Composition Forum 46, Spring 2021
http://compositionforum.com/issue/46/

Creating a Collaborative Culture of Access through the Accessibility Working Group

Molly E. Ubbesen

Abstract: The Accessibility Working Group (AWG) aims to create a collaborative culture of access within our group, our composition program, and our larger professional and pedagogical communities. To create a culture of access, participants need to be collaborative members of a community to continuously negotiate access needs that change over time. The AWG has benefited our composition program as it is a decentralized, auxiliary group dedicated to conversations about accessible pedagogy that have inspired more effective pedagogical practices. This program profile provides the theories, goals, practices, and challenges of the AWG as a model to foster a collaborative culture of access in other composition programs and contexts.

Introduction

I founded the Accessibility Working Group (AWG) in early 2018 in response to our composition director’s call for various working groups to address some areas of improvement for our program to better serve a diverse group of students at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM). During this time, I was the English 101 Coordinator as a graduate student writing program administrator and worked with our new Composition Director and other members of our writing program administration (WPA) team to improve our first-year composition program. We started to question some of the policies of the first-year composition program we inherited. Student evaluations prompted concern about the high stakes of our pass/fail portfolio system and the high anxiety it caused both students and instructors. We were also concerned about the inflexible attendance and assignment policies that deemed students ineligible to submit a final portfolio, and in turn, fail the class if they acquired more than two weeks’ worth of absences or had any missing assignments. While we were committed to upholding a composition program with high expectations, we wanted to address the alarmingly high fail rate, especially among marginalized students.

Ultimately, as a WPA team, we decided to end these policies, but I wanted to continue to make the program more accessible for both instructors and students with a variety of access needs. This is an important and endless task, and one that needs to be collaborative. This program profile provides the theories, goals, practices, and challenges of the Accessibility Working Group as a model to foster a culture of access in composition programs and other contexts. I wrote this profile in the past tense as I’m now a faculty member at a different university, but I’m grateful to the group members who have continued this important work at UWM.

Access vs. Ableism

Because instructors and students have a diversity of access needs—due to disabilities as well as other life circumstances and challenges—we need to go beyond one-and-done accessibility practices and strive to foster a more robust culture of access. In “Creating a Culture of Access in Composition Studies,” Elizabeth Brewer, Cynthia L. Selfe, and M. Remi Yergeau argue:

A culture of access is a culture of participation and redesign. To put it simply: There is a profound difference between consumptive access and transformative access. The former involves allowing people to enter a space or access a text. The latter questions and re-thinks the very construct of allowing. We encourage all colleagues to join in this project of questioning and re-thinking—for the future of the profession. (153-54)

The AWG committed to responding to Brewer et al.’s question: “How might transformative access live in practice?” (152). I argue that to create a culture of access, participants need to be collaborative members of a community to continuously negotiate access needs that change over time. This negotiation needs to be dynamic and recursive instead of, for example, a one-time application of Universal Design.

The AWG also responded to M. Remi Yergeau’s call in their CWPA keynote Creating a Culture of Access in WPA: “I want us to examine how we—as WPAs, teachers, and colleagues—operationalize and reinforce ableism in the very design of our programs. But I don't want to end there. How might we contest that ableism?” (159). Yergeau asks us to challenge any discriminatory ideas we may have and any actions we may take that oppress disabled students and colleagues. These ideas and actions may range from challenging our assumptions about student performance and changing our word choices to working towards making our pedagogy, policies, and learning spaces more accessible to all different kinds of bodies and minds. By reading about and discussing ableism, AWG members interrogated our individual pedagogical practices as well as the policies of our larger composition program to try to transform any ableist practices and policies into more accessible ones.

We can’t do this work alone though; we need to take the time to learn about the access needs of others and create spaces to share needs as they continuously arise. This collaboration is influenced by Stephanie Wheeler’s Composition Forum program profile Communities of Access: A Program Profile of the University of Central Florida's Faculty Liaison Program in the Department of Writing and Rhetoric where she argues for an approach to access as a networked practice and collaborative effort. With this approach, “Teaching and learning become based on information exchanges, as opposed to hierarchal models typically found in instructor-student, structural, or organizational relationships” (Wheeler n.p.). Wheeler further argues that “Situating all members of a community as liaisons between their own work and the work of the department or program can build a culture of access that depends on the work of its members to grow and thrive” (n.p.). AWG members considered access to be a collective effort that we are all responsible for, not just the work of accessibility/disability resource centers. We need to remember that many instructors and students with access needs do not or can not receive legal accommodations due to a variety of hurdles in the process to obtain them, including the time it takes to receive them, which does not serve access needs that can arise at any time. Hence, the auxiliary structure of the AWG serves as a network of collaborators that can address access needs as they emerge. Culture is sustained by a community of people over time; it’s a way of doing. AWG takes up a culture of access as a transformative way of centering access in everything we do, especially in our pedagogical and professional practices.

Goals of the Accessibility Working Group

To create a culture of access, the Accessibility Working Group focused on the following goals:

1. Read and discuss scholarship in disability studies and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to educate ourselves about access needs and accessible pedagogy.

2. Address accessibility challenges as they arise in our pedagogical and professional practices by providing support and interdisciplinary perspectives.

3. Provide resources and recommendations to inform our composition program about accessible practices.

4. Situate accessibility as an ongoing practice and create a collaborative culture of access within our group, our composition program, and our larger professional and pedagogical communities.

In what follows, I detail the structure of the group and our meetings, the work we accomplished, and group members’ reflections on what they learned through our collaborations. I collected their reflections via email a couple years after the group’s formation and reference them here with each member’s permission.

To initiate the AWG, I emailed our English department in early 2018 with the purpose and preliminary goals of the group and an invitation to participate. We held our first meeting that February. Meeting attendance ranged from three to eight people, including a core group of members and some who attended occasionally. Participants ranged from first-year instructors to seasoned instructors of many years. Most members taught composition courses, but many members were graduate students who also studied and taught a variety of disciplines in our department: literary and cultural theory, rhetoric and composition, creative writing, and media studies. Depending on how much we read to prepare for the meeting, we sometimes started by discussing the texts or spent more time checking in to discuss accessibility teaching challenges as they were happening. The following sections of this program profile provide a closer examination of how we worked towards our goals.

Goal 1: Read and discuss scholarship in disability studies and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) to educate ourselves about access needs and accessible pedagogy.

I selected texts based on my perception of the groups’ interests and needs. The first texts we read together are some of the first ones that attracted me to disability studies: excerpts from Disability and the Teaching of Writing, including Rethinking Practices and Pedagogy: Disability and the Teaching of Writing by Brenda Jo Brueggemann and Cynthia Lewiecki-Wilson and Mapping Composition: Inviting Disability in the Front Door by Jay Dolmage. The authors of these texts make clear connections for the need and applicability of disability studies to composition pedagogy and provide concrete suggestions for accessible pedagogical practices. We also read and discussed the introduction to Academic Ableism by Jay Dolmage, Multimodality in Motion by M. Remi Yergeau et al., and Accessible Syllabus by Anne-Marie Womack. Additionally, we read some texts on Universal Design for Learning, such as Universal Design: Places to Start by Jay Dolmage and excerpts from Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice by Anne Meyer et al.

As one group member reflected, “I found it very helpful to begin with a few readings to get a general sense of what is being discussed in the field. These articles and discussions provided a good theoretical framework, as well as practical ideas to discuss. Beginning this way helped to establish common ground for the group.” AWG members appreciated having the space to connect larger concerns in the field with our direct teaching experiences. For example, one member remarked, “I agree with some of the writers we read that the categories and ‘checkbox’ approach to accommodations restricted how we thought of students with disabilities. And I agree that moving beyond the ADA model of accessibility and accommodation has allowed for an approach to students that is more flexible and dynamic, as well as more humane.” The texts that we read promoted the idea that access is a collective responsibility. This shift of responsibility from individuals to collective access is one of the first steps in creating a collaborative culture of access.

Goal 2: Address accessibility challenges as they arise in our pedagogical and professional practices by providing support and interdisciplinary perspectives.

In some meetings, we took more time to check in about accessibility concerns and questions. For example, during one meeting, I noticed that almost everyone’s concerns essentially related to student absences, and as a result, students’ lack of access to the important work accomplished in class sessions. I shared my practice of making clear agendas for each class period so students can prepare for class or read the agenda if they miss class. Additionally, I shared my make-up attendance policy, which outlines how students can access the agenda and still do the work of the class session to earn attendance credit. Our AWG meetings provided a time to come together to share accessibility challenges as they came up throughout the semester and to share support and advice.

One group member mentioned how valuable this discussion space can be for sharing concerns as they happen throughout the semester and for receiving advice from a variety of perspectives: “It is an important space to talk through challenges, questions, and thoughts we have as instructors, as they are happening, and to get support and learn from fellow instructors with different experiences and different disciplinary approaches.” This group member mentioned this is particularly valuable as we receive less mentoring and support after our first year of teaching, and staff meetings don’t typically allow for enough time to discuss teaching concerns as they arise throughout the semester. Another group member similarly noted that “It’s great to have a space to chat about tough questions and to have such thoughtful conversations about accessibility.” They further stated, “Initially, I was concerned that being a member of this group meant I was already supposed to have ‘answers’ to these tough questions. But now I know that every time I raise a question, the group will openly and generously discuss these complex questions together.” Our meetings provided a space to discuss accessibility and disability with a supportive group of colleagues.

Goal 3: Provide resources and recommendations to inform our composition program about accessible practices.

Over summer sessions, group members reflected on what we learned from our work over the school year, and we turned this knowledge resources for other members of our composition program. To highlight the valuable collaboration and contributions of the group, the following includes two examples of resources we created.

In the summer of 2018, a smaller portion of the group had an in-depth email discussion about how to take what we had learned and make it accessible to our larger composition program. We thought a lot about how we wanted to present this knowledge: At a meeting? In a hard copy hand-out? In a digital archive? How could we get our colleagues to engage with accessibility in ways that are accessible to them, especially considering the work of pre-semester prep? How could we bring this knowledge together in a resource that provides tangible suggestions and resources for other instructors but also encourages them to see accessibility as dynamic and ongoing, not just a checklist? And how could we contextualize our knowledge to our specific program so that we aren’t just recreating existing resources?

Because of limited time and a limited printing budget, we decided to bring our work together into an accessible digital resource. Because of the interdisciplinary nature of the AWG, I proposed that each group member write out their responses to some questions about how they approach access in their own teaching. This way, readers can understand the multiplicity of ways to approach access and gain some ideas that make the most sense for their own teaching contexts. Excerpts from our Accessibility Resource Guide are included in the Appendix with permission from the collaboration authors. Our guide demonstrates the value of our interdisciplinary collaboration and knowledge.

After another year of productive meetings, we asked the same questions about how to turn our knowledge into a resource for all members of our composition program. At that point, one of our AWG members had taken up my previous role as the graduate student English 101 Course Coordinator charged with training the new composition instructors, and she asked if we could collaborate to present an accessibility workshop at their new teaching orientation. For the workshop, we decided to provide new composition instructors ideas and advice about access and accessible approaches. We also coordinated a panel of AWG members to have a conversation in front of the new instructors to essentially model the discussions we have in our meetings.

To facilitate our workshop titled “Starting with Access: How to Teach to Diverse Learning Needs,” I first asked participants to take some time to free-write on the following: “Describe a time when you, or someone you know, experienced a barrier to access. How did this make you feel? Were you ever able to obtain access or an alternative? What did you have to do to gain access/an alternative?” (thanks to my colleague Leslie Anglesey for inspiring this practice). After freewriting time, participants shared their responses with a small group, and then some participants shared responses with the whole group to encourage instructors to understand how access is relevant to everyone in a variety of ways. After providing an overview of how we conceptualize access, I introduced the AWG panel, who we are, and what we do, including showing the resource guide we made the previous summer. The panel of four volunteer AWG members shared what they learned from participating in our group as well as their continued challenges, such as: prioritizing access, managing flexibility with high expectations, creating accessible media and classroom spaces, and supporting the mental health of our students. After this valuable discussion among the panelists and then among the workshop participants, we returned to the focus of “starting with access” by showing participants examples of syllabus accessibility statements they could reference to create their own.

Starting with access in new teacher orientations is a key component to initiating and modeling a culture of access. Accessibility needs to be prioritized in this learning context if we want new instructors to prioritize it in their own teaching practices. Further, we promoted the work of the group at this workshop, and we gained several new AWG members.

Goal 4: Situate accessibility as an ongoing practice and create a collaborative culture of access within our group, in our composition program, and beyond.

Another one of my larger goals for the group was for members to understand that access is an ongoing process: we need to always start with access, but also provide opportunities for sharing access needs and supporting them as a learning community. As one group member reflected, “I think just having a space where we can meet and talk about these issues helps to keep them at the forefront of our teaching ... accessibility goes beyond document design and is something that we need to always be considering, researching, questioning, and asking for feedback on.” Our meetings provided a space to contribute collaborative feedback on accessibility challenges and questions.

Another member remarked how this collaboration reaches beyond the group as we share our work with others: “I now see accessibility as a more universal issue, and our discussions have given me more specific ideas about creating a more accessible culture in my own classroom. As our group makes changes to our own practices, and as we share our practices with others, I believe our department is developing a culture of access that benefits our students.” AWG members are teacher-learners who are eager to share what we’ve learned with members of our larger composition program in our additional professional and pedagogical contexts. Creating a collaborative culture of access means modeling it and advocating for it in a variety of contexts.

I applied much of what I learned from the group to my collaborations with the Accessibility Resource Center (ARC) and our Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (CETL) to revise our campus-wide online accessibility training for instructors. This collaboration also led to CETL members asking me to facilitate a campus-wide summer reading group for staff and instructors on Universal Design for Learning. I used the structure of AWG to connect members to this reading group and to also promote AWG to the reading group. These collaborations led to members from all over campus knowing about the valuable work we accomplish in the AWG, and, I hope, inspired them to start similar work in their own contexts.

Advancing Access

For those interested in starting an auxiliary group like the AWG, I recommend talking to other instructors first to get a feel for how they would want to participate. Originally, the AWG began with the purpose of being a working group focused on the goal to “Provide resources and recommendations to inform our composition program about accessible practices.” However, in the last year of coordinating the group and in its current formation with new coordinators, the goal to “Address accessibility challenges as they arise in our pedagogical and professional practices by providing support and interdisciplinary perspectives” has become more of the AWG’s focus for several reasons. We wanted people to attend meetings without feeling obligated to read assigned texts and take up project tasks but instead come with any accessibility questions and concerns they might be grappling with. The Accessibility Resource Center already provides some helpful resources, but the newer focus of the AWG is to provide a collaborative discussion space that can attend to accessibility challenges as they arise.

This newer focus of an open discussion space, however, can be confusing to others since there are no assigned texts or project tasks. I recently spoke with one of the current coordinators of the group, and we agreed that having a particular topic and related discussion questions sent out ahead of meetings could provide a clearer purpose and be more inviting. For example, members could focus on discussion questions about making online discussion spaces more accessible. I suggest finding a valuable balance between structure and flexibility for meetings. Related to figuring out the focus of the group, the name of the group matters as well. A discussion space might be more inviting than a working group, for example. We need to keep considering how we can make accessibility work more accessible.

In retrospect, I’ve also learned that we should have conducted the meetings online (e.g., via Zoom or Teams) from the beginning in order to make the meetings more accessible. Because we spent the first couple of years meeting in-person, not everyone was able to attend. We started taking notes to send out after meetings, but having online meetings that could have been recorded and shared would have increased this accessibility. Creating a shareable archive of the group’s work and discussions over time can could have also made all of the valuable work of the group more accessible.

A Collaborative Culture of Access

Collaborations like the AWG are beneficial to composition programs because the decentralized, auxiliary structure of groups like this provide a dedicated space for conversations that inspire and spread more accessible practices. Groups like this are becoming increasingly needed during times when we are not able to come together to have chats in the hallways or at the campus coffee shop. These groups and conversations are also necessary as many of us are trying to find more effective ways to teach online and need to consider the accessibility of digital tools.

Since the group was voluntary and not supervisory, we were able to focus our time and energy on openly discussing accessibility issues as they arose throughout the semester. These collaborative conversations influenced many teachers in our composition program to implement more accessible practices, and we hope that additional instructors were influenced by our ideas in our resource guide and our orientation workshop. The most valuable aspect of the group for me was having a space to discuss access ideas and challenges and to receive feedback from the multiple perspectives of group members. Collaboration is key to creating a culture of access, and this program profile provides one model for how to foster it. How might a group like this supplement existing resources in your own institutional context to create a collaborative culture of access?

Acknowledgments: Thanks to all Accessibility Working Group members for your collaboration. Special thanks to Bob Bruss and Zach Anderson for brainstorming ideas with me for this program profile.

Appendix: Accessibility Resource Guide (2018)

The Accessibility Working Group met multiple times this past semester and summer to discuss our experiences and share ideas about improving accessible practices in our writing courses.

The following is a resource guide that a subgroup of us put together this summer. Because accessible practices and approaches are highly contextual and continue to evolve, we decided to offer some of our own individual perspectives that have still been influenced by our larger collaborations.

We hope that you too will be influenced by a variety of ways to practice accessibility in your writing courses and beyond!

Further, you are welcome to join the Accessibility Working Group and contribute in any amount you can. Please contact Molly Ubbesen at [ ] if you would like to be put on the group email or if you have any questions.

Introduction/Exigency

“Accessibility ... is the precondition to all learning” (494).

Anne-Marie Womack, “Teaching is Accommodation”: http://cccc.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v68-3

Jay Dolmage, Academic Ableism: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/u/ump/mpub9708722

• Most recent statistics (2016) show 11.1 percent of U.S. undergraduate students have disabilities (National Center for Education Statistics qtd. in Dolmage).

• Some studies show that two-thirds of U.S. college students don't receive accommodations simply because their colleges don't know about their disabilities, and those who do seek accommodations are likely to do so only in their third or fourth year of school (Grasgreen qtd. in Dolmage).

  • Specifically, “while 94 percent of learning-disabled high school students get assistance, only 17 percent of college students with learning disabilities do” (Krupnick qtd. in Dolmage).

We all have students in our courses with disabilities and other access needs, so we are responsible for making our courses as accessible as possible!

Molly Ubbesen, Rhetoric & Composition

Accessibility and Writing Pedagogy

Accessibility means “the ability to use, enjoy, perform, work on, avail of, and participate in a resource, technology, activity, opportunity, or product at an equal or comparable level with others” (Oswal qtd. in Yergeau et al., n.p.). Disability Studies encourages me to consider how we all access learning in different ways due to our physical and mental health needs and how these intersect with our other identities and backgrounds.

Guiding Questions

• What can I do to make my pedagogy more welcoming, engaging, and effective to foster accessibility and inclusivity?

• How can I facilitate a collaborative negotiation of learning needs in my class?

Approaches/Strategies

• Creating class community by: asking students to fill out a confidential survey about their learning needs; making time for introductions (asking for chosen names and gender pronouns); weekly check-ins and reflections to help make any course modifications; arranging desks in a circle when possible

• Using inclusive language by: focusing on positive over punishing choices (e.g., “earn” instead of “deduct”; incorporating an inclusive statement in my syllabus; including a statement asking students to practice mindful language choices; using content warnings when appropriate

• Implementing Universal Design for Learning by: incorporating multiple means of representation (various modes of instruction and collaborative learning instead of lecturing); multiple means of expression (reflective writing, revisions, sharing in various modes); multiple means of engagement (conferences, group work, pair-and-share, quiet in-class writing/thinking time)

Recommended Resources

M. Remi Yergeau et al.’s Multimodality in Motion: Disability and Kairotic Spaces: http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/18.1/coverweb/yergeau-et-al/

Ann-Marie Womack’s Accessible Syllabus: https://www.accessiblesyllabus.com/

Jay Dolmage’s Universal Design: Places to Start: http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/4632/3946

Sarah O’Connell, Literature and Cultural Theory

What Accessibility Means to My Pedagogy

One of my pedagogical goals is to foster connection with and among students. One way to do that is to consider the ways that access is an acknowledgment of an aspect of students’ identities. When we structure our classroom and activities as though that is true, we actually make it possible for students to feel comfortable expressing themselves at intersections such as gender and race or disability and sexuality.

Guiding Questions

• What can I do to improve the ways I lay out and present my lesson plans in order to account for students’ access needs?

• How can I prompt students to consider the connection between overlapping, emerging identities and their unique perspectives on course texts?

Approaches/Strategies

• Incorporating different modes into your classroom practice by engaging in activities that suit visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learners, for example. Try to mix up these modes throughout one class period, so that students with and without disabilities have a chance to thrive in their preferred way of learning. Also, try to make your activities adaptable by making sure that all of your videos have captions, for example.

• Highlighting what students already know by creating activities or discussion frames where they can use prior knowledge to experience from school or homelife to anticipate future learning.

Recommended Resources

Mia Mingus’s blog Leaving Evidence: https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/

Claire McKinney’s Cripping the Classroom: Disability as a Teaching Method in the Humanities: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/trajincschped.25.2.0114?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Mary Clinkenbeard, Professional and Technical Writing

Accessibility and Writing Pedagogy

I’m inspired by Jay Dolmage’s approach to accessible pedagogy and Universal Design (UD) that seeks an ongoing dialogue among students and instructors. Through this dialogue, “teachers and students work together to develop a pedagogy that is broad and responsive—not a teaching catch-all, but a considered and flexible pedagogy, localized as it is globalized” (Dolmage, 2005).

Guiding Question

• How can I cultivate teaching practices that are flexible and responsive to the ongoing needs of individual students and of our classroom community?

Approaches/Strategies

• Encouraging open communication: by providing different opportunities and spaces (built-in class time, office hours, email, etc.) to listen to and negotiate student needs.

• Embracing flexibility: by adapting schedules, activities, and assignments based on the emerging needs and interests of students and our classroom community.

• Acting on student input: by working with students to create goals for class activities such as peer reviews and incorporating their input into feedback and evaluation rubrics.

Recommended Resources

Jay Dolmage’s Disability Studies Pedagogy, Usability and Universal Design: http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/627/804

Shannon Walter’s Toward an Accessible Pedagogy: Dis/ability, Multimodality, and Universal Design in the Technical Communication Classroom: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10572252.2010.502090

Zach Anderson, Media, Cinema, and Digital Studies

Accessibility and Writing Pedagogy

I am inspired—and challenged—by Disability Studies’ “insistence upon lived experience,” which forces me to consider my own positionality and the individual experiences of every student (emphasis original) (Elcessor and Kirkpatrick, 8). With the understanding that no two students share a lived experience or set of learning needs, I seek creative ways to collaboratively expand access and openly communicate about the presence of disability in every composition classroom.

Guiding Questions

• How might I make each presentation of audio/visual content—both in the classroom and on D2L—more accessible?

• How can I more openly and effectively invite students’ individual suggestions for expanding access?

Approaches/Strategies

• Seeking collaborative, creative responses to spatial limitations: inviting feedback about organization of chairs (if they move), lighting (if I have varied light switch options or window shades), and placement/size/color of writing on board

• Expanding access to digital and audio/visual content: producing or proofreading video captions, inviting feedback about audio levels and lighting during visual presentations, verbally describing projected visual content, providing access to all in-class content on D2L

• Encouraging diverse modes of communication: clearly defining participation and its evaluation in inclusive ways that encourage students to actively participate in ways that suit various learning styles

Recommended Resources

Elizabeth Ellcessor and Bill Kirkpatrick’s edited collection Disability Media Studies: https://nyupress.org/books/9781479849383/

Elizabeth Ellcessor’s Restricted Access: Media, Disability, and the Politics of Participation: https://nyupress.org/books/9781479853434/

Sean Zdenek’s blog Accessible Rhetoric: https://seanzdenek.com/

Works Cited

Brewer, Elizabeth, et al. Creating a Culture of Access in Composition Studies. Composition Studies, vol. 42, no. 2, 2014, pp. 151-154.

Wheeler, Stephanie K. Communities of Access: A Program Profile of the University of Central Florida’s Faculty Liaison Program in the Department of Writing and Rhetoric. Composition Forum, vol. 39, Summer 2018. http://compositionforum.com/issue/39/ucf.php.

Womack, Anne-Marie. Teaching Is Accommodation: Universally Designing Composition Classrooms and Syllabi. College Composition and Communication, vol. 68, no. 3, 2017, pp. 494-525.

Yergeau, M. Remi. Saturday Plenary Address: Creating a Culture of Access in Writing Program Administration. WPA: Writing Program Administration, vol. 40, no. 1, 2016, pp. 155-165.