the process for the “What/Why” workshops.

10:00–11:30a.m.

“What/Why” (Topic Development) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

• These initial sessions with your working groups will feature a structured activity in which researchers can narrow their research question, their purpose, and their audience. You’ll work to envision the ultimate goals of your research and articulate them more precisely. By the end of this session, you will also have developed a better idea about research methods that might be used to study your question; that will help you plan out the afternoon “How” sessions you’d like to attend. Use your Meet your Mentor Guide, your networking conversations, and the guidance of your mentors to consider who you might speak with in the afternoon.

11:45a.m.–1:30p.m.

Lunch and Break (CCE Mural and Community Rooms)

• We’ll share some lunch. We’ll also discuss other ways to “publish” (make public) or “circulate” your research in consequential ways. Finally, you will be introduced to the process for the “How” Workshops. Weather permitting, there will be some time to venture out to see a bit of our City.

1:45–2:30p.m.

Round One, Concurrent “How” (Methods) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

• Mentors will be situated for drop-by sessions in various locations throughout the CCE. Taking into account what they’ve discovered in your morning sessions, each undergraduate researcher will move to stations at breakout tables to discuss possible methods for their study and gather advice from mentors who can share their experience and expertise, but who will also help you be creative with your research methods.

2:30–3:00p.m.

Brief “Re-visioning” and Reflection Period (CCE, various rooms)

• Each undergraduate researcher will have some quiet time to make notes and start to refine their topic and methods toward designing their final pitches (using whatever mode of presentation you find most appropriate). You should bring these revised/developing ideas to your next session to discuss your thoughts.

3:00–3:45p.m.

Round Two, Concurrent “How” (Methods) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

• Each undergraduate researcher will move to a second station in breakout rooms to discuss another array of possible methods for their study and gather advice from methods experts.

3:45–5:00p.m.

Reflection and Poster Planning for your Final Pitch/Presentation (CCE, various rooms)

• We’ll first gather to talk about how you can move toward creating your final plan. Researchers will move back into their working groups, where they can work individually (and also talk with their mentors) to begin poster planning/sketching prototype of poster that will include topic question, audience, possible impact, and method of research. This will vary according to how far along their research is.

5:00–6:30p.m.

CCE, Community Room: to end our hard days’ work, we’ll gather as a full group to have dinner and to chat informally about success stories, focusing upon how topics and methods have been refined throughout the day. We’ll also hear some further observations from our plenary speakers and workshop leaders about what they’ve been hearing, and learn about our evening interactive session on art and activism from Matthew Clay-Robison.

6:30p.m.

Depart for Marketview Arts (37 W Philadelphia St, York, PA 17401)

7:00–8:30p.m.

Evening Activity (Marketview Arts)

• Making Change by Making Art: Messaging Social Change with Words and Images (led by the curator of York College Galleries, Matthew Clay-Robison, and Rebekah Eyre, CCE Director of Operations).

8:45p.m.

Return to Wyndham Hotel: talk, rest, socialize, do some more planning, and get ready for Sunday’s work!

Sunday, October 2nd

7:00–7:45 a.m.

Continental breakfast available at the Wyndham with some opening conversations before leaving for York College’s Center for Community Engagement for the day’s activities. We’ll make some announcements at about 7:20.

8:15 a.m.

Leave for Center for Community Engagement (carpooling and shuttle)

• Free parking available in the multi-tier parking garage at 41 East Market St., York, PA 17401 (right next door to the CCE). We’ll again ask for those who have driven here to use their private cars to drive to the site, and perhaps (as you are willing) take a few others with you. This will avoid an overcrowded shuttle bus and accommodate luggage.

BE SURE TO CHECK OUT FIRST and BRING LUGGAGE—shuttles and private cars will leave directly from the workshop site for the return journey.

8:30–10:30a.m.

CCE, various locations: undergraduate researchers will work individually on their final posters, with assistance as needed from mentors. For those who need materials printed, you’ll submit that by about 10:30 or earlier. York College staff will be there to help. We’ll also help you to find the spot for you to display your work in our Gallery Hall.

11:00a.m.–12:00p.m.

Group 1, Pitches and Gallery Walk (CCE, first floor)

• Half of the undergraduate researchers will give a 1-minute pitch about their work, and then we’ll have time to visit each other’s posters to comment and offer advice and encouragement.

Noon

Lunch and Group 2 Pitches (CCE, Community Room)

1:00–1:45p.m.

Group 2 Gallery Walk (CCE, first floor)

1:45p.m.

Benediction (CCE, Community Room)

• Final words and preparation for departures. You’ll be tired, but hopefully happy, inspired, and ready for your next steps with a new group of national colleagues...