"Extreme Woke/Leftist Professor": A Short Course Analysis
- SJ Williamson
- Sep 27, 2025
- 10 min read
I like to incorporate class check-in surveys, especially when I teach a new class. This semester marks my first time teaching an upper-division technical writing course where most of my students are engineering or science students. As always, I put the optional survey out for week 5 and read the anonymous responses. I normally wouldn't share any feedback I got outside of my department, but this semester one student said the best way to improve the course would be for me to be less politically biased as an "extreme woke/leftist professor." I'll be honest, I didn't know what they meant at first. I've never been called out for my assumed political ideology in class before. I definitely wouldn't call myself an extremist, and that's outside of the classroom setting. I thought I'd spend today's blog post analyzing the first 3 weeks of my technical writing course for places where politics might leak through to my students. Let's dive in!
Leaky Bodies
When I was in high school, my history and civics/economics teacher was what I considered to be a good teacher; we learned multiple perspectives for many issues discussed in class to the point where I didn't know his political perspective. When my math teacher asked me like it was oh so obvious, I couldn't answer. "Republican?" I guessed. "No, Democrat," was my math teacher's response. It felt like I had sparked drama that already existed between the two. I didn't understand why politics were so divisive at the time in 2010.
When I first started teaching, I wanted to embody that inspiration of what I thought was good; I wanted to run class so nobody knew my personal or political stances. It only took me a couple of years to realize this ideal of mine wasn't possible. Various contexts bring out different sides of us. Even if we try to hold back who we are, sometimes that part of us leaks out unintended. Sometimes it spews out instead. I've come to understand everything I do as embodied; I can't cut off parts of me without risking a leak.
In disability studies, leaky bodies are both literally and metaphorically leaky. I have IBS a disability that is truly leaky. Diarrhea or bloody Colitis flare-ups threaten to leak through me if I try to hold it in. I find myself stuck to a toilet during the worst flare-ups, afraid of what will happen if my body leaks through my clothes and into the area I am in. I worry of disgusting people with my disability. I don't want my disability to metaphorically or physically leak into my school or work life, or heck, even my social life. Still, it does; that's what's disabling about it.
My experience with disability seems to leak into other areas unintended. Perhaps this semester, it was into my online asynchronous technical writing course. Or maybe I've always been this "woke" but no students would admit it to me. Whatever the case, I am looking for the leaks in this blog.
Week 1: Welcome to Writing in the Technical Professions
I start all of my online classes the same way. I'll have students review the executive summary of the "Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing." Students will also read the course syllabus, schedule, and Netiquette tips (2016) for online class participation. I'll also post videos for students who need visual and audio modes of communication.
The videos will include a Welcome to ~Course Name~ where I show them how to navigate the learning management system (or LMS-- I'm currently using Blackboard Ultra), A reading of the class syllabus and how to use the class schedule, and an introduction to course goals along with examples from the executive summary about how to succeed in the course. I'll have a Powerpoint for the week where they can see the content from videos according to their own time and needs.
Lastly, I have students do an introduction discussion board post (or DBP) where they answer some questions I pose for them and reply to one classmate. I also share an introduction with a picture so students feel more comfortable knowing what I look like.
What in these resources are political? Where does my disabled, "woke" body leak into the course content? None of these sources mention politics explicitly. If I review the executive summary, it shares skills students can develop to succeed in any class. Some skills include openness (defined as "the willingness to consider new ways of being and thinking in the world" in the executive summary) and flexibility (defined as "the ability to adapt to situations, expectations, or demands" in the summary). Perhaps these skills are not seen as applicable in all situations. Maybe the right-leaning student feels attacked for not being open to all types of education, lifestyles, or religious and political beliefs. Perhaps they don't like the idea of being seen as difficult if they are inflexible in accepting or working with others who don't agree with their perspective. Could something this ambiguous be offensive?
Next, I think about the netiquette tips. Tips suggest toning down language, watching your temper, and recognizing and respecting diversity. The section on diversity is probably the longest. It describes the classroom as "ethnically rich and multicultural" and instructs readers to "respect diversity and opinions different from yours, no matter where they come from," be "open to different points of view" as a sign of intelligence, and report issues of bigotry to the instructor. It clarifies that "profanity, and racist, sexist, ageist, and religious comments are unacceptable, no matter how innocent or 'funny' they may sound to you." Could something as simple as a stance against bullying be seen as "woke?" Does even just the mention of multicultural people make some students in this predominantly white institution in the Midwest feel repulsed? Does the limitation of religious discussion seem unfair to them politically? Am I no longer allowed to say everyone is welcome in my class, like Ms. Inama, the censored teacher in Idaho?
I think about my powerpoint and videos. Accessibility comes relatively early in my syllabus and syllabus powerpoint. I share my own experiences before encouraging students to seek accommodations if they need them. I share the new rules for excused absences, which include religion, school-sanctioned events, legal and military duties, bereavement, medical emergency, and pregnancy. Is this woke, too? I end the syllabus by sharing more free resources for students, like free counseling, writing services, the career center, and veteran services. Does sharing a service that one thinks doesn't apply to them too "woke?" Is the mere inclusion rather than exclusion offensive?
I breeze through the course goals and nothing seems to stand out. The only thing left to check is the DBP. In the prompt, I ask students to include their name (what they'd like to be called if it is different from their birth name) and if they speak other languages. Again, I wonder if just including those parts seem offensive as exclusion tends to be right-wing and inclusion is left-wing. I scroll down to my example. I share my research focuses, my interest in mental health and Christian advocacy, and online teaching as a way to teach safely while avoiding disease. I share my old work at Aldevron, which manufactures mRNA for vaccines. Might my allusions to Covid and vaccines be seen a left-wing, even 5 years after the onset of the Pandemic? My picture is one I used when I won a travel award; I'm wearing a tan collared shirt, heavy pink eye make-up, and have my brown and blue hair split with a middle part. Is any of this truly "woke" or is it part of the common conception of what "woke" looks like: blue hair, mental health awareness, and disability advocacy. Do I look too Cuban with my dark hair and eyes? Is my intermediate Spanish proficiency too high to be okay by white Republican standards? If anything marks stereotypical left, it's definitely the DBP for week 1 for me. Let's see what appears in week 2.
Week 2: AI & the Writing Process
I always start week two with teaching students that writing is a process, not a product. I end my classes with a portfolio of their work that they revised throughout the semester using both peer and instructor feedback. Week 2 includes the final portfolio prompt and rubric, an example portfolio, and instructions for how to write a process log while writing and revising their drafts. Since the widespread use of generative AI, I also decided to include my research-based perspective on AI use and writing and a mini-lesson on citing sources, including AI, to avoid plagiarism. For my new technical writing class, I decided to make 3 short texts on AI their required reading:
Each of these texts has a different perspective on AI. Perret shows why ChatGPT isn't really capable of doing what it claims to be useful for in the writing process. Perret instead encourages readers to engage with real experts, research, and people for feedback and instruction in writing. The article by Bernard Builds is eventually outed as the AI came up with the list of how to use it for technical writing... that means Bernard Builds did not write the article; it feels almost tricky if students get to the last paragraph and see the AI credit. The last article shows how AI fails to perform according to industry standards when writing instructions, which is my students' first large writing assignment for their portfolio. This shows reasons for them to not use AI when doing the assignment. As tech bros like Elon Musk and Trump fight for expanding AI, people with leftist ideas tend to be critical of AI for its impacts on the energy grid and water consumption. I share these perspectives with my students as well as an article I wrote about how emotions lead us to use AI. Perhaps my perspective on its own along with these texts show a more leftist ideology than I expected myself to show or leak during this week of class.
I don't see anything outright political in my prompt, rubric, and example again, so I move on to the DBP. This week focuses on a reflection on AI, how they used it in the past, and how they plan to use it for technical writing based on the texts they read. No lie, it felt like a lot of students only read the positive article by Bernard because it was the first text and some DBPs reflected nothing about hesitations or failures of AI in technical writing which the other 2 sources mention. I didn't post anything outright political in the comments here either. Most were about citing sources correctly and positive comments on how I liked their reflections, as some did indeed read all three texts. Still, I didn't think AI literacy and knowledge was considered political. It took some deep pondering to understand what might have been the trigger for this week's content.
Week 3: Ethics & Technical Writing
For this class, ethics is important and often not given enough attention. I decided to include ethics in the start of the course to help address that. Texts for the week include:
Katz's article "The Ethic of Expediency"
Libretexts' Technical Writing: An Open Educational Resource chapter 4: "Ethical Considerations in Technical Writing"
Technical Writing's chapter 10: "Ethics in Technical Writing" by Eleanor Sumpter-Latham
Saliba and Rotzinger's article "Figure plagiarism and manipulation, an under-recognised problem in academia"
Apparently, ethics can be too political. Katz's article shows how expediency might be falsely equated with goodness... then shows an example of what happens when expediency is considered good: a memo from Nazi Germany instructs Nazis on how to effectively stash and move dead bodies. While not an easy read, it definitely leaves an impression on what goodness truly is in technical communication. The Libretext chapter asks readers to consider justice and equity when thinking about ethics. It includes a "social responsibility" to have "inclusive and diverse" practices. The final two sources show what happens when images don't truly reflect the math, data, or research in order to influence readers. All these texts have parts that might seem left-wing, including specific vocabulary that while initially ethical, seems to leak into the political beliefs of the readers. Perhaps including a Nazi example in text is traumatizing... or I can't help but wonder if my student is a Holocaust denier. Are the words what set them off? Or is it the content itself? Do ethics make them feel forced to do things they don't believe in, like respecting audiences that might not align with their political views? Who knows?
My video lessons and Powerpoint for the week include ethical language, ethical data visualization, and ethics through linguistic landscape analyses. The DBP gives them an option to reflect on a time their values didn't align with someone else's and how the situation came about and ended. They can otherwise choose to do a linguistic landscape of somewhere on campus. I think only 4 of my 44 students this fall chose option 2. Most chose option 1 and I was surprised with how many chose to talk about religious beliefs. One was especially strange to me as they debated not being in their close friend's wedding party because the wedding was outdoors instead of inside a Catholic church with a church service during the wedding. Even with the odd ones out, I tried not to give poor feedback unless there was poor source connection to their reflection, which was required in the prompt. Still, I wonder if my responses to the religious reflections seemed anti-religious when I myself am Christian. My own example avoided this by discussing an issue in the workplace regarding what to do if students fight. Could the assignment on top of the text content throw off one student... was it perhaps not my own leaky body, but the leaky bodies of other students combined with my own that led to the week feeling too "woke?"
Conclusion
If I talk about every week after, I could turn this into an article, so I'll end it here. Just know after starting with ethics, we do indeed get to content like instructions, descriptions, technical reports, and memos. My whole class isn't on ethics, though I could definitely create a class on ethics in writing and research later on. That'd be fun.
As I finish this blog post, I get an email about a memo in Texas on having college instructors abide by Texas law that requires them to teach only two sexes, male and female. This could be a potential example in my class... yet if I do it does it only make me more "woke?" How much of my body and mind are allowed to leak into my technical writing class before they disgust my students so much that something is done to stifle me, whether that is complaints to my superiors or direct disrespect? As I think about what I include and exclude in my class, I wonder how to tow the line so all students feel included but also are taught about ethics, which cannot be denied in a time where truth and ethical treatment are being thrown out by the president and his right-wing party in the United States in 2025. All students belong in my class. Making them know that shouldn't be leaky, but alas, here I leak. Might my leaking encourage other students to leak, so the world becomes leaked on, leaving our liquid marks that we are here and we aren't going away. Go forth, readers. Leak good and leak unabashedly. Our work is embodied indeed.
Comments