Conference on College Composition and Communication Logo

Devising/Revising Student-Centered Pedagogy

Kevin DiPirro

Abstract:

Student-centered pedagogy can benefit from a perspective of devised theater that sees trust-building and responsibility-sharing as the bases of successful project-based work. This article summarizes various approaches from devised theater, a collaborative approach to theater-making, as well as performance theory and improvisation. It offers pedagogical insights from a case study of The Devised Theater Project, a class and set of student-created performances at Stanford University in 2008-9.

Full Text

Author:

Kevin DiPirro is a lecturer in Writing and Rhetoric at Stanford University where he teaches composition, performance, and playwriting. His plays have been performed in New York City, San Francisco, and Minneapolis. He is currently a Hewlett Foundation writer for American Theatre magazine.

 
Return to Table of Contents

#inhabitation

Jamie “Skye” Bianco

 
Abstract:

#inhabitation tracked the economic crisis through the foreclosure auction process, focusing on several abandoned houses once owned by women, who left their houses and belongings behind. #inhabitation is creative-critical, digital storytelling and tactical media, affectively composing these histories through remains, urban ruins, through the material rhetoric of these abandoned houses.

 

Full Text

Author:Jamie “Skye” Bianco is Assistant Professor of English and Director of DM@P, Digital Media at Pitt, at the University of Pittsburgh. She teaches and practices creative-critical and affective multimodal composition; collaborative DIY and maker-based pedagogies. Her work appears in FibreCulture, Women’s Studies Quarterly, and edited collections, including Debates in the Digital Humanities (Minnesota, 2012).

 

Return to Table of Contents

CCC Online Issue 1.1: January 2012

The Turn to Performance


photo by Mick Orlosky
used with permission
NOTE: The webtexts for this issue of CCC Online are currently unavailable. We are working to get them back online within the next few months.
Table of Contents
Bump Halbritter and Jenn Fishman
Daniel Anderson, Jackclyn Ngo, Sydney Stegall, and Kyle Stevens 

Mark McBeth, Ian Barnard, Aneil Rallin, Jonathan Alexander, and Andrea A. Lunsford

Keith Dorwick, Bob Mayberry, Paul M. Puccio, and Joona Smitherman Trapp 

Kevin DiPirro

Jim Henry

Jamie “Skye” Bianco

Jacqueline Rhodes and Jonathan Alexander

This Is What We Did In Our Class

 Daniel Anderson, Jackclyn Ngo, Sydney Stegall,

and Kyle Stevens

 

Abstract:

This piece uses screencast videos to discuss digital composing. Additional videos argue that performance brings new voices to scholarly conversations and can inform learning portfolios. Videos use the screen as a composing space through which theoretical issues and reflections on composing are performed to create a new mode of scholarship.

 

Full Text

 

Authors:

Daniel Anderson is Professor of English at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His interests include fostering creativity and engagement in education, digital poetics, and alternative forms of scholarship.

Jacklyn Ngo is a native of Charlotte, NC, and is an undergraduate student of Environmental Sciences and Mathematics at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She has particular interest in secondary education reform, interactive multimedia learning, and creative expression as a medium for interdisciplinary learning.

Sydney Stegall is a junior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is currently pursuing a degree in English, a minor in Art History, and a minor in Rhetoric, Composition, and Digital Literacy. She plans to attend graduate school to study rhetoric and composition.

Kyle Stevens is currently a junior at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill studying Chemistry and Mathematics.

Return to Table of Contents

Write for CCC

Contact the Editors

Matthew Davis, University of Massachusetts Boston
Kara Taczak, University of Central Florida
ccceditorialteam@gmail.com

Submission Guidelines

Scope

The editorial staff of College Composition and Communication (CCC) invites submission of research and scholarship in composition studies that supports scholars and instructors in reflecting on and improving their practices in the teaching of writing. The field of composition studies draws on research and theories from a broad range of humanistic disciplines:

  • English studies
  • Linguistics
  • Literacy studies
  • Rhetoric
  • Cultural studies
  • LGBTQIA+ studies
  • Gender studies
  • Critical theory
  • Education
  • Technology studies
  • Race studies
  • Communication
  • Philosophy of language
  • Anthropology
  • Sociology
  • And others

Articles submitted to CCC may draw from discussions in various fields, but the research and scholarship published in CCC is primarily focused on the practice and teaching of writing in higher education. Successful submissions will have clear arguments, be relevant to the work of writing scholars and teachers, and engage with recent scholarship in composition studies.

We welcome research on writing and the teaching of writing that will interest the broad CCC readership and recommend directing work focused on specific subfields (e.g., technical communication, writing program administration, writing center scholarship) to journals dedicated to those areas.

Readership

When writing for CCC, consider a diverse readership that includes not only teachers of college-level writing at various institutions but also scholars, administrators, undergraduate and graduate students, and legislators. You need not avoid difficult theories or complex discussions of research and pedagogy; rather, you should engage with the interests and perspectives of the various readers who are affected by these theories, pedagogies, and policies.

Genres

CCC’s primary genre is the peer-reviewed research article, but we publish several shorter genres, as outlined below. Please ensure that your submission fits the genre criteria before submitting.

Research Article

Research articles should generally follow the field’s conventions for the genre. However, we welcome variations of these conventions that serve the purpose of the article’s argument. Article submissions should be no more than 8,000 words long and should follow the current edition of the MLA Handbook. Further, articles should follow NCTE’s Statement on Gender and Language and equitable citation practices.

To submit an article, please register as an author at our online submission system, Editorial Manager (https://www.editorialmanager.com/cccj). After logging in, follow the instructions to upload your submission. You will receive an automatic email confirming receipt. Since articles are reviewed anonymously, please ensure your submission is anonymized—do not include your name on the title page, in the text, or in the works cited. For questions, contact the editors at ccceditorialteam@gmail.com.

If your article reports the results of empirical or observational research, you need to be attentive to the ethics and the validity of your research methods. Before submitting your work for consideration, please be aware that, if you use, quote, or otherwise reproduce unpublished writing by students or teachers or others, you should have any required clearance from your local IRB as well as required permission in writing from the writers to do so, even if you use their writing anonymously (if you have further questions about this, please email). Click here to read/download a copy of the CCC consent form needed to include previously unpublished work of others in your submission (especially student work). For material (e.g., figure, table, poem) that has been previously published, permission to reprint may be necessary.

The Profile

The CCC Profile offers a snapshot of a specific term, person, genre, object, practice, or event related to rhetoric and composition. It provides a concise and critical overview of its historical and contemporary significance in the discipline. The Profile should define the topic, trace its history, and explain its impact on composition today. While the structure is flexible, it should present an engaging narrative that piques readers’ curiosity. Ultimately, the Profile should be relevant for instructors in their teaching, administrators in their program work, and scholars in their research.

For instance, a Profile might take as its subject a genre—such as the podcast—and trace how it emerged as a genre, increased in popularity, and impacted the discipline (e.g., Pedagogue, Rhetoricity, or The Big Rhetorical Podcast). Or it might focus on an event—such as the Dartmouth Conference—highlighting not only the historical importance of it but also its significance in the contemporary moment. Or a Profile might focus on a term—such as remix—tracing how that concept has impacted the cultural and social practices of writing in the discipline and, thereby, its publications, conferences, classrooms, and the like. Whatever its topic, the Profile should be between 1,500 and 2,000 words long. We welcome images that can accompany Profiles, though they are not required.

If you’re interested in writing a Profile, please query the editors at ccceditorialteam@gmail.com. Include a brief 150-word proposal and a current, shortened CV with your email.

Research Brief

The CCC Research Brief makes disciplinary research accessible and useful for both researchers and practitioners in rhetoric and composition. Its goal is to create a concise resource—either written or visual—that synthesizes current ideas on a specific subtopic in a forward-looking, evidence-based manner. Unlike a traditional literature review, the Research Brief outlines what we know about the subtopic and explains the methods and methodologies that have shaped this knowledge, such as theoretical, empirical, narrative, ethnographic, pedagogical, historical, discourse analysis, or mixed methods approaches.

Additionally, it should suggest implications for future research, teaching, administration, and public engagement. A Research Brief should help readers feel more grounded in an unfamiliar area of the discipline while directing them to further resources and potential actions. In summary, it presents evidence-based ideas that encourage new actions and/or raise pressing questions. Research Briefs should be between 1,500 and 2,500 words long and may include graphics or visualizations. Each brief should (1) provide a synthesized overview of current research and key scholarly conversations, (2) address methods and methodologies in the subfield, and (3) pose questions and speculate on future research directions.

If you’re interested in writing a Research Brief, please query the editors at ccceditorialteam@gmail.com. Include a brief 150-word proposal and a current, shortened CV with your email.

Book Review Essay

A book review essay is a critical analysis that reads across three or more books looking for connections or overlaps between them. It orients the audience to key arguments, theories, people, and ideas as a way to gain insights and understandings about the books’ topics.

If you’re interested in writing a book review essay, please query the editors at ccceditorialteam@gmail.com. Include a brief 150-word proposal, a list of three to five books you intend to review, and a current, shortened CV with your email.

Interchanges

Responses to articles that raise important issues or different perspectives will be considered for publication in the Interchanges section, which is published intermittently. Responses usually run between 500 and 2,000 words (approximately two to eight double-spaced pages) and should be written in a tone respectful of the original writer and the profession. Responses to sets of related articles may also be submitted to or solicited by the editors for the Interchanges section.

Helpful Tips and Information

  • Please review CCC’s AI policy before submission.
  • Our average time from submission to first decision is seventy-five to ninety days. This timeframe relies on peer reviewers in the field agreeing to review and completing their reviews on time, after which we draft and send authors a decision letter via email.
  • The most common reasons for desk rejections are (1) the submission is not anonymized, (2) the submission’s word count is too high, and (3) the manuscript is not situated within the current conversation in the field (often identified by a lack of recent citations from CCC or from composition studies more broadly). Attending to these three matters with care can avoid delay in the peer-review process.
  • The overall acceptance rate for the journal is 10 to 15 percent. Manuscripts submitted for initial review have close to a 75 percent rejection rate (either by peer reviewers or as desk rejections), and around 25 percent receive a Revise and Resubmit decision from reviewers.
  • We are not currently operating with a backlog; at present, accepted submissions are typically published within the next two issues.

CCC Podcasts–Jacqueline Preston

Jacqueline Preston
A conversation with Jacqueline Preston, author of “Project(ing) Literacy: Writing to Assemble in a Postcomposition FYW Classroom.”  (8:45)

Jacqueline Preston is an assistant professor in the Department of Basic Composition at Utah Valley University. Her work has been published in Community Literacy Journal and College Composition and Communication. She is a contributor to the forthcoming collections, Class in Composition: Working Class and Pedagogy and Working Writing Programs: A Reference of Innovations, Issues, and Opportunities. Most recently, with Joshua C. Hilst, she has coauthored The Write Project: A Concise Rhetoric for the Writing Classroom.
 

 

Top Intellectual Property Development Annual Series

Since 2005, the NCTE-CCCC’s Intellectual Property Committee and the Intellectual Property (IP) Caucus have been sponsoring a wonderful annual resource, “Top Intellectual Property Developments” for each respective year. The 2008 Top Intellectual Property Developments have been just recently published and can be viewed here:

/cccc/committees/ip/2008developments

Links to the 2005, 2006, and 2007 Top Intellectual Property Developments are located on the main IP Committee Webpage:

/cccc/committees/ip

The top developments for 2008 were assembled and edited by Clancy Ratliff. Clancy has also edited the 2007 top developments, while John Logie, past-Chair of the IP Committee, began the first set of publications, and assembled and edited both the 2006 and 2005 top stories.

In her introduction to the 2008 articles covering top developments in IP for teachers of writing, Clancy states: “I hope that you, the readers, will find that the articles help to achieve our committee’s first charge, to keep the rhetoric and composition community informed about developments related to intellectual property that affect our work as teachers and scholars.”

Top Developments for 2008 were written by contributors Kim Dian Gainer, Radford University, Laurie Cubbison, Radford University, Clancy Ratliff, and Traci A. Zimmerman, James Madison University and covered such topic as the Google Book Settlement, the case of J. K. Rowling v. RDR Books, Open Access in 2008, and “The Plight of Orphan Works and the Possibility of Reform.”

For more information about the top developments annual collection, or how you can be a contributor, please contact Clancy Ratliff.

Intellectual Property Reports Main Page

Copyright

Copyright © 1998 - 2026 National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved in all media.

1111 W. Kenyon Road, Urbana, Illinois 61801-1096 Phone: 217-328-3870 or 877-369-6283

Looking for information? Browse our FAQs, tour our sitemap and store sitemap, or contact NCTE

Read our Privacy Policy Statement and Links Policy. Use of this site signifies your agreement to the Terms of Use