I love what I do, and I believe that what I do is important. During the years I have been teaching, that love and belief continues to make me enthusiastic about my subject matter, an enthusiasm I do not want to stifle, for I believe it catches and holds my students' attention.

Rather than a teacher, I see myself as more of a facilitator. I downplay my role as the assumed expert, working instead to create a more student-centered classroom in which students can learn not only from me but also from each other. For example, some students have greater computer expertise than others (or even I); rather than seeing this situation as problematic, I turn it into an opportunity for those students to serve as teachers for their classmates and for me. Doing this helps me accomplish two important objectives: my students are encouraged to become active learners who share responsibility for their education, and they are introduced to collaborative learning and writing practices, ones that I have found to be both valuable and satisfying.

I also model for my students the pedagogically important stance of critic. In using computer technology in my teaching, I realize the importance of critiquing what Haas has called the "technology-is-transparent" and "technology-is-all-powerful" myths, what Hawisher and Selfe have termed the epideictic "rhetoric of technology." Computers are not neutral writing tools, for they can shape writing in profound ways, as evidenced in hypertext, for instance. Neither are they all-powerful, able to automatically and independently improve teaching and students' writing. It is therefore crucial to look at and not merely through technology, to realize that it can be not only enabling but also constraining, that it offers both benefits and liabilities. Thus, particularly in professional writing courses, my students and I discuss effective document design and appropriate and ethical use of graphics–and how word processing templates and graphics programs may help but may also hinder them. By taking such a critical stance, I help my students become not only technology users but also technology critics.

Another apt descriptor for me is that of coach. My job is to teach students how to write, not merely to tell them to write, to identify not only what works but to also show why it works. Because I work hard and continually to become a better writer through study and practice, I can show and not simply tell my students that writing ability is not innate but a skill that can be learned. I share with them my own individual and collaborative writing processes and practices, which I learned not only through my coursework in rhetoric and composition but also through my workplace writing experiences. I demonstrate how these processes and practices work in specific contexts to result in competent written products. I tell my students about the conference presentations I am proposing, articles I am working on, circulating drafts of my work in various stages of development. Bringing my own experiences, practices, and products to class helps me model what I have found to be effective and efficient writing practices, which my students can learn and ultimately master. And sharing my work with them maintains what I see as the necessary connection between my teaching and scholarship.