Author: ksuchor

Committees are appointed for terms not to exceed three years. Committee terms end during the month and year indicated. The Executive Committee may reconstitute a committee at the end of its term. The committee chair must submit a request for renewal more than six weeks prior to the upcoming CCCC Executive Committee Meeting if the committee wishes to request reconstitution. CCCC Committee Chairs should refer to the CCCC Committee Management Guidelines document for more information. The following are current CCCC 3-year committees.

Visit the CCCC Resources page for a variety of resources resulting from the work of previous CCCC committees.

Committees

Accountability for Equity and Inclusion Committee

Committee on Academic Freedom, Tenure/Renewal/Reappointment, and Employment Security (March 2028)

Committee for Decolonizing Writing, Rhetoric, and Communication Curriculum, Pedagogy, and Organizational Culture (March 2027)

Committee on Computers in Composition and Communication (November 2024)

Committee on Disability Issues

Language Policy Committee

Newcomers’ Welcoming Committee

Research Committee

Social Justice at the Convention Committee

Special Committee on Generative AI in College Composition and Writing Studies (March 2028)

Committee on Undergraduate Research

Current CCCC Task Forces

Introduction to the 2015 CCCC-IP Annual

by Clancy Ratliff

• Downloadable PDF of the report.
• Downloadable Word Document of the report.
• Table of Contents

I remember being in John Logie’s rhetoric and intellectual property seminar at the University of Minnesota in 2003.

From my personal archives: a photo of the course syllabus.

He would often ask us to find news stories about, to use his phrase, the IP landscape, and in class we would juxtapose our discussions of critical theory of authorship and complex analysis of copyright law with current news about intellectual property issues. This began a habit of mind for me, which after about a decade I have systematized: all through the year, I see interesting stories in my social media feeds and my other reading, and I paste those URLs into a TextEdit document (and I’m increasingly doing screen capturing to augment this), which I turn into a CFP around the end of each year – a wish list of topics I hope people will want to write about, and they do, and very well.

In the 2015 Caucus meeting, we decided to start including a dedicated pedagogy section in the Annual. All the articles have had connections to rhetoric and composition in some way, but the three articles in the Pedagogy section this year are more explicitly directed toward classroom application and reflections on teaching writing. Kristi Murray Costello’s excellent analysis of the FI (failure for cheating or plagiarism) course grade is the first scholarly examination in our field of this new institutional development. Steven Engel gives us several clever classroom activities about the misattributed quotation on the Maya Angelou postage stamp that help students better understand authorship. Kathrin Kottemann helps us reflect on what we’re asking students to do as authors; through her research about catfishing, an online dating phenomenon, she raises the question: are we asking our students to be catfish? To pretend to be someone else?  In future years, we hope to have not only pieces such as these, but other teaching genres as well: syllabuses for new courses on IP issues, lesson plans, assignment descriptions, and curated lists of resources for teaching about copyright and authorship.

After the section of articles that are closely related to pedagogy is the section I’m calling Copyright and Authorship in Culture. The six articles in this section all look at 2015 events in the IP landscape and situate them in rhetoric and composition broadly. Matthew Teutsch illustrates the stakes of appropriation in his analysis of a political cartoon on Twitter that perhaps some of us saw: the lowering of the Confederate flag followed by the raising of the LGBT pride flag, a visual comment on two of the most important (and in one case, tragic) historical moments of the year. Craig A. Meyer writes about an artist who enlarged and printed Instagram photos of members of SuicideGirls, an adult lifestyle brand, as they describe themselves online. I will admit that I found the moving of the Instagram images across contexts to large gallery-quality prints to be an inventive and chic stylizing. However, the artist did not inform anyone in SuicideGirls that he intended to do this, and he sold the images for $90,000 each. Meyer’s analysis of this case is insightful.

William Duffy provides an impressively thorough explanation of the complexities and stakes of the “defeat devices” in Volkswagens: software that reported false data about emissions. Freedom to tinker in this case has implications for the environment, road safety, and much more. Wendy Warren Austin has taken the news story about the emergence of the kilo-author – which is exactly what it sounds like: 1000 or more co-authors – and made a substantial contribution to composition scholarship in her analysis of authorship in the sciences.

Laurie Cubbison continues her tracking of Taylor Swift’s copyright advocacy, which began in the last CCCC-IP Annual with a report about Swift’s decision to pull her album from Spotify. This year, Cubbison analyzes Swift’s argument to Apple: she pulled her album from the Apple Music streaming service because artists would not be paid for songs streamed during the free trial period for users, and Apple reacted by agreeing to pay the royalties. Kim Gainer reports on the most recent legal developments involving the status of the song “Happy Birthday,” a song that should have been in the public domain already but has not been. Now, however, those wanting to use “Happy Birthday” in audio or video compositions may do so without worry – though specific performances of the song may still be protected by copyright, of course.

The CCCC-IP Annual has always featured thoughtful and critical reviews of longer texts about copyright and intellectual property, particularly white papers from other organizations such as Creative Commons and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Traci Zimmerman continues this tradition with a review of a new handbook from the Authors Alliance, Understanding Open Access: When, Why, & How to Make Your Work Openly Accessible.

In sum, I’ve learned a lot from reading this year’s Annual articles, and I hope you do too. If you assign any of them in your classes (they would work so well not only in composition classes, but in technical writing and literature courses also), please contact me and let me know how it went.

.telerik-reTable-3 { border-collapse: collapse; border: solid 0px; font-family: Tahoma; } .telerik-reTable-3 tr.telerik-reTableHeaderRow-3 { margin: 10px; padding: 10px; color: #3a4663; text-align: left; font-size: 10pt; font-style: normal; font-family: Verdana; text-transform: capitalize; font-weight: normal; border-spacing: 10px; vertical-align: top; background-color: #C4D1E3; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableHeaderFirstCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; color: #3a4663; line-height: 14pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableHeaderLastCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; color: #3a4663; line-height: 14pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableHeaderOddCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; color: #3a4663; line-height: 14pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableHeaderEvenCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; color: #3a4663; line-height: 14pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 tr.telerik-reTableOddRow-3 { color: #666666; vertical-align: top; font-size: 10pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 tr.telerik-reTableEvenRow-3 { color: #666666; vertical-align: top; font-size: 10pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableFirstCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; background-color: #E7EBF7; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableLastCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; background-color: #E7EBF7; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableOddCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; background-color: #F7F3F7; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableEvenCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; background-color: #E7EBF7; } .telerik-reTable-3 tr.telerik-reTableFooterRow-3 { background-color: #C4D1E3; color: #3a4663; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana; line-height: 11pt; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableFooterFirstCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; text-align: left; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableFooterLastCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; text-align: left; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableFooterOddCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; text-align: left; } .telerik-reTable-3 td.telerik-reTableFooterEvenCol-3 { padding: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; text-align: left; }

Call to Host

• Proposal Timeline
• Application Criteria
• Required Application Sections
• Past and Future Computers and Writing Locations and Hosts

The CCCC Committee on Computers in Composition and Communication (7Cs) invites all interested institutions to submit proposals to host the onsite Computers and Writing conference(s), which are held annually.

The Computers and Writing Conference is the main conference for those who use computers and networks to teach writing. It brings together scholars, teachers, and professionals from all over the world in an intimate, welcoming setting to discuss the problems, successes, innovations, and logistics of computer and network-based writing instruction.

Since there is no formal organization that oversees the conference and its continuity from year to year, the Computers and Writing community relies upon the generosity of institutions of higher education to host the conference. Typically, these institutions can donate time, personnel, facilities, and limited funding to make the conference a success. Proposals include information about a proposed theme, possible keynote speakers, activities, and innovations that will make the conference a success.

The 7Cs welcomes proposals from individual institutions of higher education as well as those that are collaborative across institutions, including community colleges, K-12 institutions, and nonprofits.

Proposal Timeline

We seek applications two to three years prior to target hosting dates (e.g., for proposing to host C&W in 2024, the application should be completed during 2022; proposals to host in 2025 may be completed in 2022 or 2023).

• May-June (post-C&W): Call for Hosts posted
• June to October: If desired, talk with 7Cs to discuss interest
• November 1: Email of Intent due to Committee chair(s)
• February 15: Applications due
• March-April (at CCCC): Applications reviewed
• May-June (at C&W): Site(s) for conference(s) announced

1. Question period. After the Call for Hosts comes out, look over these guidelines and decide if you need to speak with the 7Cs committee before considering your intent to host. If you have questions about hosting—anything from budgets to locations to technologies used, etc.—email the committee chair with your questions, or request an online meeting. Alternatively, you can meet in person by setting up an individual meeting during the CCCC or C&W, attending the open portion of the 7Cs Business Meeting at CCCC, or attending the 7Cs Open Meeting during the C&W conference that year. Meeting f2f is not mandatory, nor is querying the committee prior to submitting your letter of intent. It’s just in case you have questions.
2. Statement of Intent. By November 1, submit a statement of intent by sending an email to the committee chair. Indicate in the subject line which year you are interested in proposing to host. This statement can be an informal email that allows 7Cs to know who’s interested and who the host-proposal contact person is, in case we have questions prior to the application due date. (This also allows 7Cs time to solicit proposals, if we don’t get any intentions by Nov. 1.)
3. Application. By February 15, email the committee chair with the URL of a web-accessible version or Google Doc responding to the application criteria, listed in the next section. The committee may contact submitters, and in some cases ask for revisions, if it has questions or concerns about a proposal.
4. Acceptance. Following its CCCC Business Meeting, the committee will contact proposers to indicate acceptance status of the proposals. The selected host(s) will be publicly announced at that year’s C&W conference. After that point, the selected host(s) are responsible for all advertising, although the 7Cs is available for help and to answer questions during the lead-up to the conference(s).

Application Criteria

The 7Cs committee will be assessing proposals based on the following criteria:

• The stability, experience, and status of the applicant and identified staff members.
• Evidence of adequate funding and commitment from funding agencies, departments, and so forth.
• Complete budget showing well-thought out and realistic projections.
• Reasonable facilities (rooms, technology, etc.) for conference session accommodations (as well as the quality of the accommodations themselves).
• Reasonable costs for hotel and/or dorm accommodations, including concern for graduate students and others in the community who traditionally have less departmental support for professional development.
• Plans for the conference program that show a theme (if desired), variety of possible keynotes and/or session strands, appropriate focus, clear sense of structure.
• Plans for including hybrid or online participation elements (if applicable).
• Reasonable registration costs that account for multiple kinds of attendees.
• Added value of any sponsoring events (dinners, tours, etc.).
• Facility support for disabled conference attendees and other attendees with special needs.
• Accessibility of site (geographical location) and distance/difference from recent, previous conference sites (when possible).
• Uniqueness, ability to enhance or improve the conference.
• Depth and substance of plans to collaborate with online conference organizers

When applying, consider the above criteria when answering the Required Application Questions in the next section. Your application can include links to material about the speakers, hotel, local attractions, technologies being considered, and so forth. The more information you can provide for the Selection Committee, the better.

Required Application Sections

If a section or item isn’t applicable, please indicate so.

Background Information

1. Date Application Posted
2. Name of Organizing Committee Chair/Lead Applicant
3. Institution (if applicable)
4. Postal and Email Address
5. Phone
6. Name, Affiliation, and Contact Information for All Other Organizing Committee Members
7. Year Proposed

Conference Funding

1. Source of funding
2. Amount of funding
3. How will you allocate funding? (Please attach detailed preliminary budget)
4. Approximately what will you charge for registration? What will additional events (e.g., special tours or trips) cost?

Conference Facilities

1. In the past, up to 400 people have registered for the Computers and Writing onsite conference. Please list hotel(s) or dorm(s) and number of rooms to be set aside for attendees.
   a. Main facility providing accommodations
   b. Number of rooms reserved
   c. Additional Hotels
   d. Number of rooms reserved
2. What will you do to provide a location and adequate exposure for affiliate groups? How will you guard against uneven placement and ensure traffic for the exhibits?
3. What will be the cost of hotel or university accommodations for attendees?
4. Why are you a good site for the conference in terms of excellence of faculty planners, computer/conference facilities, and accommodations?
5. How far is the conference site from a major transportation hub? Identify any potential travel agency connections.
6. What computer support can you provide for attendees drafting papers, printing documents, checking email, and so forth? Are labs available on campus? What kind of Internet access will be available?
7. The ideal site will be in a location that offers a safe environment for conference attendees regardless of their race, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious belief, or cultural background. To your knowledge, are there any legal, social, or cultural reasons that your site may pose a problem? How does your site ensure accessibility?

Conference Program and Events

1. Past conferences have sponsored as many as 55 hour-and-15-minute sessions over a two- or three-day period. These are concurrent sessions with approximately four speakers for each session. Conferences have commonly begun with workshops, registration, and (sometimes a) keynote or reception on Thursday, held concurrent sessions all day Friday and Saturday and on Sunday morning, and occasionally ended with a brunch or lunch and final speaker on Sunday, followed by an open 7Cs meeting and/or area tours. Briefly describe your plans for the conference program—its structure, focus, and/or theme.
2. Briefly describe any plans to include hybrid and/or online conference participation. What support structures are in place to ensure their success?
3. Who will you ask to review proposals to ensure high quality?
4. Are you planning on sponsoring other events (dinners, tours) that attendees might participate in? If so, please list, with cost above in the Funding section.
5. What specific features are you planning to make your meeting unique or to improve or enhance the Computers and Writing conference?

Conference Management and Staff

1. What kind of help or advice from past organizers would you find most useful?
2. Would you be willing to serve as a non-voting member on the CCCC’s Committee on Computers and Composition for the year preceding and following your hosting the conference, to receive and then provide counsel about hosting the conference?
3. Which previous Computers and Writing Conferences have you and/or your Co-Chairs attended?
4. Please add any other comments you might have regarding plans for Computers and Writing.

Return to Table of Contents

Return to Table of Contents

View videos related to content published in College Composition and Communication (CCC).

Geocomposition in Public Rhetoric and Writing Pedagogy (2:22)
Nathaniel A. Rivers
View a brief video abstract for Rivers’s article “Geocomposition in Public Rhetoric and Writing Pedagogy.”

Metanoic Movement: The Transformative Power of Regret (5:53)
Kelly Myers
In this short video (related to the article of the same title), Kelly Myers and some of her students discuss metanoia and revision.

Editor:

Assistant Editors:

Editorial Board:

A conversation with Courtney L. Werner, author of “How Rhetoric and Composition Described and Defined New Media at the Start of the Twenty-First Century” (20:26)

Courtney L. Werner is an assistant professor of English at Monmouth University. She teaches courses on composition, digital composition, and linguistics. Her work has appeared in various collections as well as Computers and Composition and CEA Forum, and she is currently studying digital rhetoric in the writing center.

A conversation with Jessica Pauszek, author of “’Biscit’ Politics: Building Working-Class Educational Spaces from the Ground Up” (11:38).

Jessica Pauszek is an assistant professor of English and the Director of Writing at Texas A&M University-Commerce. Her work appears in Literacy in Composition Studies and Reflections. She is managing editor for New City Community Press and a coeditor of the Working and Writing for Change series with Parlor Press.

A conversation with Sarah Klotz, author of “Impossible Rhetorics of Survivance at the Carlisle School, 1879–1883.” (10:37)

Sarah Klotz is currently research assistant professor at the Center for Urban Education at USC’s Rossier School of Education. Prior to her current position, she was an English professor at Butte Community College in Northern California, where she taught first-year composition, basic writing, and Native American literature courses. Her research focuses on the intersections of race and literacy education in the United States. She is currently completing a monograph titled Decolonizing Developmental Writing: A Rhetorical History of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, which has been awarded funding through an Emergent Research/er Grant from the Conference on College Composition and Communication.