As a metadata network, LWP strives to trace the migration of feminist pedagogical ideas through the circulation of metadata about students, curriculum, and course administration, where artifacts may no longer be circulating. LWP’s tracing activities reveal two things: (1) women pedagogues’ critical locations through crowd-sourcing and integrative data modeling; and (2) the measurements of field historians through various kinds of intellectual encounters. One goal of the LWP Project is to understand more about the nature, possibilities, and constraints of different encounters, given our assumptions that historical recovery can occur within complex expectations about, and relationships between, metadata. LWP understands most encounters to be ecological or taxonomical, either causing us to question the way artifacts get to our archives, or enabling us to complicate the canon of concepts and terms thought to dominate our historical study in Rhetoric and Composition (e.g., “current-traditionalism,” “advocacy,” “professional writing,” “technical writing,” “grammar study,” “writing for students from foreign lands,” etc.).

Both types of intellectual encounters (ecological and taxonomical) assume that information moves through researcher mindsets, where concentrations of activity about certain pedagogues, topics, and terms are dictated somewhat by attitudes towards what information is available and how that information should circulate. Thus, another goal for LWP is the development of a theory of interstitial metadata that bridges this divide between broader knowledge organization systems and specific disciplinary knowledge networks.