Author: ksuchor

Click here to view the individual articles in this issue at http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v39-3

Berthoff, Ann E. Rev. of Freire for the Classroom: A Sourcebook for Liberatory Teaching by Ira Shor. CCC 39.3 (1988): 359-360.

Bloom, Lynn Z. Rev. of Teaching Composition: Twelve Bibliographical Essays by Gary Tate. CCC 39.3 (1988): 361-362.

Schwartz, Helen J. Rev. of The Wordworthy Computer: Classroom and Research Applications in Language and Literature by Paula R. Feldman and Buford Norman. CCC 39.3 (1988): 362-363.

Johnstone, Anne. Rev. of The Journal Book by Toby Fulwiler. CCC 39.3 (1988): 363-365.

Fulkerson, Richard. Rev. of The Shape of Reason by John Gage. CCC 39.3 (1988): 365-366.

Olive, Barbara. Rev. of The Harper & Row Rhetoric: Writing as Thinking, Thinking as Writing by Wayne C. Booth and Marshall W. Gregory. CCC 39.3 (1988): 366-367.

Curtis, Marcia S. “Windows on Composing: Teaching Revision on Word Processors.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 337-344.

Sullivan, Patricia. “Desktop Publishing: A Powerful Tool for Advanced Composition Courses.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 344-347.

Clark, Irene Lurkis. “Preparing Future Composition Teachers in the Writing Center.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 347-350.

Walker,Nancy L. “Mr. V and ‘A Saturday Morning in the Republic of One.'” CCC 39.3 (1988): 350-353.

Hall, Chris. “Interacting with a Reader: Using the Strip Story to Develop Reciprocity.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 353-356.

Danis,M. Francine. “Catching the Drift: Keeping Peer-Response Groups on Track.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 356-358.

Larson, Richard L. “Selected Bibliography of Scholarship on Composition and Rhetoric, 1987.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 316-336.

Abstract:

This article is an annotated bibliography of recently published work in composition and rhetoric. When selecting essays and books for this list, the author tried to choose works that offered new approaches, theories, and ways of conceiving issues over items dealing with topics already well explored. The bibliography is organized under the following categories: rhetorical and epistemic theory, literary theory and composing, psychological and developmental studies, research processes, composing processes, “basic” writing, younger children’s writing, language studies, structures of texts, instructional advice/assignments, response to writing/tutoring/group work, assessment/evaluation, instructional trends: historical/recent, writing across the curriculum and in non-academic settings, and computers and writing.

No works cited.

Haswell, Richard H. “Dark Shadows: The Fate of Writers at the Bottom.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 303-315.

Abstract:

>The author, noting that when using holistic grading scales, evaluators agreed more on what constituted “bad” writing than what was “good writing,” compares student essays given low holistic scores to those that achieved high scores and professional non-academic essays. He finds that although remedial writers do not closely follow expected academic writing conventions, their writing, as opposed to the work of their higher-scoring peers, does have logical organizational patterns, complex syntax, and a grasp of metaphor that is more like that of professional writers. Based on this finding, the author argues that instructors should seek out these strengths of remedial writers as a basis to further develop their writing to fit academic conventions. In addition, the author challenges teachers of writing to go beyond assessing student writing to diagnosing it – to understand the numerous choices the writer makes, which might transform what are seen now as deficiencies into proficiencies and strengths. </p

Keywords:

ccc39.3 Writing Writers Essays Students Teachers Organization Holistic Paragraph Remedial BottomWriters Wit

Works Cited

Bartholomae, David. “The Study of Error.” CCC 31 (Oct. 1980): 253-69.

Basseches, Michael A. “Dialectical Thinking as a Metasystematic Form of Cognitive Organization.” Beyond Formal Operations: Late Adolescent and Adult Cognitive Development. Ed. Michael L. Commons, Francis A. Richards, and Cheryl Armon. New York: Praeger, 1983. 216-38.

Bizzell, Patricia. “Cognition, Convention, and Certainty: What We Need to Know about Writing.” Pre/Text 3 (Fall 1982): 213-44.

Bradford, Annette N. “Cognitive Immaturity and Remedial College Writers.” The Writer’s Mind: Writing as a Mode of Thinking. Ed. Janice N. Hays et al. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1983. 15-24.

Haswell, Richard H. Change in Undergraduate and Post-Graduate Writing Performance: Quantified Findings. ERIC, 1986. ED 269 780.

—. “The Organization of Impromptu Essays.” College Composition and Communication 37 (Dec. 1986): 402-15.

Hays, Janice N. “Teaching the Grammar of Discourse.” Reinventing the Rhetorical Tradition. Ed. Aviva Freedman and Ian Pringle. Conway, AK: L & S Books, 1980. 145-55.

Hoagland, Edward. Red Wolves and Black Bears. New York: Random House, 1976.

Hull, Glynda. “The Editing Process in Writing: A Performance Study of More Skilled and Less Skilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 21 (Feb. 1987): 8-29.

Inhelder, Barbel, and Jean Piaget. The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence: An Essay on the Construction of Formal Operational Structures. Trans. Anne Parsons and Stanley Milgram. New York: Basic Books, 1958.

Labouvie-Vief, Gisela. “Discontinuities in Development from Childhood to Adulthood: A Cognitive-Developmental View.” Review of Human Development. Ed. Tiffany M. Field et al. New York: Wiley, 1982. 447-55.

Lunsford, Andrea. “The Content of Basic Writers’ Essays.” CCC 31 (Oct. 1980): 278-90.

Murphy, J .M., and Carol Gilligan. “Moral Development in Late Adolescence and Adulthood: A Critique and Reconstruction of Kohlberg’s Theory.” Human Development 23 (1980): 77 -104.

Ohmann, Richard. “Use Definite, Specific, Concrete Language.” College English 41 (Dec. 1979): 390-97.

Rose, Mike. “Remedial Writing Courses: A Critique and a Proposal.” College English 45 (Feb. 1983): 109-28.

Shaughnessy, Mina P. Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the Teacher of Basic Writing. New York: Oxford UP, 1977.

Stotsky, Sandra. “On Learning to Write about Ideas.” CCC 37 (Oct. 1986): 276-93.

Rose, Mike. “Narrowing the Mind and Page: Remedial Writers and Cognitive Reductionism.” CCC 39.3 (1988): 267-302.

Abstract:

This article attacks what the author terms cognitive reductionism by looking at the theories, claims, and terms surrounding the discourse of remediation and pointing out problems in applying over-generalized cognitive and literacy theories to poor college writers. The author shows how uncritical acceptance of cognitive theories such as Witkin’s field independence-dependence theory, hemispheticity, Jean Piaget’s stages of cognitive development, and the orality-literacy divide leads to dangerous, ungrounded political and educational conclusions of remedial writers.

Keywords:

ccc39.3 Cognitive Literacy Theory Problems Field Studies Differences Language Cognition Tests Writing Style JPiaget Research Brains Remediation Students

Works Cited

Adkins, Arthur W.H. “Orality and Philosophy.” Robb 207-27.

Adler, Jonathan. “Abstraction is Uncooperative.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 14 (1984): 165-81.

Arndt, Stephen, and Dale E. Berger. “Cognitive Mode and Asymmetry in Cerebral Functioning.” Cortex 14 (1978): 78-86.

Bartholomae, David. “Inventing the University.” Rose, When a Writer Can’t Write 134-65.

Battig, William F. “Within-Individual Differences in ‘Cognitive’ Processes.” Information Processing and Cognition. Ed. Robert L. Solso. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1975. 195-228.

Beamon, Karen. “Coordination and Subordination Revisited: Syntactic Complexity in Spoken and Written Narrative Discourse.” Tannen, Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse 45-80.

Beaumont, J. Graham. “Methods for Studying Cerebral Hemispheric Function.” Functions of the Right Cerebral Hemisphere. Ed. A.W. Young. London: Academic Press, 1983. 113-46.

Beaumont, J. Graham, A.W. Young, and I.C. McManus. “Hemisphericity: A Critical Review.” Cognitive Neuropsychology 2 (1984): 191-212.

Benson, D. Frank, and Eran Zaidel, eds. The Dual Brain: Hemispheric Specialization in Humans. New York: Guilford, 1985.

Berthoff, Ann E. “Is Teaching Still Possible?” College English 46 (1984): 743-55.

Bizzell, Patricia. “Cognition, Convention, and Certainty: What We Need to Know about Writing.” Pre/Text 3 (1982): 213-44.

Bizzell, Patricia, and Bruce Herzberg. The Bedford Bibliography for Teachers of Writing. Boston: Bedford Books, 1987.

Bogen, Joseph. “The Dual Brain: Some Historical and Methodological Aspects.” Benson and Zaidel 27-43.

Bogen, Joseph, et al. “The Other Side of the Brain: The A/P Ratio.” Bulletin of Los Angeles Neurological Society 37 (1972): 49~6l.

Bradshaw, J.L., and N.C. Nettleton. “The Nature of Hemispheric Specialization in Man.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 4 (1981): 51-9l.

Brainerd, Charles J. “The Stage Question in Cognitive-Developmental Theory.” The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2 (1978): 173-8l.

Brown, Warren S., James T. Marsh, and Ronald E. Ponsford. “Hemispheric Differences in Event-Related Brain Potentials.” Benson and Zaidel 163-79.

Caplan, David. “On the Cerebral Localization of Linguistic Functions: Logical and Empirical Issues Surrounding Deficit Analysis and Functional Localization.” Brain and Language 14 (1981): 120-37.

Carey, Susan. Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge: MIT P, 1985.

Chafe, Wallace L. “Linguistic Differences Produced by Differences in Speaking and Writing.” Olson, Torrance, and Hildyard 105-23.

Clanchy, M.T. From Memory to Written Record: England 1066-1307. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1979.

Cole, Michael, and Barbara Means. Comparative Studies of How People Think. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1981.

Cressy, David. “The Environment for Literacy: Accomplishment and Context in Seventeenth Century England and New England.” Literacy in Historical Perspective. Ed. Daniel P. Resnick. Washington: Library of Congress, 1983.23-42.

Cronbach, Lee J. Essentials of Psychological Testing. New York: Harper and Row, 1960.

DeRenzi, Ennio. Disorders of Space Exploration and Cognition. London: Wiley, 1982.

Donaldson, Margaret. Children’s Minds. New York: Norton, 1979.

Donchin, Emanuel, Gregory McCarthy, and Marta Kutas. “Electroencephalographic Investigations of Hemispheric Specialization.” Language and Hemispheric Specialization in Man: Cerebral Event-Related Potentials. Ed. John E. Desmedt. Basel, NY: Karger, 1977. 212-42.

Dumas, Roland, and Arlene Morgan. “EEG Asymmetry as a Function of Occupation, Task and Task Difficulty.” Neuropsychologia 13 (1975): 214-28.

Efron, Robert. “The Central Auditory System and Issues Related to Hemispheric Specialization.” Assessment of Central Auditory Dysfunction: Foundations and Clinical Correlates. Ed. Marilyn L. Pinheiro and Frank E. Musiek. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1985. 143-54.

Ehrlichman, Howard, and Arthur Weinberger. “Lateral Eye Movements and Hemispheric Asymmetry: A Critical Review.” Psychological Bulletin 85 (1978): 1080-110l.

Elbow, Peter. “The Shifting Relationships Between Speech and Writing.” CCC 34 (1985): 283-303.

Enos, Richard Leo, and John Ackerman. “Letteraturizzazione and Hellenic Rhetoric: An Analysis for Research with Extensions.” Proceedings of 1984 Rhetoric Society of America Conference. Ed. Charles Kneupper, forthcoming.

Fillmore, Charles J. “On Fluency.” Individual Differences in Language Ability and Language Behavior. Ed. Charles). Fillmore, Daniel Kempler, and William S.Y. Wang. New York: Academic Press, 1979. 85-101.

Flavell, John H. Cognitive Development. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1977.

Fodor, Jerry A. The Modularity of Mind. Cambridge: MIT P, 1983.

Freedman, Sarah, et al. Research in Writing: Past, Present, and Future. Berkeley: Center for the Study of Writing, 1987.

Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

—. The Mind’s New Science. New York: Basic Books, 1985.

—. “What We Know (and Don’t Know) About the Two Halves of the Brain.” Journal of Aesthetic Education 12 (1978): 113-19.

Gardner, Howard, and Ellen Winner. “Artistry and Aphasia.” Acquired Aphasia. Ed. Martha Taylor Sarno. New York: Academic Press, 1981. 361-84.

Gelman, Rochelle. “Cognitive Development.” Ann. Rev. Psychol (1978); 297-332.

Gevins, A.S., et al. “EEG Patterns During ‘Cognitive’ Tasks.” Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 47 (1979); 704-10.

Gilman, Sandor. Difference and Pathology. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1985. Ginsburg, Herbert. “Poor Children, African Mathematics, and the Problem of Schooling.” Educational Research Quarterly 2 (1978); 26-44.

Glaser, Robert. “Education and Thinking: The Role of Knowledge.” American Psychologist 39 (1984); 93-104.

Goodenow, Jacqueline. “The Nature of Intelligent Behavior: Questions Raised by Cross Cultural Studies.” The Nature of Intelligence. Ed. Lauren B. Resnick. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1976. 168-88.

Goody, Jack. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. London: Cambridge UP, 1977.

Gould, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: Norton, 1981.

Graff, Harvey. The Literacy Myth. New York: Academic Press, 1979.

—. “Reflections on the History of Literacy: Overview, Critique, and Proposals.” Humanities and Society 4 (1981): 303-33.

Gruber, Howard E., and). Jacques Voneche, eds. The Essential Piaget. New York: Basic Books, 1977.

Halliday, M.A.K. “Differences Between Spoken and Written Language.” Communication through Reading. Vol. 2. Ed. Glenda Page, John Elkins, and Barrie O’Connor. Adelaide, SA: Australian Reading Association, 1979. 37-52.

Havelock, Eric. The Muse Learns to Write. Cambridge; Harvard UP, 1986.

—. Preface to Plato. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1963.

Harre, Rom, and Roger Lamb. The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychology. Cambridge: MIT P, 1983.

Heath, Shirley Brice. “Protean Shapes in Literacy Events: Ever-Shifting Oral and Literate Traditions.” Spoken and Written Language. Ed. Deborah Tannen. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1982. 91-117.

—. Ways With Words. London: Cambridge UP, 1983.

Hillyard, Steve A., and David L. Woods. “Electrophysiological Analysis of Human Brain Function.” Handbook of Behavioral Neurobiology. Vol. 2. Ed. Michael S. Gazzaniga. New York: Plenum, 1979. 343-78.

Hudson, R.A. Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.

Hull, Glynda. “The Editing Process in Writing; A Performance Study of Experts and Novices.” Diss. U of Pittsburgh, 1983.

Hunt, Earl. “On the Nature of Intelligence.” Science 219 (1983): 141-46. Hunter, Carman Sc. John, and David Harmon. Adult Illiteracy in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985.

Inhelder, Barbel, and Jean Piaget. The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence. Trans. Anne Parsons and Stanley Milgram. New York: Basic Books, 1958.

Jensen, George H. “The Reification of the Basic Writer.” Journal of Basic Writing 5 (1986): 52-64.

Kamin, Leon J. The Science and Politics of I.Q. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1974.

Kuhn, Deanna, Victoria Ho, and Catherine Adams. “Formal Reasoning Among Pre- and Late Adolescents.” Child Development 50 (1979): 1128-35.

Kurtz, Richard M. “A Conceptual Investigation of Witkin’s Notion of Perceptual Style.” Mind 78 (1969): 522-33.

Latour, Bruno, and Steve Woolgar. Laboratory Life. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1979.

Lave, Jean. “Cognitive Consequences of Traditional Apprenticeship Training in West Africa.” Anthropology and Education Quarterly 8 (1977): 177-80.

LeDoux, Joseph E. “Cerebral Asymmetry and the Integrated Function of the Brain.” Functions of the Right Cerebral Hemisphere. Ed. Andrew W. Young. London: Academic Press, 1983. 203-16.

Linn, Marcia C., and Patrick Kyllonen. “The Field Dependence-Independence Construct: Some, One, or None.” Journal of Educational Psychology 73 (1981): 261-73.

Lockridge, Kenneth. Literacy in Colonial New England. New York: Norton, 1974.

Margolis, Joseph. “The Emergence of Philosophy.” Robb 229-43.

Marrou, H.I. A History of Education in Antiquity. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P, 1982.

McCormick, Kathleen. The Cultural Imperatives Underlying Cognitive Acts. Berkeley: Center for The Study of Writing, 1986.

McKenna, Frank P. “Field Dependence and Personality: A Re-examination.” Social Behavior and Personality 11 (983): 51-55.

Messick, Samuel. “Personality Consistencies in Cognition and Creativity.” Individuality in Learning. Ed. Samuel Messick and Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976. 4-22.

Ogbu, John U. Minority Education and Caste. New York: Academic Press, 1978.

Olson, David R., Nancy Torrance, and Angela Hildyard, eds. Literacy, Language, and Learning. New York: Cambridge UP, 1981.

Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen, 1982.

Ornstein, Robert E., and David Galin. “Psychological Studies of Consciousness.” Symposium on Consciousness. Ed. Philip R. Lee et al. New York: Viking, 1976. 53-66.

Oxenham, John. Literacy: Writing, Reading, and Social Organisation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1980.

Perkins, D.N. “General Cognitive Skills: Why Not?” Thinking and Learning Skills. Ed. Susan F. Chipman, Judith W. Segal, and Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1985. 339-63.

Piaget, Jean. “Intellectual Evolution from Adolescence to Adulthood.” Human Development 15 (1972): 1-12.

Polanyi, Livia. Telling the American Story: A Structural and Cultural Analysis of Conversational Storytelling. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1985.

Robb, Kevin, ed. Language and Thought in Early Greek Philosophy. LaSalle, IL: Monist Library of Philosophy, 1983.

Rogoff, Barbara. Everyday Cognition. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1984.

Rose, Mike. “Complexity, Rigor, Evolving Method, and the Puzzle of Writer’s Block: Thoughts on Composing Process Research.” Rose, When a Writer Can’t Write 227-60.

—, ed. When a Writer Can’t Write: Studies in Writer’s Block and Other Composing Process Problems. New York: Guilford, 1985.

Rugg, Michael D. “Electrophysiological Studies.” Divided Visual Field Studies of Cerebral Organisation. Ed. J. Graham Beaumont. New York: Academic Press, 1982. 129-46.

Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne B.K. Scollon. “Cooking It Up and Boiling It Down: Abstracts in Athabascan Children’s Story Retellings.” Tannen, Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse 173-97.

Shaughnessy, Mina. Errors and Expectations. New York: Oxford UP, 1977. Siegler, Roberr S. “Children’s Thinking: The Search For Limits.” The Function of Language and Cognition. Ed. G.J. Whitehurst and Barry J. Zimmerman. New York: Academic Press, 1979. 83-113.

Sperry, Roger W. “Consciousness, Personal Identity, and the Divided Brain.” Benson and Zaidel 11-26.

Tannen, Deborah, ed. Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1984.

—. “A Comparative Analysis of Oral Narrative Strategies: Athenian Greek and American English.” The Pear Stories. Ed. Wallace Chafe. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1980. 51-87.

—. “Relative Focus on Involvement in Oral and Written Discourse.” Olson, Torrance, and Hildyard 124-47.

TenHouten, Warren D. “Social Dominance and Cerebral Hemisphericity: Discriminating Race, Socioeconomic Status, and Sex Groups by Performance on Two Lateralized Tests.” Intern J. Neuroscience 10 (1980): 223-32.

Toulmin, Stephen. “Epistemology and Developmental Psychology.” Developmental Plasticity. Ed. Eugene S. Gollin. New York: Academic Press, 1981. 253-67.

Tulkin, S.R., and M.J. Konner. “Alternative Conceptions of Intellectual Functioning.” Human Development 16 (1973): 33-52.

Valenstein, Elliot S. Great and Desperate Cures. New York: Basic Books, 1986.

Vernon, Philip. “The Distinctiveness of Field Independence'” journal of Personality 40 (1972): 366-91.

Vygotsky, L.S. Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1978.

Wachtel, Paul L. “Field Dependence and Psychological Differentiation: Reexamination'” Perceptual and Motor Skills 35 (1972): 174-89.

Whitaker, Harry A., and George A. Ojemann. “Lateralization of Higher Cortical Functions: A Critique.” Evolution and Lateralization of the Brain. Ed. Stuart Dimond and David Blizard. New York: New York Academy of Science, 1977. 459-73.

Williams, James Dale. “Coherence and Cognitive Style.” Diss. U of Southern California, 1983.

Witkin, Herman A., “Psychological Differentiation and Forms of Pathology.” journal of Abnormal Psychology 70 (1965): 317-36.

Witkin, Herman A., et al. “Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications.” Review of Educational Research 47 (1977): 1-64.

Wittrock, Merlin. “Education and the Cognitive Processes of the Brain.” Education and The Brain. Ed. Jeanne S. Chall and Allen S. Mirsky. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1978.61-102.

Young, Andrew W. “Methodological and Theoretical Bases of Visual Hemifield Studies.” Divided Visual Field Studies of Cerebral Organisation. Ed. J. Graham Beaumont. New York: Academic Press, 1982. 11-27.

Click here to view the individual articles in this issue at http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v39-1

Schuster, Charles I. Rev. of The Structure of Written Communication: Studies in Reciprocity between Writers and Readers by Martin Nystrand pp. 89-91.

Stotsky, Sandra. Rev. of The Dynamics of Language Learning: Research in Reading and English by James R. Squire pp. 91-93.

Kneupper, Charles. Rev. of Actual Minds, Possible World by Jerome Bruner pp. 93-95.

Clark, Beverly Lyon. Rev. of Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications by Anne Ruggles Gere pp. 95-96.

Sudol, Ronald A. Rev. of Composition and the Academy: A Study of Writing Program Administration by Carol P. Hartzog pp. 97-98.

Sides, Charles H. Rev. of How to Teach Technical Editing by David K. Farkas pp. 98-99.

Clifford, John. Rev. of Write to Learn by Donald M. Murray pp. 99-101.

Weltzien, O. Alan. Rev. of Generating Prose: Relations, Patterns, Structures by Willis L. Pitkin, Jr. pp. 101-102.

Brent, Harry. Rev. of Literature and the Writing Process by Elizabeth McMahan, Susan Day, and Robert Funk pp. 102-103.

Schwartz, Helen J. “Writing with the Carbon Copy Audience in Mind.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 63-65.

McLeod, Susan H., and Laura Emery. “When Faculty Write: A Workshop for Colleagues.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 65-67.

Devet, Bonnie. “Stressing Figures of Speech in Freshman Composition.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 67-69.

Raymond, Richard C. “Reading and Writing on the ‘Nuclear Predicament.'” CCC 39.1 (1988): 69-74.

Madigan, Chris. “Applying Donald Murray’s ‘Responsive Teaching.'” CCC 39.1 (1988): 74-77.

Sommers, Jeffrey. “Behind the Paper: Using the Student-Teacher Memo.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 77-80.

Reynolds, Mark. “Make Free Writing More Productive.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 81-82.

Gordon, Helen H. “Clustering: Generating Ideas for Original Sentences.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 83-84.

Haviland, Carol Peterson, and Adele Pittendrigh. “Writing Discovery Journals: Helping Students Take Charge.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 84-85.

Veglahn, Nancy J. “Searching: A Better Way to Teach Technical Writing.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 85-87. </ph2

Swaim, Kathleen M. “Making a Virtue of Necessity.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 87-88.

Chaplin, Miriam T. “Issues, Perspectives and Possibilities.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 52-62.

Abstract:

This, a revision of the author’s 1987 CCCC Chair’s address, discusses how larger and complex social and economic problems are affecting the field of composition. The economic strain of recession has led students, who are increasingly independent and non-traditional, to demand serious, real-world applicable writing courses. Concerns about recruiting and retaining students in an era of dwindling enrollments has prompted national reports on the status of higher education, which have placed university curriculum, pedagogy, and teacher training under scrutiny. The push for accountability has led to the creation of objective, standardized tests to measure student progress, which many in composition argue do not effectively judge student writing development. The author argues that composition needs to change in various ways to accommodate and combat these larger social and political movements affecting the university, including expanding the types of writing taught, recognizing the diversity of student experiences in a given class, insisting on relevant assignments, not merely ones that fulfill a standard requirement, and opening up connections between the university and secondary schools.

Keywords:

ccc39.1 ChairsAddress Students Composition Teachers Education HigherEducation Writing Testing Experience Institutions Language Diversity Faculty

Works Cited

Association of American Colleges. Integrity in the College Curriculum: A Report to the Academic Community. 1985.

Britton, James. Language and Learning. Baltimore: Penguin, 1972.

Buber, Martin. Between Man and Man. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1947.

Kelly, George. “Man’s Construction of His Alternatives.” Clinical Psychology and Personality: The Selected Papers of George Kelly. Ed. Brandon Maher. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1969.

Odell, Lee. “A Maturing Discipline.” Chair’s Address. CCCC Convention. New Orleans, 13 March 1986.

Tuman, Myron C. “Class, Codes, and Composition: Basil Bernstein and the Critique of Pedagogy.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 42-51.

Abstract:

The author argues that composition scholars who are critiquing the process movement and raising questions about the connections between language, class, and academic success would be wise to consider the later essays of educational sociologist Byron Bernstein. Bernstein’s essays show that the freedom students are given in student-centered, process-oriented composition classrooms favor middle and upper-class students who possess cultural capital – the educational and social preparation needed to succeed in an environment without much explicit direction. Educational reform movements that don’t address the wider power and class structure of society do not help disadvantaged students succeed, and composition teachers need to reflect on how their pedagogical strategies may help and hurt all the students in their classes. The author argues that some pedagogical practices deemed too traditional and reactionary might better serve students from lower-income or disadvantaged homes.

Keywords:

ccc39.1 Writing BBernstein Curriculum Students Classrooms Pedagogy Process School Children Work Parents Family Education World Communication Power Critique Society LFaigley

Works Cited

Bartholomae, David. “Inventing the University.” When a Writer Can’t Write. Ed. Mike Rose. New York: Guilford, 1985. 134-65.

Bernstein, Basil. “Aspects of the Relations Between Education and Production.” Class, Codes and Control Vol. 3. 174-200.

—. “Class and Pedagogies: Visible and Invisible.” Class, Codes and Control Vol. 3. 116- 56.

—. Class, Codes and Control: Towards a Theory of Educational Transmissions. Vol. 3. 2nd ed. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977.

—. “Codes, Modalities, and the Process of Cultural Reproduction: A Model.” Language in Society 10 (1981): 327-63.

—. Introduction. Class, Codes and Control Vol. 3. 1-33.

—. “Language and Social Class.” Class, Codes and Control: Theoretical Studies Towards a Sociology of Language. 2nd ed. New York: Shocken, 1974. 61-67.

—. “The Role of Speech in the Development and Transmission of Culture.” Perspectives on Learning. Ed. C. L. Klept and W. A. Hohman. New York: Mental Material Center, 1967. 15-45.

Bizzell, Patricia. “College Composition: Initiation into the Academic Discourse Community.” Curriculum Inquiry 12 (1982): 191-207.

Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Economics of Linguistic Exchanges.” Social Science Information 16 (1977): 645-68.

Brannon, Lil, and C. H. Knoblauch. “On Students’ Rights to Their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response.” CCC 33 (1982): 157-66.

Chomsky, Noam. Language and Responsibility. New York: Pantheon, 1979.

Faigley, Lester. “Competing Theories of Process: A Critique and a Proposal.” College English 48 (1986): 527-42.

Giroux, Henry A. Theory and Resistance in Education: A Pedagogy for the Opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin & Garvey, 1983.

Gramsci, Antonio. Prison Notebook. Trans. Quentin Hoare and Geoffrey Smith. New York: International, 1971.

Heath, Shirley Brice. Ways with Words. New York: Cambridge UP, 1983.

—. “What No Bedtime Story Means: Narrative Skills at Home and School.” Language in Society 11 (1982): 49-76.

Lasch, Christopher. Haven in a Heartless World. New York: Basic, 1977.

Scollon, Ron, and Suzanne B. K. Scollon. “Cooking It Up and Boiling It Down: Abtrabaskan Children’s Story Retellings.” Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse. Ed. Deborah Tannen. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 17.3-97.

Brooke, Robert. “Modeling a Writer’s Identity: Reading and Imitation in the Writing Classroom.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 23-41.

Abstract:

This article uses student writing from a semester-long freshman reading and composition course and theoretical understandings of identity construction to argue for a new way of understanding the connection between reading, imitation, and writing. Students, the author argues, form their identity as a writer through imitation of specific, individual authors that they admire and respect, not through dry imitation exercises that focus on generic forms or patterns. The author goes on to argue that composition courses should be primarily concerned with developing writer identities, and the process of forming these identities is complex, drawing from the attitudes towards writing that a teacher models, students’ past histories and experiences, their stance towards reading and writing, and their interpretation of individual authors’ styles.

Keywords:

ccc39.1 Identity Students Writing Courses Experience Reading Imitation Models Writers

Works Cited

Applebee, Arthur. Tradition and Reform in the Teaching of English. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1974.

Aristotle. Rhetoric. Trans. W. R. Roberts. New York: Modern Library, 1954.

Berthoff, Ann. Forming/Thinking/Writing. Rochelle Park, NJ: Hayden, 1978.

Calkins, Lucy. Lessons from a Child. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1983.

Comley, Nancy, and Robert Scholes. “Literature, Composition, and the Structure of English.” Horner 96-109.

Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers. New York: Oxford UP, 1973.

Erikson, Erik. Childhood and Society. New York: Norton, 1950.

—. Identity, Youth and Crisis. New York: Norton, 1968.

Goffman, Erving. Asylums. New York: Anchor, 1961.

—. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoil Identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

Graves, Donald. A Researcher Learns to Write. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1984.

Heath, Shirley Brice. “Ethnography in Education: Toward Defining the Essentials.” Ethnography and Education: Children in and out of School. Ed. P. Gilmore and A. Glatthorn. Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1982. 33-55.

—. “Ethnography and Education.” Seminar given at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, March 1986.

—. Ways with Words. New York: Cambridge UP, 1983.

Holland, Norman. 5 Readers Reading. New Haven: Yale UP, 1975.

—. The I. New Haven: Yale UP, 1985.

—. “UNITY IDENTITY TEXT SELF.” PMLA 90 (1975): 813-22. Rpt. in Reader Response Criticism. Ed. Jane Tompkins. Baltimore: John Hopkins, 1980. 118-33.

Horner, Winifred, ed. Composition and Literature: Bridging the Gap. Chicago: Chicago UP, 1983.

Kantor, Ken. “Classroom Contexts and the Development of Writing Intentions.”‘ New Directions in Composition Research. Ed. Richard Beach and Lillian Bridwell. New York: Guilford, 1984. 72-94.

Kantor, Ken, Dan Kirby, and Judith Goetz. “Research in Context: Ethnographic Studies in English Education.” Research in the Teaching of English 15 (1981): 293-309.

Kennedy, George. Classical Rhetoric and its Christian and Secular Tradition from Ancient to Modern Times, Chapel Hill: North Carolina UP, 1980.

Knoblauch, C. H., and Lil Brannon. Rhetorical Traditions and the Teaching of Writing. Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook, 1984.

Laing, R. D. The Divided Self. London: Tavistock, 1960.

—. Self and Others, 2nd ed. New York: Penguin, 1969.

—. The Voice of Experience. New York: Pantheon, 1982.

Laurence, Margaret. A Bird in the House. Toronto: Seal, 1978.

Miller, J. Hillis. “Composition and Decomposition: Deconstruction and the Teaching of Writing.” Horner 38-56.

Plato. “Gorgias.” Trans. W. D. Woodhead. The Collected Dialogues of Plato. Ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Princeton: Bollington, 1961. 229-307.

Reither, James. “Writing and Knowing: Toward Redefining the Writing Process.” College English 47 (1985): 620-28.

Rose, Mike. “The Language of Exclusion.” College English 47 (1985): 341-59.

Young, Richard, Alton Becker, and Kenneth Pike. Rhetoric: Discovery and Change, New York: Harcourt, 1970.

Chase, Geoffrey. “Accommodation, Resistance and the Politics of Student Writing.” CCC 39.1 (1988): 13-22.

Abstract:

This article uses case studies of extended writing projects of three college seniors to show how students practice what Giroux terms accommodation, opposition, and resistance strategies when they are asked to adopt established academic discourse conventions in their writing. Through analyzing the students’ writing, the author argues that when instructors teach different discourse conventions, they need to allow students to both problematize the conventions themselves and understand the conventions within a greater social and historical context. This means broadening what teachers deem as “good” or “correct” writing and giving students the opportunity to compose purposeful texts that work towards a larger social goal instead of merely fulfilling an academic assignment.

Keywords:

ccc39.1 Conventions Project Students Discourse Writing Resistance Audiece History Discourse Communities HGiroux Forms Accommodation Community

Works Cited

Batsleer, Janet, et al. Rewriting English: Cultural Politics of Gender and Class. London: Methuen, 1985.

Bizzel1, Patricia. “College Composition: Initiation into the Academic Discourse Community.” Curriculum Inquiry 12 (1982): 191-207.

Bourdieu, Pierre, and Jean-Claude Passeron. Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. Trans. Richard Nice. London: Sage, 1977.

Faigley, Lester, and Kristine Hansen. “Learning to Write in the Social Sciences.” CCC 36 (1985): 140-49.

Freire, Paulo. The Politics of Education. Trans. Donaldo Macedo. South Hadley, MA: Bergin Garvey, 1985.

Giroux, Henry A. Theory and Resistance in Education: A Pedagogy for the Opposition. South Hadley, MA: Bergin Garvey, 1983.

LeSueur, Meridel. The Girl. Minneapolis: West End, 1978.

Lusted, David. “Why Pedagogy?” Screen 27 (1986).

CCCC is seeking the next editor of College Composition and Communication. The term of current editor Malea Powell will end in December 2024. Interested persons should send a letter of application to be received no later than Monday, February 13, 2023 (the deadline has been extended).

Letters should be accompanied by (1) a CV, noting any editorial experience, (2) one published writing sample (article or chapter), and (3) a statement of vision, to include any suggestions for changing the journal as well as features of the journal to be continued. Applicants are urged to consult with administrators on the question of time, resources, and other services that may be required. NCTE staff members are available to provide advice and assistance to all potential applicants in approaching administrators about institutional support and in explaining NCTE’s support for editors.

Finalists will be interviewed virtually during the winter/spring of 2023. The applicant appointed by the CCCC Executive Committee in spring 2023 will effect a transition in 2023–24, preparing for their first issue in February 2025. The appointment term is five years.

Applications should be submitted via email in PDF form to jsitar@ncte.org; please include “CCC Editor Application” in the subject line by Monday, February 13, 2023. Direct queries to Jim Sitar, NCTE journals managing editor, at the email address above.

 

CCC homepage

Subscribe to CCC
Purchase a print copy of this issue

What is CCCC?

The Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) supports and promotes the teaching and study of college composition and communication. CCCC is one of four conferences of the National Council of Teachers of English, which promotes access, power, agency, and affiliation for all invested in literacy, pre-K through graduate school.¹

Organizational Structure of CCCC

CCCC is governed by its Constitution and Bylaws. It is through the groups and roles specified in these documents that the work of the organization takes place. Leadership of the organization is charged to the CCCC Executive Committee (EC). The EC consists of 25 voting members (who are themselves elected by CCCC members) and five ex officio members who sit on the EC by virtue of their offices. These include, for instance, the editor of College Composition and Communication, CCCC’s journal, and the chair of the Two-Year College English Association (an NCTE association and close ally of CCCC). These ex officio members provide necessary information about the operations of the organization to the larger leadership body.

The CCCC EC is led by six officers (included in the count above): five elected and one who sits on the Officers’ Committee by virtue of their office. These officers include the Chair, Associate Chair, Assistant Chair, Past Chair, Secretary, and the Executive Secretary-Treasurer (non-elected), who form an Officers’ Committee as specified by the Constitution. Along with the EC, the officers have responsibility for policymaking, fiduciary matters, and organizational decision-making.

Also charged with undertaking projects is a series of Special Committees. These are appointed by the EC. They have a set of discrete tasks around a common interest defined by the Executive Committee to achieve purposes associated with the organization (for example, updating or revising a position statement). Organizationally, the other entities included in the structure of CCCC are membership-driven entities such as Special Interest Groups and Standing Groups, which emerge from the body of the organization. These groups are defined on this webpage and can request formal status within the organization in order to pursue goals, projects, or tasks around an area of common interest.

Organizational Structures within CCCC

Committees
Article IV of the CCCC Constitution names four kinds of committees within CCCC: the Executive Committee, Nominating Committee, Officers’ Committee, and Special Committees. The first three committees (Executive, Nominating, and Officers’) consist of elected and ex-officio members, so are necessarily limited in membership. The fourth, Special Committees, covers a range of topics and has more open membership.

• Executive Committee: comprised of 20 elected plus a number of ex-officio members, the EC is CCCC’s policymaking body.
• Nominating Committee: comprised of seven elected members, the NC identifies and encourages a diverse group of potential candidates to run for leadership positions within the organization.
• Officers’ Committee: the officers of the EC make up the OC, which is charged with carrying out the business of the EC.
• Special Committees: At any given time, CCCC will have a number of special committees, each appointed by the CCCC Chair.  While certain committees are ongoing because their charge renews itself each year (e.g., Newcomers’ Orientation Committee and Awards Committees), most are chartered for three years and have specific deliverables. (The EC may renew the charter if provided with evidence that the organization would benefit from doing so.) A list of current Special Committees, along with information on how to join a committee, can be found on the CCCC Committee webpage.

Task Forces
Task forces are convened, charged, and appointed by the CCCC Executive Committee with the Officers’ Committee taking responsibility for charging the group. A Task Force tends to have a short activity span (typically no more than one year) around a very focused goal or outcome.

Member Groups: Special Interest Groups and Standing Groups
Committee membership is relatively limited because committees have specific and focused charges that are defined by the Executive Committee via the Chair. CCCC members who seek to define more ongoing work that is driven by member interests can participate in Member Groups of two types: Special Interest Groups (SIGs) or Standing Groups (SGs).

Currently, the more than fifty Special Interest Groups (SIGs) meet at the CCCC Annual Convention in the spring. They are relatively informal and provide an opportunity for people with common professional interests to meet and talk. Longstanding SIGs can apply to become a Standing Group, resulting in a more formal relationship with CCCC. While SIGs are not accountable to the organization with specific deliverables, Standing Groups are required to submit an annual report of activities and membership.

Who Does What in the Groups?

• Committees are convened by the CCCC Executive Committee, with charges determined by the EC or Officers’ Committee. All committee members (including the chair) are named/appointed rather than elected. The exceptions to this description are the Nominating Committee, the Officers’ Committee, and the Executive Committee.
• Task Forces are convened by the Executive Committee, with charges determined by the EC or Officers’ Committee. The chair is named or appointed rather than elected, as is the membership.
• Standing Groups are membership-driven groups focused around a common interest. They may start as SIGs and apply for Standing Group status. Chairs or co-chairs are elected from the membership rather than appointed. They have organizational status as an ongoing group, presuming they provide necessary annual updates to the CCCC leadership and abide by their bylaws.
• Special Interest Groups (SIGs) are groups assembled by members with a common interest that meet annually at the Convention. SIGs can apply for Standing Group status–recognition by the organization for longstanding activity.

How do I get involved?

• Committees: Because committee membership is named by the Officers/EC, members interested in committee involvement should contact the CCCC liaison and/or respond to the biennial survey circulated to members, which seeks to solicit interest.
• Task Forces: If there is an area of special expertise that a member wants to contribute to the organization, s/he can contact the Officers’ Committee to indicate a willingness to serve on a committee or task force should a task/goal falling under that member’s area of specialization be necessary.
• Standing Groups: Standing Groups are open to all members. Any member is invited to attend the standing group meeting at the annual convention.
• Special Interest Groups: SIGs are open to all members. Any member is invited to attend the special interest group meeting at the annual convention. SIGs and Standing Groups determine their own leadership opportunities and can be great ways to connect to other leadership positions within CCCC.

Statements

• Position Statements: CCCC Position Statements—formal statements approved by the CCCC Executive Committee—have a long history in the organization, with Students’ Right to Their Own Language dating back to 1974. Position statements cover a range of ethical and professional issues. More detailed information can be found at the following sites:
  • /cccc/resources/positions/creation
  • /cccc/resources/positions/guidelines
• Resolutions: Members of CCCC are encouraged to propose and/or support resolutions in order to “facilitate our collective efforts” on issues “that bear on the teaching of writing and communication.” While some resolutions are intended to make a statement, others are meant to spur action. The Resolutions Committee compiles resolutions and then puts them to a vote by the membership at the business meeting on Saturday morning at CCCC.

¹The other three conferences are the English Language Arts Teacher Educators (ELATE), Conference on English Leadership (CEL), and Literacies and Languages for All (LLA). NCTE also has affiliates (NCTE regional affiliates and TYCA regional affiliates) and assemblies.

Aim of the CCCC Studies in Writing & Rhetoric Series

The aim of the CCCC Studies in Writing & Rhetoric Series is to influence how we think about language in action and especially how writing gets taught at the college level. The methods of studies vary from the critical to historical to linguistic to ethnographic, and their authors draw on work in various fields that inform composition—including rhetoric, communication, education, discourse analysis, psychology, cultural studies, and literature. Their focuses are similarly diverse—ranging from individual writers and teachers, to work on classrooms and communities and curricula, to analyses of the social, political, and material contexts of writing and its teaching. Still, all SWR volumes try in some way to inform the practice of writing teachers, students, or administrators. Their approach is synthetic, their style concise and pointed. Complete manuscripts run from 40,000–50,000 words, or about 150–200 pages. Authors should imagine their work in the hands of writing teachers and all who are interested in how we make our ways with language.

SWR was one of the first scholarly book series to focus primarily on the teaching of writing. It was established in 1980 by the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) in order to promote research in the emerging field of writing studies. As our field has grown, the research and scholarship sponsored by SWR has continued to articulate the commitment of CCCC to supporting the work of writing teachers as reflective practitioners and intellectuals. Click here for a list of current books in the SWR series.

New Editor and Publisher of SWR

On July 1, 2012, Professor Victor Villanueva (Auburn University) will become the next SWR series editor. He and the current series editor, Joseph Harris, are working closely together to ensure a seamless transition. The series will continue to seek out the very best work in writing studies.

Submissions

We are eager to identify influential work in writing and rhetoric as it emerges. We thus ask authors to send us project proposals that clearly situate their work in the field and show how they aim to redirect our ongoing conversations about writing and its teaching. Proposals should include an overview of the project, a brief annotated table of contents, and a sample chapter. They should not exceed 10,000 words.

To submit a proposal, please visit www.editorialmanager.com/nctebp.
Good luck!

 

Problems or questions? Please email Victor Villanueva, SWR Editor, at victorv [at] auburn [dot] edu

 

SWR Editorial Advisory BoardVictor Villanueva, SWR Editor, Auburn University
Robin Gosser, Associate Editor, Auburn University

Linda Adler-Kassner, University of California, Santa Barbara
Adam Banks, University of Kentucky
Anis Bawarshi, University of Washington
Patricia Bizzell, Holy Cross College
Ellen Cushman, Michigan State University
Eli Goldblatt, Temple University
Juan Guerra, University of Washington
Krista Ratcliffe, Marquette University
Raúl Sánchez, University of Florida
Mary Soliday, San Francisco State University
Lucille Schultz, University of Cincinnati
Betsy Verhoeven, Susquehanna University

The CCCC Studies in Writing and Rhetoric Series (SWR), established in 1984, supports research that explores how writing, rhetoric, and literacy are currently and have been historically taught, learned practiced, and circulated within communities, whether in colleges, workplaces, or neighborhoods, local, national, digital, or international contexts. The series also focuses on supporting a broad range of projects that accurately represent the diverse identities of teachers, learners, administrators, and researchers involved in writing, rhetoric and literacy, addressing the cultural, social, political, and material realities that define their work. Work published in SWR seeks to identify and resist the inequities and forces of oppression that shape the teaching of writing, rhetoric, and literacy as well as to intervene in them. The series aspires to be global both in scope and reach, and is dedicated to the use of digital technologies that ensure its publications are accessible and available to a national and international audience.

All SWR volumes try in some way to inform the practice of writing teachers, students, or administrators. Their approach is synthetic, their style concise and pointed. Complete manuscripts run 50,000–60,000 words, or about 150–200 pages. Authors should imagine their work in the hands of writing teachers, including those at two- and four-year colleges and universities, in dual enrollment programs, and in a wide range of extra-institutional and/or non-US-centered pedagogical contexts. While writing teachers may be a primary audience, the series aims to be accessible and engaging to broad audiences of those who are interested in how we make our ways with language and literacy.

SWR was one of the first scholarly book series to focus on the teaching of writing. It was established in 1980 by the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) in order to promote research in the emerging field of writing studies. As our field has grown, the research sponsored by SWR has continued to articulate the commitment of CCCC to supporting the work of writing teachers as reflective practitioners and intellectuals.

Submissions

We are eager to identify influential work in writing and rhetoric as it emerges. Authors are encouraged to submit proposal queries to share questions and project concepts ahead of submitting a formal proposal. Project proposals should clearly situate the work in the field, showing how the research being developed and shared intervenes in and engages conversations hosted by the series and/or in writing, rhetoric, and literacy studies. Prospective authors are asked to indicate how the project extends, redirects, and/or reshapes ongoing conversations about writing, rhetoric, literacy and their teaching. Proposals should include an overview of the project and its stakes, a brief annotated table of contents, a market analysis of comparable/related work published in the last 5–7 years, and a sample chapter. They should convey the project’s conceptual and/or empirical archive/data set and how the text’s arguments emerge from the archive/data. If the project involves human subjects please indicate IRB approval. We welcome work that originates outside of the academy and collaborations among authors who experiment with form and knowledge-making practices.

NOTE: We do not accept unrevised dissertations.

To submit a proposal, please register as an author on the Editorial Manager site for the NCTE Books Program. Once registered, follow the steps to submit a proposal (be sure to choose SWR Book Proposal from the drop-down list of article submission types).

Questions?
Contact SWR Editor Stephanie Kerschbaum at kersch@uw.edu.

SWR Editorial Advisory Board

Stephanie Kerschbaum, SWR Editor, University of Washington
Taiko Aoki-Marcial, SWR Associate Editor, University of Washington

Jonathan Alexander, University of California, Irvine (2027)
Damián Baca, Arizona State University (2027)
Suresh Canagarajah, Penn State University (2027)
Charissa Che, Queensborough Community College (2027)
Jo Hsu, The University of Texas at Austin (2027)
Vivette Milson-Whyte, University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica (2027)
Federico Navarro, Universidad de O’Higgins, Chile (2027)
Cassandra (Cassie) Phillips, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (2027)
Patti Poblete, South Puget Sound Community College (2027)
Lauren Rosenberg, The University of Texas at El Paso (2027)
Emily Suh, Texas State University (2027)
Amy Wan, Queens College (2027)

SWR Editor Search Procedures

 

 

Series: Studies in Writing and Rhetoric
Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press / CCCC & NCTE
xi, 171 p.
ISBN-13: 978-0-8093-2924-3 (Paperback); ISBN-10: 0-8093-2924-7 (Paperback)

Listen to the Podcast with author Kelly Ritter and SWR Editor Joe Harris:

Author Information

Kelly Ritter is chair of the School of Literature, Media, and Communication and professor of writing and communication in the Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts at Georgia Tech. Her scholarship focuses on archival histories of US writing programs and pedagogies, and cultural-historical conceptions of social class and literacy education. Her books are Before Shaughnessy: Basic Writing at Yale and Harvard, 1920-1960 (NCTE/SIU Press, 2009), Who Owns School? Authority, Students, and Online Discourse (Hampton Press, 2010), To Know Her Own History: Writing at the Woman’s College, 1943-1963 (U of Pittsburgh Press, 2012) and Reframing the Subject: Postwar Instructional Film and Class-Conscious Literacies (U of Pittsburgh Press, 2015). She is also the author of numerous articles and chapters, and editor or coeditor of four collections, including  Beyond Fitting In: Rethinking First-Generation Writing and Literacy Education (Modern Language Association, 2023). She is past editor (2012-2017) of College English, a flagship journal of the National Council of Teachers of English.

Tags:

Basic writing; basic writers; history of composition; ability testing; first-year writing; archival research; placement; literacy; remediation; Mina Shaughnessy; Yale University; Harvard University; Ivy League institutions

Reviews:

Reviewed by Gregory R. Glau in WPA: Writing Program Administration 33.1/2 (Fall/Winter 2009) (PDF format)

Reviewed by Composition Forum 22 (2010) http://compositionforum.com/issue/22/before-shaughnessy-review.php

Purchasing Information

Purchase this book from Southern Illinois University Press.