The style of these narratives of inclusive teaching is the “personal essay.” It is distinct from the formal academic essay in that it is frank with the reader that the essay is not neutral, objective, or speaking for a group. In the introduction to The Art of the Personal Essay, Phillip Lopate (1995) writes,
The hallmark of the personal essay is its intimacy. The writer seems to be speaking directly into your ear, confiding everything from gossip to wisdom. Through sharing thoughts, memories, desires, complaints, and whimsies, the personal essayist sets up a relationship with the reader, a dialogue – a friendship, if you will, based on identification, understanding, testiness, and companionship…At the core of the personal essay is the supposition that there is a certain unity to human experience. (p. xiii)
In the academy, we often write in a less personal voice about what we learn when we do research in our classrooms, but teaching is personal and often intuitively guided. A teaching strategy that works in my teaching style may require adaptations for someone else to use it. This special issue of the Journal for Research and Practice in College Teaching recognizes this personal experience of inclusive teaching in challenging times.
As teachers, we can learn from each other’s experiences, and as professionals, we can adapt principles to our personal contexts. We hope that these personal essays of negotiating inclusion in teaching can help our readers negotiate changes in their own teaching, or at least they might feel some support by reading about the struggles of others.
Here are the points that would be helpful for you to cover in your account of how you have accounted for AI in your teaching.
Describe how teaching the course changed for you when you decided to account for AI as an influence in student work.
Explain how you learned from what worked well and why you will keep this change as a regular part of your teaching practice or why the attempt did not work, and what you might change as you move forward.
Formatting Guidelines
Font: Aptos, 12 point
1.5 spacing
Paragraphs: Full justified, first line indented, with a line space in between paragraphs.
The following table demonstrates how to format headings in APA 7 Style.
Level
Format
1
Centered, Bold, Title Case Heading
Text begins as a new paragraph.
2
Flush Left, Bold, Title Case Heading
Text begins as a new paragraph.
3
Flush Left, Bold Italic, Title Case Heading
Text begins as a new paragraph.
4
Indented, Bold, Title Case Heading, Ending with a Period. Text begins on the same line and continues as a regular paragraph.
5
Indented, Bold Italic, Title Case Heading, Ending with a Period. Text begins on the same line and continues as a regular paragraph.
Recommended Terminology
We understand that terminology continually evolves. This guidance is for consistency in the publication. Our intent is to be respectful of all groups, although we understand that different groups, and people within groups, may have differing preferences for terminology. Should an author have a strong preference for terminology that differs from APA guidelines, please contact the General Editor to discuss alternatives and how to provide context for the reader to understand the author’s usage. For terminology, please see the APA usage guide.
Submission Preparation Checklist
All submissions must meet the following requirements.
The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
The text is 1.5 spacing text; 12-point Aptos font; italics, rather than underlining for emphasis (except with URL addresses). All illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
The manuscript does not exceed 1,500 words for a Personal Narrative.
The submission file is in Microsoft Word file format.
URLs or DOIs for the references have been provided.
The text adheres to the terminology recommendations in APA style. Should the author wish to use alternative terminology, please consult with the General Editor to discuss the alternatives.
To ensure the integrity of the blind peer-review process, authors must de-identify the manuscript. The document's authors must delete their names from the text and replace them with the word "Author". With Microsoft Office documents, author identification can also be removed from the properties of the file.
Institutional review board approval or exemption is clearly indicated for inclusion of student data.
