All Journals

Although previous research has explored how L2 writers allocate their time and how time limits influence writing scores, many of these studies focus solely on final texts, providing only a partial understanding of the writing process. A more comprehensive investigation is essential for enhancing the construct validity of writing assessments. Drawing on empirical research on timed writing and on theoretical models of the writing process, this study explores how time constraints affect L2 learners' written texts and fluency behaviors. A total of 123 participants (60 high-intermediate and 63 advanced EFL learners) completed an argumentative writing task with keystroke logging software under either a 30-minute or 60-minute condition, and stimulated recalls were conducted with a subset. The texts were analyzed for syntactic and lexical complexity, fluency, and overall quality. Results indicate that time constraints did not significantly affect linguistic complexity or writing quality, although fluency behaviors differed across conditions. Time constraints thus affected learners' writing processes more than the linguistic quality of their texts. The core implication for L2 writing assessment is that, for test takers experienced with timed writing, shortening the time allotted to an argumentative task changes composing processes without compromising the product-based scores on which assessment decisions rest.

This study investigates how English as a foreign language (EFL) student reviewers engage in open-ended, dialogic interactions with generative artificial intelligence (AI) during the feedback generation process in peer assessment within EFL writing classrooms. It examines the impact of these interactions on feedback quality perceived by recipients, emotional responses (task enjoyment and anxiety), and feedback literacy. A quasi-experimental design was employed with 60 Chinese undergraduate students, divided into an experimental group (EG) that used generative AI (Doubao) for support and a control group (CG) that did not. Over three intervention cycles, data from chat histories, feedback quality ratings by recipients, and pre/post questionnaires on emotions and feedback literacy were analyzed. The results indicated that EG students primarily employed AI for linguistic refinement of their comments, with limited use for enhancing the content or structure. Nevertheless, AI support led to significant, progressive improvements in the perceived quality of feedback, particularly in affect, description, justification, and constructiveness. Furthermore, EG students reported significantly higher task enjoyment and lower anxiety compared to the CG. The intervention also positively enhanced all dimensions of feedback literacy: knowledge and abilities, willingness to participate, cooperative learning, and appreciation of peer feedback. The findings suggest that generative AI can serve as a powerful scaffold, reducing the emotional and cognitive burdens of peer assessment while fostering a more supportive and effective feedback environment. This study underscores the value of integrating AI into peer feedback practices to develop students’ feedback literacy and improve the overall quality of peer learning experiences.

The literature review and appraisal assignment is a core foundational component of the writing emphasis course for undergraduate nursing students. The assignment traditionally focuses on navigating databases to locate scholarly research, synthesizing research findings across the literature, and learning APA format. Often, however, students conflate effective writing in the discipline as demonstration of correct APA format. This essay describes a pedagogical innovation that integrates reflective writing and a multimodal infographic component. The changes shift the student focus toward communicating evidence-based, person-centered care, which also promotes metacognition and genre awareness as students connect scholarly literature to culturally congruent care in their future clinical practice.

Very few research studies of the teaching of grammar and writing had been carried out with children younger than eight-years-old prior to the research reported in this paper. The research evaluated a new approach to teaching grammar and writing called Englicious. A Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) and Implementation and Process Evaluation (IPE) research design, featuring 1,246 pupils aged six to seven-years-old in 70 primary school classes, was used to evaluate the effectiveness of Englicious for improving children’s writing. The approach was implemented in the context of the programs of study for grammar teaching in England’s national curriculum. The research found that there was no effect of the grammar teaching intervention on pupils’ narrative writing. The effect size for pupils’ sentence generation was sufficient to merit reflections about potential impacts of aspects of the intervention although this outcome also did not reach statistical significance. It is hypothesised that the manipulation of words, phrases and sentences, combined with practice at writing, may have contributed to any positive effect, although this would need to be confirmed in future research. It is concluded that until more research is done to investigate the effectiveness of different approaches to teaching grammar and writing with young children, existing evidence-based approaches are more likely to be effective to help young pupils’ narrative writing. England’s national curriculum specifications for teaching grammar and writing could usefully be reviewed to more closely reflect the evidence base from this field of writing research.

This article presents findings from an ethnographic, rhetorical study of children's experiences with free-time writing in so-called author schools for children in Denmark. The study is guided by two research questions: What characterizes writing enjoyment in the context of free-time author schools for children, based on children's own experiences? and How can insights from children's writing experiences in author schools inform broader pedagogical considerations about writing in formal school settings? The aim of the article is to contribute empirically grounded knowledge about writing enjoyment in an out-of-school teaching context and to explore how such knowledge might inspire broader considerations about a pedagogy for enjoyable writing experiences. Findings point to four core dimensions of writing enjoyment as expressed by the children: (a) writing together with others in a community of writing, (b) being free in writing and experiencing agency, (c) using imagination in writing to explore ideas and stories, and (d) being taught by an author, someone who is herself a writer. These insights are considered in relation to existing understandings of writing enjoyment and discussed as inspiration for a writing pedagogy that is experience centered rather than performance centered.

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Background:</i></b> While corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting has been widely studied, fewer works have systematically examined how legitimation strategies are discursively constructed across generic structure in energy-sector disclosures. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Literature review:</i></b> Prior research has explored microlinguistic features and move structures, but little attention has been paid to how rhetorical strategies of legitimation are embedded across generic stages. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Research questions:</i></b> 1. How are the five major legitimation strategies linguistically realized across the move-step structures of Chinese and American energy CSR reports? 2. How do legitimation strategies co-occur with different discourse types of Chinese and American energy CSR reports? 3. How do the external factors influence the selection of legitimation strategies in CSR reporting practices? <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Methodology:</i></b> This study analyzes 40 CSR reports (2020-2023) from Chinese and American energy companies using a corpus-assisted and move-step-based approach that integrates critical genre analysis and an integrated analytical legitimation framework. Lexical bundles and grammatical features are annotated across generic stages and discourse types to identify legitimation strategies and trace how they vary by national context and external pressures. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><i>Results and conclusions:</i></b> This study identifies eight moves and 13 steps—including a newly observed move, M8: Elaboration of performance in the public health crisis—as well as four discourse types. Chinese reports emphasize authorization and moral narrative, while American reports favor rationalization, analogies of moralization and cosmos narrative. These strategies are embedded across moves and discourse types, adapting to institutional logics and external pressures.

As generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools become embedded in writing practices, researchers must refine methodologies for studying self-regulation in AI-assisted composition. While sociocognitive and co-regulation frameworks have effectively captured self-regulatory processes in human collaboration, they are insufficient for understanding how writers manage the dynamic and probabilistic nature of AI-generated text. This article introduces interplay as a methodological framework to analyze the recursive process of initiating, responding, adapting, and revising in human–AI writing interactions. Unlike co-regulation, where collaborators share communicative intent, interplay highlights the writer’s active role in interpreting and steering AI-generated content. Drawing on self-regulation theory, we propose an analytical framework that integrates traditional self-regulation categories (goal-setting, monitoring, and reflection) with interplay-specific coding (initiation, evaluation, acceptance, and adaptation). Through case analyses of human–AI writing exchanges, we demonstrate how interplay provides a systematic approach to studying agency, decision making, and regulatory strategies in AI-assisted writing. We argue that recognizing interplay as a distinct dimension of self-regulation advances both empirical research and pedagogical approaches to AI-mediated composition.

The disaggregation of data around human identities can act as a rich method, providing researchers with new ways of understanding community and workplace writing. However, demographic analysis can unknowingly perpetuate harmful stereotypes and constructions of human identity. This article examines common issues with disaggregation of identity-based data in research and details an empirical research project that drove the research team to reconsider new approaches to desegregated data. In response, I propose a participant self-identification method and offer a heuristic guiding researchers to critically interrogate demographic data collection, enabling more equitable, participant-centered approaches to understanding identity in writing research.

Virtual reality (VR) technologies are increasingly marketed to knowledge workers as productivity tools for focused, immersive work. Yet little empirical research examines the lived experience of sustained VR use for complex academic writing tasks. This study presents a 10-week diary study of a doctoral candidate using VR to compose her dissertation during summer 2025. Through weekly reflective entries, screen recordings, and artifact analysis, we examine the user experience dimensions of immersive academic writing. Our thematic analysis reveals six major findings: (1) technical infrastructure constraints dominated the writing experience; (2) embodied discomfort consistently limited sessions to 30–50 min; (3) affective dimensions shaped productivity; (4) learning curves remained steep throughout the study; (5) task type significantly influenced success, with structured administrative writing outperforming open-ended academic drafting; and (6) technical disruptions fragmented flow and made momentum recovery difficult. We argue that VR writing tools require task-appropriate design, realistic session expectations, and user agency to discontinue when needs are not met. These findings contribute user-centered evidence to technical communication scholarship on emerging composing technologies and offer practical guidance for graduate writing programs.

Background: Both technical professional communication (TPC) and translation training call for a closer academia-industry link to cultivate students’ professional competence and enhance employability. Among the collaborative efforts, the internship serves as a key part in bridging the gap and enhancing students’ work-readiness. Their effectiveness, however, depends on the alignment of expectations among the internship stakeholders. Literature review: While prior studies have examined translation internships, they typically center around either students or language service providers (LSP) in isolation. A significant gap exists in quantitatively comparing the perceptions of these two key stakeholder groups. Research questions: How do students and LSPs differ in their perceptions of internships? What factors contribute to the misalignment in stakeholders’ perceptions from the perspective of university educators and administrators? Methods: This study employed a mixed-methods approach. A survey was administered to translation students and LSP representatives to identify their perception differences across four key dimensions of internships, followed by interviews with university educators and administrators to explore the causes. Results: Quantitative analysis revealed statistically significant discrepancies in 18 of the 44 items. The subsequent qualitative interviews identified four primary factors contributing to these discrepancies: inadequate internship management, curriculum misalignment due to the lack of qualified faculty, emphasis on hard skills over soft skills in evaluation, and pragmatic concerns from both students and employers. Implication: The findings provided recommendations for students, employers, and institutions to improve the effectiveness of internships, which are relevant not only for translation but also for other practice-oriented disciplines like TPC.

Metaphor is a pragmatic device that might influence how arguments are evaluated. Beyond its cognitive and aesthetic value, metaphor also fosters linguistic intimacy, i.e., the feeling of belonging to an intimate community. The paper hypothesizes that linguistic intimacy might be particularly relevant in ad populum arguments, where a sense of belonging to the community endorsing the argument might influence the acceptance of the conclusion. In ad populum arguments, indeed, metaphors might act as a “concealed invitation” to accept and share a conclusion, encouraging effortful interpretation that results in a feeling of shared community. However, not all ad populum arguments are fallacious: they may reflect reasonable consensus, with the agreement with their conclusion depending on how they are framed. The article presents an empirical study investigating whether conventional and novel emotive metaphors vs. their literal counterparts within ad populum premises increase participants’ acceptance of the argument conclusion. The results showed that especially novel and negative metaphors in the premises make people less prone to evaluate the conclusion of ad populum arguments as logically acceptable, while conventional and positive metaphors in the premises makes them feel intimacy with the group of people supporting the conclusion, more easily leading to agreement with their conclusion.

This article adds to previous literature on writing “wayfinding” by examining how a writer’s religious beliefs and commitments shape their rhetorical choices and influence their writing wayfinding. The 5-year longitudinal study we report here used discourse-based interviews to understand the experiences of student writers who are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Examining texts our study participants wrote in and outside of college classrooms, our analysis highlights moments when they used emotion and affect as rhetorical strategies to accomplish instrumental and relational goals. We found that in these moments, participants’ commitments as Latter-day Saints and their related identities significantly affected their writing decisions and their sense of wayfinding, particularly as they navigated writing contexts outside of familiar academic settings. The article suggests that understanding the challenges and opportunities writers face in the intersections between their rhetorical choices and their commitments as members of an organized church can help writing teachers better support students' writing development.

With the emergence of generative artificial intelligence, dialogue systems like chatbots are redefining traditional concepts of authorship and impacting critical aspects of writing. In educational contexts, previous research has pointed out new opportunities associated with using chatbots for writing instruction and support. This study involved 108 students across 10 classes in Norwegian K-12 education, examining how they employed educational chatbots as a support tool in L1 writing assignments. Through an inductive, data-driven thematic analysis of 895 student prompts, five recurring patterns emerged: information requests, structural guidance, example requests, content creation, feedback on text, and follow-up clarification. Aggregated results show that information requests were the most common pattern, particularly among younger students, whereas content creation and feedback on text were more prevalent among secondary and upper secondary students. Illustrative examples from the conversations revealed that generative AI extensively produced content on student’s behalf, even when students primarily sought scaffolding. The study proposes that effective scaffolding of writing through educational chatbots requires not only refining students' prompting strategies but also enhancing system designs that better support pedagogical use of generative AI.

This article is a case study dealing with virtual communication experiences of the Indian executives engaged in remote work using online media during the pandemic phase. The author employs qualitative research methodology of ethnography by using a questionnaire circulated online to garner descriptive data regarding virtual communication from Indian executives in various corporate roles who had to take recourse to full-time virtual communication channels to continue their work. The data obtained from a longitudinal study of 12 months spanning from March 2021 to March 2022 was coded with an objective to plot the experiential spectrum of corporate managers using media richness theory and a psychobiological model, as online communication became a singular medium to process all kinds of conversations ranging from routine to negative and persuasive. It became the only tool for leadership execution as well as leadership enhancement compelling corporate heads to improvise media customization methods expeditiously to overcome the limiting constraints of its intrinsic lean outlet. After analyzing the data, the author concludes that virtual communication has now become an integral part of contemporary corporate communication ecosystem owing to the ‘best practices’ that managers invented during their ‘remote work only’ period when they were thrown into the virtual space with its insular gamut of applicability. Remote work also coerced executives to discover the latent potential of this communication channel, which was not apparent when this medium existed only as an elective channel in the ‘plurally channelled’ pre-pandemic work environments. The study provides a comprehensive repository of virtual communication techniques not just for the consumption of management classroom embedding industry inputs into the theoretical curriculum but also for corporate executives who began their careers in an environment of ‘channel sovereignty’ in the post-pandemic setups. The case study, thus, acts as a communication lab presenting online communication pathology and its incubation in industry environments. The author posits that the communication experimentation done during the remote work phase of the pandemic has changed the status of this medium in the realm of management communication from debilitating to dynamic irreversibly.

As a key attribute of effective writing, coherence remains challenging to teach in language classrooms, with traditional writing instruction frequently overlooking coherence in favor of discrete, rule-based features. This mixed-methods study investigates the effectiveness of explicit coherence instruction on English-as-a-Foreign-Language (EFL) students’ performance on integrated writing tasks. The study employed a controlled experimental design with 64 upper-intermediate-level undergraduate students at a Chinese university, drawing on Hasan’s Cohesive Harmony theory as the theoretical framework. Half of the participants (n = 32) in the experimental group received explicit instruction on coherence with a focus on cohesive chains and cohesive devices in integrated writing, while the control group (n = 32) received standard paraphrasing instruction. Quantitative analysis revealed that the experimental group showed significant improvements in coherence scores and multiple cohesive chain measures. Qualitative discourse analysis of six students’ writing samples from the experimental group demonstrated varying levels of improvement in writing coherence, with high-performing students showing better use of identity chains and pronoun references. The findings revealed that explicit instruction on coherence significantly improved students’ performance in creating coherent integrated writing, particularly through the development of cohesive chains and appropriate use of cohesive devices. This study underscores the pedagogical value of teaching coherence to enhance writing quality and provides concrete strategies for developing more effective teaching approaches for integrated writing tasks in EFL contexts. • The study examined 64 Chinese EFL students using mixed-methods experimental design. • Cohesive Harmony theory served as the framework for assessing writing coherence. • Explicit instruction significantly improved coherence in integrated writing tasks. • High-performing students demonstrated superior identity chain development.

This study examines how entrepreneurs’ public-speaking competence shapes investor sentiment and firm valuation in China’s emerging industries. Drawing on nine cases across digital technology, cryptocurrency, and new energy vehicles, we analyzed narrative structure, emotional marker density, credibility anchors, and delivery dynamics. Findings from this mixed methods study shows that while narrative structure and emotional marker density cues has no significant effect on Investor Sentiment, credibility anchors and delivery dynamics significantly enhance investor sentiment, which mediates their effect on firm valuation change. These results highlight that credibility anchors and delivery dynamics function as the strongest communicative signals, amplifying investor confidence and valuation outcomes. For practitioners, the study underscores the strategic value of cultivating credibility and delivery skills to strengthen market trust and access to capital. By linking communication and entrepreneurial outcomes, this research clarifies how rhetorical competence can be leveraged to support firm growth in competitive environments.

Introduction: The technical editing discipline stands in need of additional empirical research—particularly language-level research. However, the time- and resource-intensive nature of data collection and analysis may prevent some scholars from completing the needed research. Therefore, this tutorial introduces TrackEDT, a tool we have developed to ease the process of collecting and analyzing edits and comments from edited documents. Key concepts: TrackEDT extracts editors’ tracked insertions, deletions, moves, and comments from Microsoft (MS) Word documents—all elements of traditional editorial markup. It outputs the extracted data into an MS Excel format that affords easier analysis of the editors’ data than would be possible in the data’s original MS Word format. Key lessons: Researchers can download TrackEDT as an executable file at editingresearch.byu.edu/trackedt. To run the file, they select a folder containing edited MS Word documents that have tracked changes and comments. After TrackEDT processes the documents, the researchers can analyze the extracted tracked changes, comments, and metadata in the resulting Excel reports, which include information such as who made the edit, what type of edit was made, when the edit was made, how long the edit was, and what comments were appended. Implications for practice: Technical editing researchers can use TrackEDT and its reports to ease their collection and analysis of editing data, thereby answering important empirical research questions related to language-level editorial changes and processes.

This article seeks to present a model of critical factors that influence writing transfer by exploring and extending conversations happening in the field. The article identifies five critical and interconnected factors that support writing transfer: connection, perception, reflection, disposition, and fortification. These factors emerge from an integration of writing transfer scholarship and data from a longitudinal study of student writers. In that study, six participants were followed for seven years (from first-year composition past graduation and into the workforce) and asked to explain their experiences and perceptions of writing. I offer these five factors to spark a broader conversation about how multiple overlapping influences contribute to writing transfer and to encourage further research into how these factors interact and reinforce one another.

Trump’s presidential announcement speeches and presidential nomination acceptance addresses were analyzed through the lens of a functional approach to political campaign discourse. In order to present themselves more favorably than their opponents, candidates typically engage in one of three rhetorical strategies: acclaiming, by emphasizing their own strengths; attacking, by diminishing their rivals' appeal; or defending, by responding to criticisms. This analysis focuses specifically on instances of acclaims and attacks in which themes related to immigration and immigrants are foregrounded. The findings indicate a discernible upward trend in the frequency of attacks directed at immigrants and foreign “Others”. A recurring metaphor in Trump’s rhetoric on immigrants is that of THE COUNTRY/NATION IS A HOUSE. Once established, this metaphor is employed with rhetorical precision, enabling the strategic manipulation of political discourse. Trump’s rhetoric thus contributes to a politics of fear and entrenches the binary opposition between “Us” and “Them.”

Background: Responding to current research gaps in the investigation of researcher identity development among graduate students, we implement a longitudinal study, powered by user-experience (UX) methods, to document engineering doctoral students’ identity formation. Literature review: Identity formation in novice engineering researchers, such as doctoral students remains underexamined. A process-oriented approach to studying researchers’ identity development may yield useful theoretical and programmatic insights. UX methods offer visual and qualitative approaches to the understanding of student experiences by revealing their identity formation journey over time. Research questions: 1. How can UX methods like persona building support studies of researcher identity development? 2. How can the insights generated from longitudinal UX methods inform graduate program design and assessment? Methodology: Twenty participants were recruited from an industrial engineering department at an R1 university. Data were collected via surveys, qualitative interviews, and journey mapping. Analysis methods, informed by a phenomenological perspective, included persona building and collaborative affinity diagramming. Results: Seven distinctive personas were created to represent identity formation experiences influenced by learning modality, attitude, program stage, and prior experience. Theoretical conclusions and opportunities for academic programming emerged from affinity diagrams. Conclusion: Doctoral engineering students’ researcher identity formation presented implications for theory and curricular design. UX methods offered benefits to qualitative research that can support cross-disciplinary efforts.

With respect to AI writing technologies (AIWT), we pose three foundational questions about academic dishonesty. First, do writing instructors and students perceive differences between AI agents and human agents in classroom scenarios? Second, to what extent are writing instructor and student perceptions are aligned? Third, what types of writing scenarios are perceived as academic dishonesty? Answering these questions provides a baseline of comparison not only for future studies of AIWT collaboration but also contextualizes perceptions of human-to-human collaboration. We report on a large-scale experimental survey study that answers these questions using item response theory (IRT). Our findings demonstrate that while there are differences between AI and human agents of collaborations, writing instructors and students are generally aligned in their perceptions. Using a Rasch model, we find that academic dishonesty operates along a spectrum of textual production. Regardless of whether the collaborating agent is human or AI, the more an agent produces text, the more this collaboration is perceived as academic dishonesty. Conversely, the less text that is produced, the less this scenario is perceived as academically dishonest. In our discussion, we provide a data-driven heuristic to guide instructors and administrators.

In the past ten years, scholarship has increasingly directed attention to the intersections between disability studies and writing center work, emphasizing the importance of multimodality, Universal Design Learning (UDL), and academic support for students with disabilities. Though the literature on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in writing spaces highlights the personal narratives of student writers, tutors, and administrators (see for example, Garbus, 2017; Stark & Wilson, 2017; Zmudka, 2018), empirically-based research on the topic remains rare. This empirical study looks at how a seemingly invisible disability, like ADHD, affects tutors and clients in the writing center. Results from this study’s survey of existing tutors and clients, in conjunction with semi-structured interviews, revealed tutors and clients’ need for more conversations around neurodivergence, as well as better support and equity in the writing center and in other institutional organizations and academic resources on campus. Participants also highlighted the need to foster a culture of understanding and mutual listening rather than relying on disclosure, to provide accessible modes of tutoring for clients, and to include training around disability literacy in tutor education. Overall, this paper unwraps the often hidden stories of tutors and clients with ADHD and provides ways to (re)think neurodivergence in writing center work. As an international graduate tutor in my writing center, receiving my Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) diagnosis as an adult made me highly cognizant of the issues that neurodivergent [1] students like myself face in academic spaces, including how to navigate our classes, maneuver teaching and tutoring, and educate ourselves and others on the reality of disability (in)justice. Almost three years ago, I encountered a client who disclosed having ADHD in the middle of our face-to-face session. The first-time client had a poster on mental health concerns for her psychology course. She expressed needing help to organize her poster and make sure its content is clear. At one point in the session, she disclosed having ADHD, to which I blurted, “I have ADHD too!” I noticed her demeanor change, as she eased up in her chair. It was my first time disclosing that I have ADHD. In retrospect, my self-disclosure served as an act of awareness, understanding, and reassurance. I also wanted to normalize discussions surrounding disability in the session because it pushed us towards an open and honest conversation about what I could do to adjust my tutoring approach and best support her as a writer. Our overall exchange prompted me to consider what happens when disability comes into the equation in a writing center context. In the past ten years, scholarship has highlighted the intersections between disability studies and writing center work. Much of this work emphasizes the need to conduct more studies on disabilities and neurodivergence in the writing center (Babcock, 2015; Babcock & Daniels, 2017; Daniels et al., 2017; Dembsey, 2020; Hitt, 2012, 2021; Kleinfeld, 2018; Rinaldi, 2015). In particular, Babcock (2015) urges writing center practitioners to produce more empirically-oriented studies on less visible disabilities, including ADHD, one of the most common disabilities among college students. More importantly, this study challenges the problematic rhetorics of disability that show up in our writing center communities, as the writing center is one facet of how an institution functions. Hitt (2021) points out that dominant discourses of disability in writing center work are often concerned with diagnosis and accommodation, which coincides with a remediation model that treats disabilities as problems to diagnose and overcome. Dembsey (2020) sheds light on the discrimination that disabled individuals face in writing center instruction and environment, like questioning whether disabled writers need support, perceiving disability as something to “fix” in a writing center context, and placing burden and judgment on disabled writers and tutors who self-disclose. In response to the positioning of disability as deficit in the writing center, writing center practitioners have challenged this notion and taken the lead on rethinking the disability discourse (for example, Anglesey & McBride, 2019; Degner et al., 2015). This notion coincides with Denny’s (2005) call to think of writing centers as liminal spaces that can disrupt the norm and “destabilize conventional wisdom of what we do and who we are” (p. 56). In the same spirit, this study aims to challenge the problematic discourses that linger in writing center research on disability. Its goal is to also envision the writing center as a rebellious space that can amplify the voices of neurodivergent tutors and clients, promote a culture of intentional listening and accessibility, and adapt to the needs of its diverse tutors and clients. In this empirical study, I focus on the experiences of neurodivergent tutors and clients with ADHD in the writing center space. Using an initial brief survey, followed by semi-structured interviews with tutors and clients with ADHD, I explore how clients and tutors with ADHD recount their experiences in past tutoring sessions and how they describe their writing process(es). I also discuss how clients and tutors with ADHD can be supported in the writing center.

Internationally operating business professionals communicate using English as a business lingua franca (BELF), which differs from “standard” English usage, leading to calls for innovations in business English (BE) pedagogy. However, how BE instructors incorporate BELF research findings in the classroom remains unexplored. Therefore, in this mixed methods explanatory sequential study, we used a questionnaire and semistructured interviews to collect data from BE instructors who had been exposed to BELF research. The findings revealed that while the exposure to BELF raised their awareness and understanding, there remain contextual, theoretical, and mindset-based obstacles to implementing BELF principles in the classroom.

While parents have long turned to experts of various kinds for childrearing advice, books like Emily Oster’s Cribsheet suggest that parents can empower themselves by using research on child development to inform their parenting decisions. The online community r/ScienceBasedParenting was designed as a “safe space” for this kind of parental labor, allowing users to request evidence-based advice without the threat of misinformation that often plagues online parenting spaces. This article analyzes how users of this community establish a boundary between science and nonscience, establishing science as an amorphous shared value rather than a set of processes or standards. The community establishes personal feelings and experiences as unscientific and implicitly inferior to “science,” vaguely construed, and user conversations indicate the struggles associated with this construction. The community’s internal rhetoric illustrates that there are limits to the reassurance and empowerment that evidence-based parenting can provide.

In this study, we identify the pedagogical practices the science teachers use for successfully conducting their argumentation-based science lessons and examine the process of managing informal formative assessments. For this qualitative study, we collected data via video and audio devices from classroom implementations after conducting two professional development courses on assessment practices in inquiry settings and argumentation in science classrooms. We analysed the data from the conversation analysis (CA) perspective to conduct a data-driven study. Our results show that there are multiple pedagogical practices that teachers use to achieve lesson purposes and shape lessons. These are primarily the revealing of different claims and warrants or counterarguments about the same phenomenon or situation, prompting the class to discuss different arguments, including more than one student in interaction. Regarding the nature of answers produced by students, the teachers also make implicit or explicit positive and negative assessments, avoid explicit assessments, and give content feedback as pedagogical practices and use them for managing the informal formative assessment process. The results show that the teachers perform some pedagogical practices via the information gained by the informal formative assessment process. These pedagogical practices provide them with new road maps to achieve the lesson goal by increasing classroom interactions.

Background: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports are essential for companies to persuade stakeholders of their commitment to social, economic, and environmental responsibilities. This persuasion is to a large degree determined by how companies construct their stance in discourse. Literature review: Among efforts in academic discourse, stance analysis of shipping industry CSR reporting remains unexplored. Research questions: 1. How are stance resources distributed in COSCO Shipping and Maersk's CSR discourse? 2. How do similarities and differences between institutional speakers instantiate their stakeholder-oriented communication strategies? 3. Which stance markers show significant changes over time, and what factors drive these changes? Methodology: This study employed corpus linguistics and discourse analysis of CSR reports (2016-2022) of COSCO Shipping and of Maersk. Python and WordSmith 8.0 were used for stance feature retrieval and frequency analysis, and hierarchical clustering analysis was conducted on hedges and boosters. Chi-square tests evaluated differences in stance marker distribution, while diachronic analysis examined changes over time. Results and conclusion: Maersk employs more stance markers of hedges, attitude markers, and general self-mentions, reflecting a more personal communication style, while COSCO Shipping favors boosters and formal self-references, indicating an authoritative approach. We argue that these features are informed by the contrast between European rationalism and Eastern empiricism in corporate communication. Our novel four-category classification of self-mentions (general, specific reference, group, and affiliated) addresses the complexities of shipping corporate discourse. Diachronic analysis shows stance marker usage fluctuations, particularly during global events like the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings develop a stance framework, offering insights in terms of stance construction for effective cross-cultural CSR communication to foster global cooperation on shared social responsibilities.

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Background:</b> Millions of scientific research posters are presented at conferences every year, yet little research exists to guide poster design. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Literature review:</b> There is widespread dissatisfaction with the state of scientific research posters. Research from technical and professional communication suggests that the typical research poster could be improved with complete sentence assertion headings. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research question:</b> How does poster format affect audience comprehension and reader preference? <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research methodology:</b> In Study 1, undergraduates read posters in two different formats—Complete Assertion Headings and short, Topical Phrase Headings—and answered questions about comprehension and preference. In Studies 2a (engineering educators) and 2b (engineering faculty), participants answered questions about their perceptions of three different poster formats: Complete Assertion Headings, traditional IMRD headings + Abstract, and the popular #betterposter billboard style template. In a short teaching case study, students used these research results to develop their own posters and adapted the templates that we presented. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Results:</b> Study 1 found that Complete Assertion Headings, compared to topical headings, improved student recall, and students preferred the complete assertion format. Study 2a found that engineering educators preferred nontraditional poster formats (both the Complete Assertion Heading and the #betterposter format) to the traditional IMRD + Abstract format. Study 2b found that mechanical engineering faculty preferred the Complete Assertion Heading to other formats. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Conclusion:</b> We recommend that practitioners consider using Complete Assertion Headings on their posters, and we provide examples of exemplary student posters.

• AI can offer useful writing feedback when used combined with peer review. • AI and peer responses were often similar and mutually reinforcing. • When AI and peer responses differed, the perspectives were often complementary. • Evaluating AI feedback fostered student agency and AI literacy. Cycles of drafting and revising are crucial for student writers' growth, and formative assessment plays an important role. However, many teachers lack the time or resources to provide feedback on drafts. While research suggests that AI feedback is high enough quality to be used for draft feedback, especially when assignment-specific criteria are used (Steiss et al., 2024), it must be used in a human-centered process. AI has the potential to reduce educational equity gaps in writing support (Warschauer et al., 2023), but when narrowly implemented, technologies can deepen divides (Stornaiuolo, et al., 2023). Peer and AI Review + Reflection (PAIRR) combines peer review best practices with AI review in an approach that emphasizes student agency and reflection. Using a mixed methods approach, this study examined student perceptions of AI utility in the context of peer review. Results indicate that AI tools offer useful feedback when combined with peer review. Students found the similarity between AI and peer feedback reassuring, while also valuing their complementary perspectives. Moreover, by evaluating AI outputs, students developed AI literacy, gaining familiarity with AI feedback's affordances and limitations while learning ethical ways to use AI in their writing processes.

In this paper, I explore first-year students' self-reported preferences for choosing source material in a digital, research-based writing setting. I argue that widespread skepticism towards online information has led to an "objectivity bias," where students prefer sources perceived as neutral and objective. Through qualitative interviews, I report that this bias may result in an overreliance on data-driven and empiricist sources, often at the expense of valuable personal narratives and experiential knowledge. I highlight the role of digital platforms and search algorithms in shaping these preferences and discuss the implications for teaching information literacy.

In the crowded social media platforms, brands need diverse strategies to engage users with their branding content. The research uses a communicative persuasive matrix in an experimental design to understand the multilayered social media persuasion with factors like message sources (celebrity vs. social media influencer), message strategy and message receivers’ attributes. The impact of these variables is tested on the intent to like and share the branding message in the case of a health and fitness product. The results indicated that different users prefer to like and share branding messages with different message sources and message strategies.

Multilingual writing is a challenging process that requires adjusting to academic and cultural demands. Studies of multilingual writers acknowledge the need for learners to self-regulate their cognition, affect, and actions as they write. Scholarship in educational psychology emphasizes socially regulated learning, suggesting that the regulation of learning is facilitated or hindered not only by the self but also by others. There is, therefore, a need to examine how developments in educational psychology and multilingual writing inform efforts to promote language learners’ writing skills. This article introduces a theoretical model of self- and socially regulated multilingual writing that can guide empirical research. The narrative literature review method was used to inform the design of the model. The review revealed that self- regulated writing by multilingual writers involves activating background knowledge and motivational beliefs, which then lead to decisions about strategies to employ to accomplish a writing task. The review also identified effective processes of socially regulated writing, including cognitive strategy instruction and formative assessment practices, particularly feedback. Finally, the review surfaced gaps in the literature that could be addressed, including how multilingual writers interpret writing tasks, manage their time and environment, deal with distractions, respond to feedback, seek help, and reflect on their successes and failures.

To meet the current trends in higher education, there is accountability on EAP programmes to prepare and assess students’ access to higher education. Thus, multimodal tasks including integrated writing (IW) assessments have seen a resurgence because they arguably closely mirror academic writing. However, test practicality constraints and variability in the use and format of these assessments mean rating scales often fall short in substantiating the central claims of IW assessment. We developed an integrated reading-writing scale taking into account reading-writing requirements and empirical research on IW tests designed to assess readiness for first-year humanities and social science courses. We approached test development as part of the ongoing validation efforts, detailing the considerations involved in the scale development process. We argue that alignment with academic writing requirements should guide the development of IW tests, thereby acknowledging and comprehending nuances of academic writing. The paper demonstrates considerations and decisions in scale design as the validation process from the start, which is a reminder that assessment is not just a quantitative exercise but a multifaceted process. • The design of a rating scale for first-year undergraduate academic writing is detailed. • Emphasis is placed on the role of reading in integrated writing scales. • Academic argumentation, rather than solely source-use mechanics, is considered. • Implications for construct operationalisation in academic evaluations are offered.

Using a mixed methods approach that relies on conceptual metaphor theory, corpus linguistics, and discourse analysis, the study investigates the use and function of metaphor in a self-constructed corpus of U.K. bank chairman’s letters to shareholders during the study period, covering a state of relative stability (2002-2007), financial crisis and scandals (2008-2019), and the coronavirus pandemic (2020). We find evidence that bank chairmen use conventional metaphors to communicate with shareholders. Additionally, the choice of metaphors is conditional on the contextual environment in which banks operate. Further qualitative analysis of the metaphors supports a persuasive role that depends on the contextual environment.

High school students for whom English is a second language (L2) often struggle with effective text revision because of limited ability to self-regulate their writing, that is, to manage the subprocesses of writing and to use writing-related knowledge and strategies. To help students in China acquire effective text revision skills for English persuasive essays, self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) revision instruction was applied both with and without peer interaction targeting knowledge of six writing dimensions. An experimental design involving 120 Chinese 11th-grade students in three conditions, that is, SRSD revision instruction with and without peer interaction (two treatment conditions) and conventional instruction without SRSD (control condition), was applied to examine the instructional effects on students’ writing and text revisions. Analyses of covariance revealed a statistically significant increase in text length and improvement in students’ text quality regarding higher-order content-level writing dimensions in both treatment conditions compared to the control condition in a post-intervention test. Notably, the most substantial improvement regarding both text length and text quality was observed in the SRSD plus peer interaction condition. Further, students in both treatment conditions made more text revisions involving longer text segments aimed at improving quality and changing meaning compared to those in the control condition. Among these, the students in the SRSD plus peer interaction condition exhibited the highest frequency of high-quality text revision during the posttest. The findings provide new insights into the effectiveness of SRSD revision instruction and peer interaction in developing L2 high school students’ self-regulation in revising English persuasive essays.

Terms used to describe writing support workers in higher education, as well as the location of their employment have sparked a long history of debate in writing center studies but have led to only scattered empirical research. The author examines the history of this debate addressing connotations of various terms and then aims to verify actual naming practice. The present study investigates the impact such debates have had on writing center practice by assessing public web pages from 575 university writing centers to see what terms are generally employed. The study shows that “writing center” is the most popular name for the location of writing tutorial services and that “tutor” remains the most popular term. This finding suggests that “center” has won out over other terms, but the popularity of “tutor” is much less decisive. At institutions with higher enrollment, in R1 institutions, and in the case of graduate student employees, the use of the term “consultant” increases. The general prevalence of the “writing tutor” and the rise of the more recent “writing consultant” and other variants may suggest a lag between scholarly critique and writing center practice, but it could also derive from institutional context. Alternative tutor terms could be employed, but an empirical study of efficacy would be needed to move naming from the realm of lore and conjecture.

Research has increasingly addressed first-generation (FG) students both in and outside the center (Baelemian & Feng, 2013; Bond, 2019; Denny et al., 2018; Ward et al., 2012), but there remains a need to address this unique student population from the perspective of critical theory. In a replication study of Bond’s 2019 “‘I Need Help on Many Things, Please’: A Case Study Analysis of First-Generation College Students’ Use of the Writing Center,” we examined the needs and perceptions of self-reported FG students in a writing center at a large, regional, public R2 university in the Midwest. We gathered preexisting digital data from WCOnline, consultants’ postsession notes, and our office of institutional research. Using thematic analysis, we coded, categorized, and compared FG college student and non-first- generation student data to better understand their unique needs. Thereafter, we corroborated our qualitative findings using quantitative analyses, specifically the Pearson chi-square test. Situated within the framework of cultural community wealth, our findings illustrate that FG students bring their own forms of cultural capital to the academy, challenging prior deficit-oriented narratives (Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Yosso, 2005). Our study can be used to better address the academic needs of FG college students and to extend replicable, aggregable, and data-driven (RAD) writing center research (Driscoll & Wynn Perdue, 2012; Haswell, 2005) into conversations of justice, equity, and inclusion.

In today’s workplace, supervisors often communicate with direct reports using technology that could influence the perceived relationship employees have with their managers. The purpose of this convergent mixed methods study was to describe the perception of how media richness, when using technology to communicate, influences the relationship direct reports have with their supervisors. To address the research question, a survey was used with a sample of 100 direct reports who frequently receive communication from their supervisors in different technology formats. The results from the study suggest that technology media influences the perceived relationship between direct reports and their supervisors. According to the results of this study, technology media may be especially helpful in bolstering the availability of supervisors, which may positively influence other elements of the supervisory relationship. The results further suggest that it may be important for all leaders to choose technology media that is personalized and preferred by the employee while also using the most effective media for the type of message. Finally, leaders should understand the concerns that employees may have around privacy and overuse of technology media.

Introduction: As demand for cannabis edibles increases worldwide, researchers have called for evidence-based packaging and labeling. To assist in these efforts, this integrative review focused on two questions. 1. What aspects of edibles packaging and labeling has the empirical literature covered across disciplines, and how? 2. How might professional communication researchers build on that empirical literature, addressing consumer and industry needs? Research methodology: The methods followed Whittemore and Knafl, who described five stages for integrative reviews: problem identification, literature search, data evaluation, data analysis, and presentation. These methods, supplemented with guidance from Arksey and O'Malley, involved searches in seven relevant databases, producing 341 total returns. The final corpus consisted of 25 empirical studies. I constructed tables of these studies to facilitate iterative comparisons and synthesis. Results/discussion: The final corpus covered five aspects of packaging and labeling: label accuracy; visual content, appeal, and compliance; comprehension of serving size and dosage; perceptions of warnings; and possible enhancements through innovative technologies. The most common intervention types were laboratory analyses (n = 8), followed by surveys paired with experimental tasks (n = 7) and content analyses (n = 4), two of which included a compliance audit. Conclusions and further research: Based on current literature, more empirical studies are needed overall as well as more geographic and linguistic coverage. These needs align with our field's calls for more experimental and quasi-experimental research, alongside long-standing commitments to translation and localization, including participatory localization. As in other fields, future studies should emphasize child and youth protection as well as label accuracy.

Data Justice and the Right to the City consists of a set of case studies each exploring the intersections between urban governance and datafication. This volume, edited by Morgan Currie, Jeremy Knox, and Callum McGregor, situates itself within the critical discourse on how data-driven technologies reshape urban spaces, impacting notions of citizenship, justice, and democracy. Each chapter draws inspiration from Henri Lefebvre's concept of the Right to the City (RTTC) theory by integrating data justice as a complementary framework to address the political ramifications of datafication in urban contexts. RTTC emphasizes participatory parity in urban space by developing spaces and data systems that enable all residents, regardless of their economic status, cultural background, or political power, to have an equal say in how their cities are designed and managed.

Communicating the Other Across Cultures by intercultural communication scholar Dr. Julia Khrebtan-Hörhager is a compelling read about how master narratives perpetuate cultural othering discursively, visually, and materially. The author notes that the crux of cultural othering is a systemic and reoccurring process of prioritizing histories with a “capital H,” “written and communicated by the powerful of the world” (e.g., colonizers, enslavers); this, in turn, socially constructs the Other (5). In these, the Other is routinely shown “as unworthy, primitive, barbaric, threatening, even subhuman” (2). In response to such master narratives, the latter half of the book examines how minoritized groups employ resistive rhetoric, specifically through exposure and empowerment, to disrupt oppressive systems and foster social change. The author refers to this process as “communicating other/wise,” which she coins as a “discursive strategy against Master Narratives that perpetuate cultural othering and an alternative epistemology of learning with and from the Other, of gaining awareness and eventually wisdom with regard to Self and Other” (14). Tracing types of rhetorical othering through case studies in the United States, Russia, and Western European countries, the author utilizes a cross-cultural approach and Kenneth Burke's concept of “equipment for living,” which Khrebtan-Hörhager extends to visual and material rhetoric.Communicating the Other Across Cultures is divided into two parts: “Cultural Othering as Equipment for Living” and “Communicating Other/Wise.” The first three chapters demonstrate the embedded nature of cultural othering through verbal, visual, and material artifacts, showcasing how cultural othering is a communicative phenomenon that has no borders. The last three chapters focus on how communicating other/wise is a powerful, subversive tool for the Other to tell alternative stories and conclude by pointing to the necessity of studying cultural othering across disciplines.Chapter 1 offers a comparative study of verbal othering in master narratives through different geopolitical locations. The author argues that the Other is discursively constructed, maintained, and normalized in literary works through binaries, which often endorse Eurocentric values and whiteness. An example of this is Mark Twain's The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, where the racialized good and evil binary emerges as Finn “thinks of himself as a sinner who will go to hell for his choice of not betraying fugitive slave Jim” (25). Twain's characters point to the idea that Finn should not care for Jim's wellbeing, furthering the justification of slavery and colonialism as a U.S. master narrative. Ultimately, this institutionalizes stigmas and reifies oppressive binaries. The Other is characterized as nonhuman and undeserving of inclusion and equality.Chapter 2 focuses on how visual culture transcends certain discursive boundaries, contending that images are powerful as they “demonstrate to us who matters, who does not, who exists in the center, and who struggles on the margins” (67). A significant component of visual othering is through cinematography, which greatly contributed to Nazi Germany's propaganda, supported the National Socialist regime, and justified the Holocaust. For example, the famous 1940 documentary Der Ewige Jude (The External Jew) portrays Jews as an unsanitary pest and “compares them [Jews] to rats, and reminds the audience that rats need to be killed for reasons of public health and safety” (106). Such visuals have the potency to intensify othering of Semitic peoples across geopolitical locations, solidifying ideological and national understandings of the Other.Chapter 3 looks at the relationship between material rhetoric—such as monuments, architecture, and memorials—and cultural othering. The author underscores the importance of attending to artifacts as they “contribute to the creation of a certain worldview that includes our national identities, our heroes, our role models, and our aspirations,” resulting in the lack of representation and even misrepresentation of the Other (111). The nationalist narrative is evident in the Mount Rushmore National Memorial, which celebrates several of America's Founding Fathers, communicates a superior national identity, and upholds patriotism. Mount Rushmore National Memorial especially ignores the United States’ involvement in Indigenous genocide and displacement by depicting the American Dream and freedom as available to all. The author argues that this is a form of strategic othering, a “convenient ideology of the (non-[w]hite, non-Christian, non-male, non-European, non-powerful) Other” (123). Utilizing material artifacts to distort history absolves white guilt and upholds white supremacy.In chapter 4, Khrebtan-Hörhager highlights a collection of alternative stories across the United States, Russia, and Europe that does not reify master narratives but instead exposes and empowers the voices of the Other. Prominent Russian writer, poet, and critic Nikolay Nekrasov, for example, used his works to critique war and suffering—an opposition to Russia's worldview and imperial expansion. As the author posits, writing Other/wise “is about listening to and learning from Other narratives, even if they clash with our existing worldviews and discredit our heroes and role models” (164). Communicating other/wise is a critical tool for reimagining spaces that include perspectives of the voices often silenced, erased, and hidden.Chapter 5 explores visuality through the lens of the Other. A striking example is the artwork Cloud Madonna, which shows a woman of color carefully and intimately carrying a melon while carrying water on the top of her head. The author posits that this portrayal is supposed to contrast Indigenous women's innate and generative connection to the land with a Christian nationalist perspective of the white madonna, who is “primarily defined through her relationship to baby Jesus” (223). Visualizing the Other is rooted in critiquing essentialized identities created by master narratives, which “teach us to see things differently; provide a new look on beliefs, norms, and values; and gradually change our culture” (219).Chapter 6 models communicating other/wise through materiality. The author explains that materiality (e.g., monuments, memorials, museums) crafts and tells our histories, which, in turn, communicates and informs our present and “the future of our children” (261). Because many forms of materiality are told through a homogenous, colonized lens, the goal for this chapter aims “to ‘un-set’ history and culture that is ‘in stone’ and to introduce alternative, culturally sensitive, and inclusive pieces of material rhetoric” (263–264). Khrebtan-Hörhager introduces several examples of how exposure and empowerment are imperative for disrupting homogenous narratives often curated by those in power. One example is the act of literally removing monuments that commemorate a nation's ideological regime. For example, Poles have removed certain monuments that commemorate the Red Army for freeing Poland from Nazi fascism. The author notes that “the removal of such Soviet monuments [is] not only natural but highly necessary as it avoids communicating wrong ideological values and grants Poland a much-overdue chance to achieve its own national and cultural definition as a free European democracy” (279). Materiality can be an especially rich mode for communicating other/wise, as it is often strikingly present even in the most mundane public spaces.Communicating the Other Across Cultures concludes by restating the pervasiveness of cultural othering in verbal, visual, and material forms and their ideological implications. With inspiration from Audre Lorde, communicating others/wise is a strategy for disrupting oppression and, thus, necessary for creating new realities. As the author hopefully asserts, “although othering is still omnipresent, it does not have to remain omnipotent, but the power to change the status quo starts with the critical social self-reflexivity and cultural self-diagnostics” (312). The question, “Whose voices are being prioritized?” is necessary for the unraveling of master narratives. This can be especially useful for undoing hegemonic educational curriculums, instead bringing in alternative histories and voices, such as Toni Morrison, as the classroom is often a formative space for shaping new perspectives and realities. Communicating the Other Across Cultures is extraordinary, grounded in cultural richness with exhaustive examples; it also highlights the voices of Other scholars and showcases the importance of studying cultural othering beyond communication and rhetoric. While the book demonstrates that cultural othering is systemic across cultures and recognizes the destructive patterns of master narratives, it also reminds readers of their agency to listen to the Other, learn from the stories of the Other, and invent ways of living Other/Wise.

Since its release in late 2022, ChatGPT and subsequent generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools have raised a wide variety of questions and concerns for the field of technical communication: How will these tools be incorporated into professional settings? How might we appropriately integrate these tools into our research and teaching? In this review, we examine research published in 2023–2024 addressing these questions ( N = 28). Overall, we find preliminary evidence that GAI tools can positively impact student writing and assessment; they also have the potential to assist with some aspects of academic and medical research and writing. However, there are concerns about their reliability and the ethical conundrums raised when they are used inappropriately or when their outputs cannot be distinguished from humans. More research is needed for evidence-based teaching and research strategies as well as policies guiding ethical use. We offer suggestions for new research avenues and methods.

This introductory article examines the evolving landscape of generative artificial intelligence (GAI) tools, contextualizing their impact through historical tropes of automation as both helper and threat. The authors argue that GAI tools are neither sentient helpers nor existential threats but complex systems that require careful integration into educational and research settings. The article underscores the importance of nuanced, evidence-based approaches, advocating for a balanced understanding of GAI's potential and limitations. It emphasizes ethical considerations and promotes reflective adoption over reactionary measures.

This eight-year longitudinal case study follows one high school English teacher from her practicum and student teaching through three subsequent job sites, with one year off due to prohibitive job stress. To study the developmental path of Caitlin, the teacher, we rely on the metaphor of the twisting path, which comes from Vygotsky’s attention to socially mediated concept development. This development is reliant on engagement with obstacles that promote growth and conceptual synthesis, with some obstacles becoming prohibitive and discouraging and with the path proceeding in a serpentine rather than straightforward way. Our principal data source is a series of biannual interviews conducted either in person or via video-conferencing platforms. We trace Caitlin’s developmental path by attending to her encounters with competing perspectives, policies, and practices informing the English curriculum, especially as they were enforced by different stakeholders. These obstacles were at times internal to her own thinking (e.g., the tension between relational, student-centered instruction and the belief that students need guidance to reach their potential), at times local in terms of English department and schoolwide tensions (especially, contentious battles over canonical versus relational and contemporary teaching), and at times from distant sources in the form of community pressures and externally created policies affecting instruction (in particular, imposed standardized teaching and assessment in conflict with instruction predicated on relationships and teacher judgment). These conflicts were virtually nonexistent in the fourth school she taught in, an alternative school where test scores were far less important than establishing supportive relationships with students through which they experienced care and cultivation. This eight-year longitudinal case study contributes to research that investigates how school contexts affect teachers’ persistence and attrition, with attention to which sorts of environments provided obstacles that benefitted Caitlin’s development, and which were prohibitive.

Drawing on surveys and interviews with college writing instructors and students at a public university in the United States, this mixed methods study revealed that in many cases instructors adopted translingual orientations, whereas students were committed to norms in their views of writing across differences. Students’ orientations to language as stable and discrete revealed the perseverance of monolingualism and standard language ideologies in college writing classrooms. The results established that writing programs should go beyond merely accepting linguistic diversity and incorporate language rights into the curriculum to demonstrate openness to pedagogies of difference. Writing instructors should embrace translingual pedagogies and practices not just to challenge students’ mainstream ideological positions but also to facilitate inclusive learning environments that celebrate linguistic diversity.

This study investigates the impact of guest speaker programs on student engagement and skill development in a university setting, focusing on different types of speakers: alumni and industry experts. Through a quantitative analysis involving 159 business students, the research examines how speaker characteristics influence perceived learning outcomes, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills. The findings reveal that alumni speakers, sharing a common educational background with the students, significantly enhance students’ perceived learning outcome and communication skills because of their relatability and personal insights. The implications of these findings underscore the need for educational institutions to strategically select guest speakers to optimize educational outcomes and prepare students more effectively for professional environments. This study contributes to the broader discourse on integrating practical experiences within academic curricula to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application in higher education.