A colonial-style brick building shopfront has a embedded signage reading Gunter-Smith Center for Community Engagement, followed by the York College of Pennsylvania logo.

9th Annual
Naylor Workshop
for Undergraduate
in Writing Studies

September 29–October 1, 2023

The 2023 Naylor Workshop continued our focus upon issues related to social and linguistic justice–and the important link between the two.  Language is a crucial component of how humans interact with one another, and attention to ways in which those interactions support, or undermine, equitable access to power structures is crucial.  With that in mind, the 2023 Workshop returned to a landmark resolution from a half a century ago which—most would agree—has yet to be realized: “Students Right to their Own Language.” That resolution called out the ways in which the denial of an individual’s mother tongue “amounts to an attempt of one social group to exert its dominance over another. Such a claim leads to false advice for speakers and writers, and immoral advice for humans.”  With that in mind, at a time in which civil liberties are under further attack, undergraduate researchers responded with a brilliant array of topics that addressed the impact of language policies, in education and beyond, and how they have created a kind of linguistic apartheid. 

Just a glance at the work of our undergraduate students at this workshop demonstrates the creative and thoughtful nature of our undergraduate researchers’ work.  They explored topics as divergent as the loss of one’s mother tongue across generations, to how narratives around the appropriation of Muslim mosques and slave plantations (now used as wedding venues) mask the truth.  They thought and wrote about access, about language surrounding disabilities, about queer literature, and about the educational gaps that are created by treating one language style as dominant and another as inferior.  The full range of that work can be found on the undergraduate researchers link.

While this work reminds us how little has changed, it also reminds us that this generation of undergraduate researchers are ready, willing, and able to bring about change.  From this, we can take hope.

2023 Naylor Thumbnail
Undergraduate researchers and their mentors at the 2023 Naylor Workshop

ExploreWorkshop Details

  • Plenary Speaker

    Plenary Speaker

    The 9th Annual Naylor Workshop for

    Undergraduate Research in Writing Studies

    September 29-October 1, 2023

    York College of Pennsylvania

    A headshot of Dominic DelliCarpini

    Plenary Address by Dr. Dominic Dellicarpini

    York College of Pennsylvania

    Dominic DelliCarpini is the Naylor Endowed Professor of Writing Studies and Dean of the Center for Community Engagement at York College of Pennsylvania, where he also served 13 years as Writing Program Administrator, 5 years as Chief Academic Officer, and as Academic Senate President. He is the author/editor of five writing textbooks as well as numerous articles and book chapters. His presentations and publications derive from his identity as a teacher, administrator, and community activist/advocate. He has written and presented on topics related to civic engagement, writing program administration, and first-year writing pedagogy. Dr. DelliCarpini served as President and Executive Board member of the Council of Writing Program Administrators, national Secretary of The Conference on College Composition and Communication, and a member of the national Committee on Undergraduate Research.

  • Undergraduate Researchers

    Undergraduate Researchers

    The students at this year’s Naylor Workshop brought fresh questions and thoughtful research around language, literacy, and social justice. Drawing on the conference theme, “Students’ Rights to Their Own Language,” our undergraduate researchers considered how their research might help students everywhere think about the politics of language—where their words are valued or excluded, celebrated or denigrated.

    Ultimately, as you can see below, this shared interest in language led to a range of conversations and research interests that students further explored at the Workshop. You can check out our brilliant students and read more about the topics that animated their work below.

    Undergraduate Research Participants

    Angela Akintokun, Clayton State University
    Owen Bennett, Penn State Harrisburg
    Luke Christensen, University of Texas—Permian Basin
    Taryn Deckard, Western Kentucky University
    James Gathings, Clayton State University
    Harper Kellogg, University of Texas—Permian Basin
    Lee Krauss, York College of Pennsylvania
    Christy Lorentz, University of Toronto Scarborough
    Ebony Mason, Clayton State University
    Alex Merritt, York College of Pennsylvania
    Maddie Moravcik, University of Texas—Permian Basin
    Becky Pechnann, Allegheny College
    Julia Pavlick, University of Maryland, College Park
    Giulian Romano, Hofstra University
    Delia Savin, Emory University
    Sal Sayema, CUNY, Queens College
    Jessica Segovia, University of Texas—Permian Basin
    Nick Stump, York College of Pennsylvania
    Emma Stauffer, University of Missouri—Kansas City
    Nickel Spartz, Allegheny College
    Alijah Smith, University of Missouri—Kansas City
    Cyrus Spino-Harris, Montana State University
    Katie Wagner, Allegheny College
    Karen Quick, Montana State University

    • My research project examines the unique relationship between disability and humor, specifically focusing on how individuals with disabilities reclaim the power of humor, and use it to work towards a more inclusive and accessible world.
    • I'm a member of a federally recognized Indigenous tribe, and have great interest in learning about the history of legislation in the tribal government. I am also interested in National legislation that was passed throughout the 20th century, such as the Indian Voting Rights act of 1924, or the Indian Religious Freedom act of 1978 and whether these bills had any effect on my own tribe's legislation as well as the other tribes of the Pacific Northwest if possible.
    • My research strives to observe how languages traditionally spoken by families fade when they are not passed down and the disadvantages that may transpire for second and third-generation immigrants as a result.
    • I’m interested in thinking about how teaching queer literature affects non-queer people. That is, I want to research specifically the effects of allowing discourse and literacy with queerness in earlier education.
    • I believe that how I educate students to read and write at my university can support social justice and advances literacy because I encourage students to be themselves in their writing and utilize Standard American English as a tool, not a voice.
    • I am interested in disability rights and accessibility, and specifically how Writing Centers can improve overall accessibility. My 'working' research question is "How can the writing center improve accessibility for neurodiverse, disabled, and other students with accessibility needs?
    • I aim to investigate the "utility" of translation studies in refining students' reading and writing in both languages (i.e., the languages they are translating out of and into) with the end goal of examining whether it is worth integrating more translation components to the design of writing programs at large.
    • What is it, I want to explore, that makes the act of fanfiction reading and writing so popular?
    • I want to explore whether unconventional responses to assigned prompts spark greater interest and pride in a writer's work by providing a creative outlet for the writer by breaking down the barrier of having to write "academically."
    • One question has persistently come to my mind throughout my collegiate academic career and the entirety of my life: what are the historical and social circumstances that lead to Black people, and more generally speaking oppressed/minority groups as a whole, to statistically perform worse and struggle more in conventional academic literary settings, yet at the same time possess a high level of linguistic creativity in the cultural artifacts they create?
    • In my research, I seek to explore the ways that scientists argue for the value of their research in scientific writing. Specifically, I am studying the ways that value arguments in scientific communication during social crises change and stay the same over time, as the different approaches that scientists use to communicate about crises as rhetorical situations demonstrate the influence of the genre of scientific writing on individual researchers' writing styles.
    • As a mother with children growing up in a technological world, I think about how our literacy skills are shaped by technology. In other words, I am interested in researching technology and the effect it has on children and adults.
    • Many of the challenges First Year Composition students face are uniquely genre-induced, suffering from genre anxiety or a lack of genre awareness as assignment requirements shift radically from one paper to another. Thus, my goal is to explore the genre-focused strategies that tutors, teachers, and writing centers can adopt to allay this anxiety.
    • I want to explore how modern language, both inside and out of the queer community, is influenced by Western European colonialism and its subsequent spread of Western gender norms and conceptions?
    • I'm investigating what Vaporwave, as a musical genre, represents. I’m particularly interested in its themes such as the passage of time, the corruption of nostalgia, and workplace life.
    • This project aims to understand (1) how has the turbulent and violent history between Greece and Turkey constructed the unstable positions of Muslim Greeks now, (2) what is the relationship Muslims have with public prayer in Greece and how is that impacted by the availability of Mosques that are open to prayer, and (3) what are the wants and needs Muslim Greeks have regarding Mosques, especially those that are neglected by the Greek government and public?
    • I am interested in mental health issues and issues faced in the LGBTQ+ community. Specifically, how kids who have mental illnesses or those in the community struggle to be taken seriously due to their age or struggle to even identify how they feel due to lack of education on the topic.
    • We are going to research the impact of pre-existing relationships between writing consultants and writers on writing consultations at our institution's writing center.
    • I am trying to gather an overarching look into, within my state of Georgia, who currently owns and profits off of plantations, specifically plantations used as wedding venues.
    • I’m studying how submersible technology can be enhanced to improve communication and language studies in underwater environments.
    • I am interested in developing an empirical research study connecting language acquisition with disability studies. I think this topic is very important to study for understanding children with disabilities, finding the best way to communicate with them, and discovering how to make communication more accessible for them.
    • We would like to explore the following questions as it relates to non-users of writing centers, to build upon existing findings: What are some of the individual factors within the underutilization of the writing center by students?
  • Mentors


    As educators, we’re responsible for giving our students the intellectual tools they need to flourish in all their endeavors. This year, our committed mentors did this by pushing the undergraduate researchers towards specificity, originality, and social justice. They encouraged the students to think about new methodologies, different questions. In effect, they heeded this year’s research theme, helping students excel not by regulating students’ voices—as so many classrooms do—but by amplifying them.

    Here are the mentors that affirmed students voices at this year’s workshop:

    Whitney Jordan Adams

    Whitney Jordan Adams earned her PhD in Rhetorics, Communication, and Information Design from Clemson University. At Clemson, Dr. Adams was the assistant director of the writing center and helped to create the Visual Information Design Center, where both students and faculty can go for assistance with visual presentations, visual rhetoric, and graphic design. Currently, she is the Visiting Assistant Professor of English, Rhetoric, and Writing at Berry College in Rome, GA. She studies the rhetorical construction of white supremacy, focusing on the Alt-Right, Accelerationism, and the rise in white nationalism. Additionally, she studies how symbols reproduce ideology connected to resentment rhetoric. Her courses focus on issues related to race, community activism, anti-racist pedagogy, and the rise in misinformation and the digital divide.

    Maria Assif

    I am Professor of English, Associate Chair of EDI, the Coordinator of our first-year writing course, and the Faculty Advisor of the Joint Program (B.A. in English/Master of Teaching) at the University of Toronto Scarborough. I am also the Co-Coordinator of The Writing About Writing Network (WAWN). My work for the past fifteen has been focusing on first-year writing and EDAI pedagogies (Equity, Diversity, Access, and Inclusivity). I mostly use discourse analysis and qualitative methods in my research. I speak four languages and identify home between Canada, the U.S.A and Morocco.

    Rebecca Babcock

    Currently I'm interested in the social nature of writing. How people interact with others in person, online, and through texts as they compose their writing and work through the writing process. I have been participating in and studying writing groups, writing workshops, writing retreats, etc, both in-person and online. I have several articles in the revise-and-resubmit stage on these topics, especially as relates to multi-level, interdisciplinary writing groups that may also be multi-lingual and even multi-national. I also taught a class recently on Linguistic Justice and as a group we presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication on Latinx Linguistic Justice. We also have an article under submission and are working on an edited collection on the same topic.

    Gabriel Cutrufello

    I study the history of science and technical writing by using archives of student writing from the 1800s. I am interested in understanding the ways in which undergraduate and graduate students in the science and engineering integrated visual information (sketches of equipment, maps, tables, charts) into their writing during the early years of the modern American university model (roughly the 1850s to the early 1900s). Using large collections of student writing from the era helps me to see patterns and allows me to understand the larger national movement to integrate writing into the sciences and engineering in the late 1800s.

    Dominic DelliCarpini

    Dominic DelliCarpini is the Naylor Endowed Professor of Writing Studies and Dean of the Center for Community Engagement at York College of Pennsylvania, where he also served 13 years as WPA, five years as Chief Academic Officer, and as Academic Senate President. His articles, book chapters, and presentations focus upon writing as engaged citizenship and undergraduate research. He is also author/editor of four textbooks, and has owned two small businesses—a bakery/cafe and a retail clothing business—in his earlier days. His expertise includes work in human-centered design (Design Thinking).

    Doug Downs

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

    Andrea Efthymiou

    Andrea has been a writing center administrator since 2007, mentoring tutors' research on topics ranging from tutoring across genres, valuing students' languages, and understanding undergraduate tutor labor. In her own research, Andrea employs qualitative methods—like conducting interviews and collecting surveys—to build knowledge around writing center work and writing beyond the university. Recently, Andrea has presented and published on the impact undergraduate research experiences have on writing center tutors. She also is part of an ongoing, multi-institutional project that studies the function of self-sponsored writing in people's lives.

    McKinley Green

    McKinley Green (he/him/his) is an assistant professor of English at George Mason University. Broadly, his research draws from rhetorics of health and medicine, technical communication, and queer rhetorics. His current research uses qualitative methods to investigate how young people living with HIV define, communicate about, and mitigate the health risks that most impact their sexual health. His research illustrates how these narratives reveal alternative epistemologies of HIV risk and identify new frameworks for HIV care and prevention. Recently, McKinley’s research has been published in Technical Communication Quarterly, Rhetoric of Health and Medicine, Computers and Composition, and Reflections.

    Cantice Greene

    I'm interested in helping students examine the ways their identity fuels their research and academic, social, and civic interests. My writing and research explores women's identities, English language learners (Gen 1.5, bilingualism, codemeshing), faith (and specifically Christian faith) in the college classroom. I have used autoethnography, theory building, archival, and qualitative (survey, interview) research methods.

    Daniel Hengel

    I love teaching. I think of myself as a teacher-scholar rather than a researcher who teaches. My teaching and research interests center language as a space of both oppression and an opportunity to create forms of dissent. I called my most recent first-year writing course, "Language and Power." In school year 23/24, I plan on teaching (in addition to first-year writing), a class titled, "Radical Rhetorics: Persuasion, Power, and Protest." At MLA and NeMLA, I have presented on a range of topics centered on creative curriculum design, experiential education, the syllabus as hospitable practice, and community building in the classroom. My most recent publication, "Power Relations and Experiential Education: Facilitating Conscientization in the Humanities," appeared in Radical Teacher: a socialist, feminist, and anti-racist peer-reviewed academic journal dedicated to the theory and practice of education in Spring 2023. Most of my work seeks, in some way, to expose and challenge various forms of coercion and control that disenfranchise marginalized social bodies.

    Emma Hetrick

    My name is Emma Hetrick (she/her), and I'm the Writing Program Coordinator at Lafayette College. Although I have come to writing studies from a circuitous route, much of my scholarship and approach to working with students has been in identifying and working to dismantle barriers to access, as well as thinking about who is represented in academic spaces and what the implications of these representations are. In my position, I train and supervise undergraduate writing tutors and develop programs that support writing communities and equip campus community members with the tools necessary to address a variety of rhetorical situations.

    Cody Hmelar

    Through my work as an undergraduate researcher, I explored multi-modal education through immersive media and its impacts on retention rates and the writing process using qualitative methods. After graduating, I examined linguistic justice in Asian/Asian American diasporic communities through rhetorical analysis of governmental response to the COVID-19 pandemic as well as narrative play as a coping mechanism to the native speaker fallacy in the teaching and hiring in institutions of higher learning. I examine this through statistical analysis of hirings of non/tenure-track faculty and qualitative interviews with graduate students and doctoral candidates. I have presented at the Naylor Workshop, CCCC and will present at CWPA in July. Outside of composition and rhetoric, I work as a broadcast engineer in major market radio and television stations and teach basic engineering and broadcast networking courses at the undergraduate level. I also serve as associate chair of the Asian/Asian American Caucus at CCCC.

    Gwendolynne Reid

    I'm an associate professor of English and direct the Writing and Communication Program at Oxford College of Emory University. My research focuses on how disciplines, like scientific disciplines, use writing to produce and communicate new knowledge. I most often employ rhetorical genre theory and qualitative methods like text-based ethnography. My research, for example, has examined how scientists use digital media to engage citizens and how this impacts their scientific writing. Another recent project has examined citation practices in the medical journals JAMA and JNMA to examine how the history of racism in American medicine is reproduced in citational relationships and in digital tools like impact factors and search results. My students have published and presented on a range of topics, including rhetorical analyses of Oprah Winfrey's 2018 Golden Globes award acceptance speech and of the science documentary Our Secret Universe, and genre analyses of scholarly book prefaces, men's lifestyle magazine covers, and mental health recovery narratives.

    Myra Tatum Salcedo

    First and foremost, I began my career with a focus on social justice issues as a nationally award-winning civil rights reporter with Hearst Newspapers. Then, I earned my PhD in Rhetoric and Composition and have presented conference papers and publications on creating civil discourse amongst religions, ethnicities, gender, cultural identities, disabilities and more. My research is now excelling in the visual arts as being notable in the way of literacy in the realm of offering visual and textual works (largely as a healing mode) for those who engage various parts of the brain in deciphering comics and graphic novels. I have a chapter at the moment at press concerning comics and graphic novels being beneficial pre-and-post deployment on deciphering visual images and textual print combined. I am a highly narrative writer and believe heavily in utilizing RESEARCH that can lead the researcher to unique and new connections in order to add a voice that can change up the conversation in the scholarly realm of publications!

    Mike Zerbe

    My name is Mike Zerbe, and I teach at York College of Pennsylvania. I teach courses in first-year writing, technical and scientific communication, rhetorical history and theory, civic rhetoric and writing, linguistics, and editing and writing style. My background is mostly in scientific and medical writing: I worked as an editor for a cancer research journal for a few years, and my undergraduate degree is in chemistry (with graduate degrees in English). I'm also a big fan of all things global, and I've had the good fortune to teach in Bulgaria (in Eastern Europe) and India. I also spend a lot of time in Peru, where my wife is from.

  • Comments


    The Naylor Workshop never fails to create new friendships; this year was no different. Undergraduate researchers and faculty mentors from across the country came to support one another, finding ways to explore new methodologies, discover new evidence, and ultimately revise their research. The comments below bear witness to the power of writing and research to build community around topics that matter.

    • I personally had never attended anything of this sort before and just expected to go and talk about research a little bit, then go home. But it was clear after maybe 20 minutes into the first event that this was an amazing place with an amazing group of people to be with.
    • Coming to Naylor was the best thing that happened to my research project, and it was so rewarding. Being able to interact with like-minded fellow writing scholars was an experience I'll truly take with me even post-grad.
    • To undergraduates I would say this is one of the best forums for getting support for your research at any stage of the process. To mentors I would say the experience is one-of-a-kind.
    • Even if you are happy with your research when you go into the workshop, you can leave with new ideas and a new excitement for continuing it.
    • The experience was out of this world and life changing. The environment was friendly, and I felt the power of being with like-minded people sharing thoughts and ideas.
    • Mentors are appreciated and valued in ways we don't often experience in our day-to-day campus experience.
    • My expectations were so amazingly exceeded.
    • You would not believe the community that gets built and how far the conversations there will take your research. You don't want to miss out on this.
    • I feel like I have grown immensely in such a short period of time.
    • I felt thoroughly engaged throughout the process. I had mentors that complimented my work and mentors that challenged it. Each helped structure my final work product in a way that felt very satisfying.
    • The intellectual experience was phenomenal. I was asked questions that helped me think deeper about my work and where I needed to be more intentional with my focus.
    • I felt inspired by the students’ work and a renewed energy in my own projects. Listening to tutors’ feedback from their Writing Centers helps me understand how I can better communicate and support tutors in my own Center.
    • I was really embraced by students in gender and disabilities studies trying to find a "way in" in order to include their own voices in published journals.
    • The Naylor Workshop provided the necessary input from the mentors about the future of my project and methods to do my research; it helped me find the steps necessary to articulate the "so what?" part of my topic.
    • The combination of group work and one on one work was amazing!
    • I bridged the gap on my timeline between my research proposal and research. It really helped having others tell me how I can network, and share resources or contacts they know I may be able to use.
    • I learned so much, and was so energized by all this intelligence, engagement, and goodwill.
    • It was a pleasure to discuss complex ideas with like-minded people who all value writing and research.
    • I would state that the experience is intellectually inspiring, serious work and a game changer for academic and social change.
    • Hearing about the research that other students were doing and how they were doing it was an eye opener for me on ways I can go about my research that I had not thought about before.
    • The workshop allowed me to hash out a concrete and specific timeline to carry out my pedagogical intervention project at my home institution.
    • I was able to polish up my research question and my research methods—my two biggest issues going into this workshop.
    • My time at the Naylor Workshop allowed me to meet with and get contact information for a few mentors who were more than willing to answer questions I had or will have.
    • I enjoyed working with students. I learned from them and I shared with them through my experience.
    • It was genuinely one of the best experiences I’ve had. I learned so much and met so many people.
    • The Naylor Workshop was an amazing experience that allowed me to meet amazing researchers!
    • I learned a lot as a mentor and I can’t wait to come back next year.
  • Program


    This year’s program highlights the sometimes vexed, but always crucial, relationship between a College and the environs that surround, support, and interact with it. While “Students’ Right to their Own Language” began as a statement about how to teach writing, those of us who have worked in this liminal space also know that what we do in academia bleeds over into, and sometime upon, our communities. This program, and meeting here within the City of York–a third-tier, post-industrial City with deep inequities–reminds of the fact that the teaching of writing is always already a part of a larger matrix of those things that can either dismantle or maintain social inequities—inequities that start with how we communicate across boundaries, and whose language becomes the lingua franca.

    Friday, September 29

    ARRIVE at the Yorktowne Hotel—ideally, no later than 5:00 p.m.! After getting settled in, feel free to spend some time relaxing and/or mingling with others in the hotel lobby, the Graham Rooftop Lounge, or have a walk around our fair city. We'd also be happy to have you stop by and see us at the Center for Community Engagement, also directly across from the Yorktowne Hotel, at 59 East Market Street. We will be here to welcome you and would enjoy some informal conversation before we get underway.

    5:30–6:45 p.m. | Opening Reception and Networking Exercise (Center for Community Engagement)

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

    7:00 p.m. | Opening General Session and Plenary Address (Yorktowne Hotel, Pullo Room)

    • As we sit down for dinner, we’ll hear some brief opening remarks to set the tone for this year’s Workshop. You’ll be seated with members of your Working Group, so you will also be able to continue the process of getting to know each other and do some goal-setting for the busy day ahead.
    • Over dessert, we'll have our Plenary address.
    • Once we've wrapped up formal activities, feel free to continue conversations. (But be sure to get some rest—we start early on Saturday!)


    Saturday, September 30

    7:00–7:45 a.m. | Breakfast and Networking (Center for Community Engagement, CCE)

    •   Continental breakfast available at the Center for Community Engagement. This is a good opportunity to have some conversations and continue your networking.

    8:00 a.m. | Story Time and Opening Exercises, led by Dominic DelliCarpini (CCE, Community Room)

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

    9:30–11:00 a.m.| "What/Why" (Topic Development) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

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

    11:00–11:45 a.m. | Round One, Concurrent "How" (Methods) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

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

    Noon–1:30 p.m. | Lunch and Break (CCE Mural and Community Rooms)

    • We’ll share some lunch, discuss ways to “publish” (make public) or “circulate” your research in consequential ways. Weather permitting, there will be some time to venture out to see a bit of our City—and perhaps meet some of the people who are doing social justice work in York. 

    1:45–2:30 p.m. | General Check-in (CCE, Community Room)

    • After lunch and our break, we’ll take a bit of time to see how we are all doing, to hear about how you’re thinking is developing and/or changing, and address any questions or concerns. 

    2:30–3:15 p.m. | Round Two, Concurrent "How" (Methods) Workshops (CCE, various rooms)

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

    3:30–5:00 p.m. | Reflection and Poster Planning for your Final Pitch/Presentation (CCE, various rooms)

    • We’ll first gather to talk about how you can move toward creating your final plan. Then, each undergraduate researcher will have some quiet time to make notes and start to refine their topic and methods toward designing their final pitches (using whatever mode of presentation you find most appropriate) and their posters. Researchers will be with their working groups, where they can work individually (and also talk with their mentors).
    • The goal is to plan/sketch prototypes of your poster, which might include topic question, audience, possible impact, and method of research. This will vary according to how far along their research is. You can use the resources on the “Instructions and Links for Poster Presentation” page to guide you.

    5:00–6:00 p.m. | Break and Prepare for Evening Activities (CCE, Community Room)

    • After a brief check in to end our hard days’ work, you’ll have some time to relax (you can stop back in your hotel room if you wish) and prepare for our evening fun. 
    • After some down time, we'll gather again to walk to our dinner location (about two blocks), after which it is a short walk (about 3 blocks) to our evening activity. (We’re glad to provide rides to anyone who has mobility challenges—just let us know). 

    6:30 p.m. | Dinner (Archetype Pizza)

    8:00 - 9:30 p.m. | Evening Activity (Escape Games Live)

    9:30 | Return to Yorktowne Hotel for evening conversations and a much-needed rest!



    Sunday, October 1st

    7:00–7:45 a.m. | Breakfast (Center for Community Engagement)

    •   Continental breakfast available at the Center for Community Engagement. This is a good opportunity to have some conversations and continue your networking. 

    8:00 - 9:30 a.m. | Final Poster Work (CCE, various rooms)

    • Extending from your work on Saturday afternoon, undergraduate researchers will work individually on their final posters, with assistance as needed from mentors. For those who need materials printed, you’ll submit that by 9:30 or earlier. 
    • York College staff will be here to help. We’ll also help you to find the spot for you to display your work in the first floor of the CCEl. 

    10:00 - 11 a.m. | Group 1, Pitches and Gallery Walk (CCE, various rooms)

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

    11:15 a.m. – Noon | Group 2 Pitches and Lunch (CCE, Community Room)

    Noon – 1:00 p.m. | Group 2 Gallery Walk (CCE, first floor)

    •   We’ll have time to visit each other’s posters to comment and offer advice and encouragement. 

    1:15 p.m. | Benediction (CCE, Community Room)

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

    1:30 p.m. | Airport and Train Ground Transportation Departs