There is a piece missing from the composition discussions about voice and that is the knowledge which evolves from learning through a dynamic group experience. Voice is recognized by most scholars as having a social component, yet there is little research about voice in writing which has occurred in a social context that is purposefully designed to allow the participants to set their own parameters, ergo exercise their own voices. Through telling stories about voice and having participants choose a means to respond to those personal stories, this dissertation provides a methodology for the emergence of personal voice both physically and metaphorically. From the stories told and the responses to them, it became apparent that voice in writing operates in a much larger context than that of the word on the page. Acute to the emergence of personal voice are issues of vulnerability and personal safety. To hear each other's stories in a secure setting and be guaranteed a response creates a sense of comfort and a willingness to break barriers. Even though there is no universally accepted definition of voice, the term is used facilely and with intention by many people. Because of this it is possible to ask someone to tell a story about his or her personal experience with voice, without defining the word. These stories shed light on how the term is internalized and personally applied. Such storytelling allows a place for each person to be voiceful, whereas a strict or limiting definition of voice can rule some people out. As a pool, individual stories about voice form a field of possibilities. What is told as possible within a group then becomes the socially created parameter for voice. In this way, using the loose group framework presented in this dissertation permits fluidity as well as structure. While voice in writing is certainly framed by social contexts, it is at the same time, highly personal. Far from being at odds, as many scholars suggest, these two dimensions reinforce each other. They are mutually shaping and, therefore, neither can be considered without regard for the other.