Using Contact Zone Concepts to Teach Critical Autoethnography to Multilingual Writers in Foundational Composition

Contact Zone-Based Composition Pedagogy

Contact zone scholarship can, at times, make the contact zone feel like more of a theoretical construct than a real space or implementable praxis. However, Pratt instructs educators to “look for the pedagogical arts of the contact zone” (40). In response to this, the literature calls for revolution via new pedagogical approaches instead of trying to force new ideas into old methods (Bizzell 460). The basis of this revolution should be methodologies that focus on providing safe spaces for learners to unpack linguistic and cultural conceptions and entry points for meaningful interactions with new ideas (Canagarajah 85; Beauvais 22; Ferreira and Mendelowitz 55). Ferreira and Mendelowitz use traveling as a metaphor for the process that students undergo (55). As an extension of this metaphor and aligning with Deborah Brandt’s notion of literacy sponsors (19), I suggest perceiving instructors as travel agents or tour guides for their sojourning students. A contact zone tour guide enhances their sponsorship by making the contact zone tangible for students and helping them navigate the different learning experiences they encounter within it. Although any classroom can be a space for cultural learning, a contact zone classroom and tour guiding teacher intentionally recognize and facilitate pedagogical moments instead of letting rich opportunities be lost haphazardly. Tour guiding teachers multitask to create a holistically implemented contact zone classroom: teachers must collaborate with students to foster a safe, productive classroom environment. Moreover, teachers must consider the activities and assignments conducted within the space as well as the thoughts and experiences students may have outside of it.

The Contact Zone Classroom

Students should learn how to socialize within their translingual environment (Canagarajah 99; McCook; Ferreira and Mendelowitz 56). To facilitate this socialization, Ferreira and Mendelowitz advocate for reflexive inquiry (57). Donna Qualley explains that inquiry is a discovery process of systematically assessing oneself and that “reflexive” refers to “the act of turning back to discover, examine and critique one’s claims and assumptions in response to an encounter with another idea, text, person, or culture” (3).

To get to a point where students can perform reflexive inquiry, though, instructors must create an environment that is conducive to discovery through error-making (Pratt 39; Lu 481; McCook; Miller 129; Voeste 217). Growth from error-making is a hallmark of both Second Language Acquisition studies and Writing Studies, making this an integral aspect of the multilingual composition classroom as students progress through the learning process. The goal here is that students can feel comfortable with themselves, their work, others, and others’ work within the classroom, so it is incredibly important that teachers be aware of how they talk about writing (Miller 134) and learning, particularly within their role as literacy sponsor.

If a teacher does not critically assume their role as tour guide in these moments of rapport-building and constructive learning, the literacy development can become oppressive. Without their instructor’s conscious and explicit facilitation of contact zone happenings, students may be unaware of their own or others’ identities and negotiations. Worse than being unaware of these processes, students, without proper guidance, could view the contact zone with apathy or even hostility. It is therefore of the utmost importance that teachers exemplify equitable, decolonizing practices so that their students may model those constructive behaviors (Gottschalk 61). Teachers as tour guides helping students journey through the contact zone equip students with skills for noticing and reconciling differences in a process that, without a tour-guiding teacher, would likely feel confusing and isolating. Creating an amicable relationship-based environment will aid in students feeling more comfortable with their assignments and identity negotiation.

I recognize I run the risk of exotifying the cultures explored within the contact zone by using a “tour guide” metaphor. A teacher’s presence is important for facilitating the contact zone, but teachers should be wary of promoting ethnocentric beliefs and hegemonic norms. Consequently, I think the metaphor’s risk demonstrates the need for careful pedagogical practice and teachers’ reflexive inquiry when developing a contact zone and co-constructing it in an agency-building process with students. Teachers should continually examine their positionality and do the same type of reflective work that they are asking of their students; they can create opportunities for student-led learning to highlight students’ voices instead of prioritizing their own perspective. Student/teacher collaboration enables co-constitutive identity and literacy development for all participants where co-construction of knowledge equitably distributes power across stakeholders.

Teaching in the Contact Zone

Once the pedagogical environment is established, instructors can focus on the course projects and activities. Paul Beauvais prefaces this discussion by explaining that all writing and reading assignments should be focused on the contact zone (22). Course projects and activities should also try to feature agency building opportunities (Ferreira and Mendelowitz 59). Examples of such activities include:

• oral and written narratives (Ferreira and Mendelowitz 56),
• revision work (Lu 478; Miller 130),
• looking at outside materials, including authentic texts (Lu 481; Canagarajah 99),
• multimodal projects (McCook; Canagarajah 300),
• literacy skills development (Miller 134; Pratt 38; McCook), and
• games or roleplay and storytelling (Pratt 38, 40).

Lessons should also cater to a variety of learning strategies with learner-centered pedagogy (Canagarajah 96; McCook). Furthermore, the presentation of materials and assignment directions should be clear and scaffolded to avoid adding unnecessary pressure to students (Miller 133; Ferreira and Mendelowitz 56). Outside of class, McCook recommends that teachers research their students’ educational, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds to better understand them.

Each of these strategies can be performed in hopes of getting the class to a point where everyone can dialogue about rhetorical decisions made during reading and writing (Miller 140; Gottschalk 63). In sum, an auspicious pedagogical response is one where teachers are “closely attending to what our students say and write in an ongoing effort to learn how to read, understand, and respond to the strange, sometimes threatening, multivocal texts they produce while writing in the contact zone” (Miller 145).

Bearing all of these suggestions in mind, it is important to create a streamlined action plan for a contact zone-based composition class. However, the countless genres available for writing instructors to choose from can be overwhelming, particularly when trying to identify ones that will mesh with contact zone principles. Subsequently, I now turn my attention to an assignment I designed, with the hope that this vignette will offer a humble attempt at responding to the question Suresh Canagarajah poses in response to being inundated by theory and wanting to create praxis: “As a teacher of writing for ESL and multilingual students, I am left with the question: what can I do to promote this pedagogical vision in my classroom now?” (299)