Category: Uncategorized

In the context of two contradictory movements, one that emphasizes a liberal education and a second that works to compress curricula and learning into narrow indicators of teacher accountability and student achievement, and in response to a call for writing instruction to move outward from its traditional emphasis on academic contexts, this statement calls into action all those who share CCCC vision of a future in which an expansive writing curriculum, backed by ample resources, attends unyieldingly to the difficult work of helping students use good words, images, and other appropriate means, well composed, to build a better world.

Read the full statement, CCCC Statement on the Multiple Uses of Writing (November 2007)

The National Language Policy is a response to efforts to make English the “official” language of the United States. This policy recognizes the historical reality that, even though English has become the language of wider communication, we are a multilingual society. All people in a democratic society have the right to education, to employment, to social services, and to equal protection under the law. No one should be denied these or any civil rights because of linguistic differences. This policy enables everyone to participate in the life of this multicultural nation by ensuring continued respect both for English, our common language, and for the many other languages that contribute to our rich cultural heritage.

Read the full statement, CCCC Guideline on the National Language Policy (March 1988, updated 1992, revised March 2015)

The Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) Executive Committee votes on the future site for each annual convention five or six years before the convention takes place. This is necessary to secure convention meeting space and sufficient hotel rooms to accommodate several thousand attendees. Before the Executive Committee votes on a future site, CCCC members are polled about possible sites. NCTE staff investigate (through research and site visits) several feasible cities, based on the results of this poll, location of recent conventions, geographic parity, opportunities for attractive costs, and other factors. Several options are then presented in a report to the Executive Committee that includes information about hotel costs, Internet access, travel options, meeting space, and tourism. Additionally, consideration is made for the number of session rooms available at each convention facility, favoring those sites that may provide more favorable conditions for higher attendance.

In discussing siting options, the Executive Committee takes into consideration not only these detailed reports but also factors that could be objectionable to participants, including legislation that is hostile to various groups or in opposition to the values of the organization. After thorough discussion and consideration, the Executive Committee votes on a future site. Following this vote, CCCC enters into contractual agreements with the convention center, hotels, and other entities. These agreements carry heavy penalties for withdrawal, usually amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars of lost financial resources. The closer the proposal of withdrawal is to the convention date, the more complicated and expensive it becomes to move the convention to another city.

Because siting is done far in advance of each convention, it is not possible to predict future state or local legislation that could be objectionable to attendees. As a result, calls may be made to break the contractual arrangements and move the convention. Withdrawing from a location is advocated as a form of protest that harms the state’s economy and expresses the collective voice of thousands of CCCC members through the decision of their elected Executive Committee members.

At the same time, withdrawing from a future site (1) can negatively affect hundreds of service workers who rely on conventions for their livelihood; (2) may have little impact on the state if another organization takes the space vacated by the CCCC; and (3) results, through the organization’s absence, in silence on the issues of concern. This silence is particularly problematic for an organization devoted in part to the study and pedagogy of communication as a form of civic engagement and deliberation about issues involving fairness and the humane treatment of all groups of people.

For these reasons, the CCCC Executive Committee has approved the following guiding principles for future convention siting with respect to hostile legislation:

In principle, CCCC will work to change state or local policies in host convention cities that diverge from established CCCC positions or otherwise threaten the safety or well-being of our membership. We will do so by consulting closely with local groups who share our principles and arranging activities and opportunities for members to support those who are disadvantaged by offensive policies or otherwise to use their presence in the offending state as a vehicle for nonviolent protest. We will vigorously communicate the methods of support and/or protest to the media, convention and tourist bureaus, and local and state government officials, with the avowed purpose of provoking policy change or supporting current policies threatened by hostile change. In general, we will follow this strategy of engagement rather than abrogating or cancelling contracts for future conventions as a method of protesting existing or future legislation.

November 2013, revised March 2019

Conference on College Composition and Communication
April 2016

Since the 1980s, as composition has grown as a scholarly field, the composition job market has grown correspondingly in both size and complexity. Specifically, over the fourteen years since AY2000–01, ads seeking expertise in composition and rhetoric have consistently made up 30 percent or more of all job ads placed in the English edition of the MLA Job Information List—the most of the ten scholarly specializations offered in the English JIL. In addition to searches that departments announce in the JIL, numerous part-time and non-tenure-track hires are made throughout the academic year and over the summer. The practices described here apply to both tenure-track and non-tenure-track positions. The purpose of this statement is to provide guidance on best practices in hiring processes for positions in composition and rhetoric, and its intended audience is faculty members serving on hiring committees.

This statement is divided into the following sections:

• Best Practices for Forming the Search Committee
• Best Practices for Writing the Position Advertisement
• Best Practices for Ensuring a Diverse Candidate Pool
• Best Practices for Submission of Application Materials
• Best Practices for Managing the Search Timetable
• Best Practices for First-Round Interviews
• Best Practices for Final-Round Interviews
• Best Practices for Hiring Writing Program Administrators
• Best Practices for Hiring International Candidates

Best Practices for Forming the Search Committee

• Search committees include at least one faculty member with expertise in composition and rhetoric.
• Search committees charged with hiring non-tenure-track candidates include at least one non-tenure-track faculty member on the committee. Department chairs request remuneration for NTT faculty for such work, if it falls outside their contractual duties.
• Graduate students participate in the search process and, when possible, on the search committee.
• Members of the search committee are expected to know and abide by their institutions’ procedural, ethical, and legal guidelines for searches before reviewing applications or interviewing candidates.
• Hiring committees communicate often with candidates about the timetable of the search and any questions candidates may have about the position.
• When possible, all members of the search committee are available for all stages of the interviewing process.

Best Practices for Writing the Position Advertisement

The position advertisement contains the following:

• An accurate description of the title and department(s) of appointment.
• A description of areas of research interest that uses current descriptors from the field of composition and rhetoric.
• A clear description of duties involved in the position, including mentoring, advising, and writing program administration, if applicable. For non-tenure-track employees, the job ad makes explicit if duties such as service and advising are expected, and if so, whether those duties are accounted for through course reductions, employment distribution calculations (e.g., 80/20), or are expected in addition to a full teaching load.
• For tenure-eligible positions, the list of duties in the job ad clearly corresponds to the criteria for tenure and promotion.
• A statement of qualifications that accounts for considerations such as completion of the PhD and consideration of terminal degrees other than the PhD.
• A deadline for submission of materials that is at least one month after job posting. If circumstances require a shorter timeline, it specifies whether applicants may submit materials after the deadline and still be considered for the position.
• Contact information for the chair of the search committee.
• A clear timeline for the search—e.g., will candidates be interviewed on particular dates (at a conference) with decision thereafter or is the search ongoing until the position is filled?

Best Practices for Ensuring a Diverse Candidate Pool

Lack of diversity among faculty ranks often stems from problems in the search and hiring process. As explained in “Effectively Recruiting Faculty of Color at Highly Selective Institutions: A School of Education Case Study,” “Without formal and pronounced action in support of recruiting faculty of color, hiring processes for this population may be considered tenuous at best” (Gasman, Kim, & Nguyen, 2011, p. 213). Because many composition and rhetoric hires, however, are managed at the department level, there are ways that the search committee can help to ensure a diverse candidate pool.

• The search committee is composed of members representing diverse perspectives who share a commitment to diversity, including a discussion about what diversity means to committee members.
• At the time that the search committee is formed and the job ad crafted, the committee seeks out the Human Resources office on campus and, if applicable, the campus’s diversity officer to form strategies for recruiting diverse candidates that are in compliance with state and local policies. The committee investigates university policies related to “target of opportunity” and other incentives that allow for flexibility in hiring diverse candidates (e.g., hiring off official dates or allowance for additional lines when qualified diverse candidates are identified).
• The job ad identifies the institution’s commitment to diversity, student demographics, and job duties that relate to institutional goals on fostering diversity. The valuation of diversity is reflected in the job ad, both in the kinds of candidates sought as well as the kinds of expertise valued.
• In addition to usual places where job ads are posted, the committee considers targeted advertising and reliance on professional networks to cultivate a diverse candidate pool.
• At the time of the interview, the committee members are able to answer candidates’ questions regarding campus climate, student demographics, resources available for diverse faculty, questions about retention of diverse hires, and community profile.
• Search committees review the candidate pool at multiple times in the search process to ensure diversity.
• After the committee has made a preliminary list of finalists for first-round interviews, the committee goes back through the list of candidates to determine if potential diverse candidates have been overlooked because the selection criteria do not account for the kinds of expertise they offer.
• At the time of the campus visit, candidates meet other tenured diverse faculty. This ensures a link between recruitment and retention. It is also advisable that they meet a range of graduate students, non-tenure-track faculty, and administrators who share and support their pedagogical and research interests. Candidates are asked if there are faculty members from departments or programs outside the hiring department whom they would like to meet.

Best Practices for the Submission of Application Materials

• Search committees minimize job-seekers’ time and financial expense with regard to submitting application materials. With the initial application, searches request the least volume of materials possible. In most cases, a letter and CV will suffice.
• Following this first-round request, committees request institution-specific, though still not overly idiosyncratic, documentation. Insofar as they can, hiring committees seek to reduce the costs candidates incur to transfer files and materials connected with their applications.

Best Practices for Managing the Search Timetable

• Departments update candidates each time the committee reaches a new stage of the hiring process that makes a cut in the candidate pool, except when Human Resources offices or other administrative entities explicitly dictate otherwise.
• Whenever search committees wish to solicit additional materials, candidates have at least two weeks to submit them.
• During the first-round interview, search committees provide an honest account of the timeframe for subsequent decisions (e.g., for campus visits).
• When an offer is made to a candidate, the candidates are given at least two weeks to respond to the offer.

Best Practices for First-Round Interviews

The expense and stress of traveling to a conference for in-person first-round interviews are well documented. Given this, search committees carefully consider whether the benefit of meeting candidates in person outweighs the potential drawbacks, not only for committee members but for candidates themselves. For both in-person and phone/video interviews, candidates are informed ahead of time who will be present, as well as what general format the questions will follow.

Best practices for in-person interviews include:

• Committees plan ahead carefully to ensure that access needs for all candidates are met, using the principles of Universal Design.
• If the interview room is not well labeled, committees might consider posting a sign with the room number on the outer door, and/or stationing a person near the room to help candidates reach the location.
• Committees are familiar with barrier-free ways to reach the interview space (for example, they know where the nearest elevator is located, as well as the nearest escalator or stairwell).
• The space in which interviews take place is as roomy as possible, with space for a scooter, wheelchair, person on crutches, or person with a service animal to move around.

Best practices for phone or video interviews include:

• Candidates know who will be interviewing them, and in a virtual medium, committee members provide more frequent reminders of who they are. For example, during a phone interview, a committee member might say, “This is [name] speaking now. I’d like to ask . . . .”
• Committees plan ahead of time to select a venue and equipment that enable everyone to appear on camera at the same time; the practices of having only one person visible or passing a laptop from hand to hand have been reported by candidates to be disorienting and unhelpful.
• In virtual media, committee members attend carefully to sending visual cues that they are listening while candidates speak; for example, they may wish to make a point of looking into the camera and nodding as often as seems appropriate.
• Most campuses have a dedicated space for video conferencing; search committees contact their campus IT department well ahead of time to learn about the best options for well-designed video interviewing or phone interviewing.

Best Practices for Final-Round Interviews

The following practices pertain to both tenure-track and non-tenure-track searches, as the practice of bringing NTT candidates to campuses has become more common. Just as first-round interviews require attention to accessibility, so do final-round interviews.

• Regarding travel expenses, the obligation for explaining how these are incurred and resolved belongs to the institution and is addressed at the time the invitation is extended. Expenses are paid for up front by the hiring institution, but when this is not possible, procedures for reimbursement are articulated clearly and early in the process, as well as facilitated in order to ensure timely return of funds. Candidates do not pay their own expenses for on-campus interviews.
• Time for rest is built into a candidate’s schedule every few hours.
• Prior to research presentations or teaching demonstrations, a faculty member from the hiring committee gives a speech introducing the candidate that clearly explains the candidate’s areas of teaching and research and their value for a wide audience.
• Finally, hiring committees speak openly and positively about negotiation. During final-round interviews, members of the committee and institution make suggestions about kinds of support to ask for, or recommendations for language to use in negotiation if the candidate is offered the position.

Best Practices for Hiring Writing Program Administrators

• WPAs are hired with tenure at the rank of Associate or Full Professor.
• The committee provides candidates with a comprehensive written list of the responsibilities of the administrative post, including the minimum length of time the faculty member is expected to serve as WPA, and offers candidates the opportunity to negotiate these duties at the time of offer.
• The committee gives thorough information about how administrative work will be evaluated by the university for reappointment, tenure, promotion, and annual performance reviews, using the Council of Writing Program Administrators’ statement “Evaluating the Intellectual Work of Writing Administration” as a guide.

Best Practices for Hiring International Candidates

International faculty members have contributed immeasurably to the field of rhetoric and composition. International candidates are given full consideration for positions for this reason and as a matter of commitment to diversity. Before interviewing international candidates, the search committee consults with the International Student Services Office (ISSO) on campus or similar, or the appropriate responsible persons in HR in order to determine visa requirements and payroll procedures for international travel reimbursement. It is generally a good idea to consult with ISSO or HR in order to learn about the legal and financial complexities of hiring a foreign national, which involve a work visa sponsorship and may in some cases lead to sponsoring a permanent residency. For example, the typical work visa (H1B) for qualified international workers is active for up to six years, which is also the typical amount of time required to achieve tenure, meaning that the successfully tenured international faculty must secure permanent residency status in order to continue employment in the United States. Each of these steps involves financial commitments that the departments as well as the candidates must be prepared for; the residency-related processes may also involve an external law firm.

• Search committee members do not ask applicants if they are US citizens but may ask if applicants are authorized to work in the United States.
• Either the search committee or an ISSO or HR member clarifies during the search that the position comes with automatic visa sponsorship of a work visa (which is the responsibility of the university) and what the candidates’ responsibilities, financial and otherwise, would be in securing their residency status if desired (for example, if the position is NTT, the university may not sponsor them beyond a work visa).
• Once the decision has been made to hire an international candidate, departments work along with ISSO and HR in order to clarify responsibilities and expectations regarding the documentation, visa sponsorship, and appropriate authorities handling the faculty’s legal status, preferably in writing.
• When the hiring committee reaches a clear understanding of the deadlines, paperwork, offices, and financial responsibilities to be incurred during the faculty’s employment by the university, they take measures to protect the faculty from possible administrative failures such as missed deadlines due to no fault of the faculty, as there have been cases in which faculty have lost or nearly lost their positions due to HR mishaps.

References

Association of Departments of English and Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. (1994). MLA Statement on the Use of Part-Time and Full-Time Adjunct Faculty Members.

Association of Departments of English and Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. (2012). Suggestions for Interviews Using Videoconferencing and the Telephone.

Conference on College Composition and Communication. (2016). CCCC Statement on Working Conditions for Non Tenure-Track Writing Faculty.

Conference on College Composition and Communication. (2015). Principles for the Postsecondary Teaching of Writing.

Council of Writing Program Administrators. (1998). Evaluating the Intellectual Work of Writing Administration.

Council of Writing Program Administrators. (1992). “The Portland Resolution”: Guidelines for Writing Program Administrator Positions.

Gasman, M., Kim, J., & Nguyen, T-H. (2011). Effectively recruiting faculty of color at highly selective institutions: A school of education case study. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 4(4), 212-222.

MLA Committee on Academic Freedom and Professional Rights and Responsibilities. (2013). Guidelines for Search Committees and Job Seekers on Entry-Level Faculty Recruitment and Hiring.

MLA Committee on Contingent Labor in the Profession. (2011). Professional Employment Practices for Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Members: Recommendations and Evaluative Questions.

MLA Committee on Disability Issues in the Profession. (2006). Disability and Hiring: Guidelines for Departmental Search Committees.

National Council of Teachers of English. (2010). Position Statement on the Status and Working Conditions of Contingent Faculty.

Schuman, R. (2015, January 8). The $1,000 job interview that will not die. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

This position statement may be printed, copied, and disseminated without permission from NCTE.

Committee Charge

Research Committee

General Charge: Reflecting a broad and diverse range of research methods and types, the Research Committee monitors and identifies updates in research developments in the field and employs and advocates for ethical research standards across a variety of areas of influence in writing studies.

Responsibilities

• Conducts an inventory of research trends in the field, and provides an oral and written annual report to the Executive Committee regarding some or all of the following: suggested updates to CCCC calls for proposals, targeted calls for grant proposals for the CCCC Research Initiative grants and Emergent Researcher Awards, recommendations for breadth and diversity of methods and findings, and identifying needed areas of research in keeping with the CCCC overall mission.
• Provides two Research Committee members to participate in the Executive Committee-appointed committee evaluating and selecting CCCC Research Initiative grants and Emergent Researcher Awards.
• Sponsors an annual full-day Research Methods Workshop at the CCCC Convention.

Membership

• Members will serve three-year terms.
• Chair: Selects members in consultation with administrative committee chairs and is responsible for fulfilling or delegating its charges.
• Members: Assist Chair in fulfilling the responsibilities of its charges.

 

In collaboration with the CCCC Feminist Caucus, CCCC is pleased to offer small grants of no more than $300 per attendee that can be used to offset the costs of dependent care expenses or for other caregiving needs as described by the applicant, at the 2025 annual convention. The grant is intended for caregivers, including those caring for children, a spouse, a parent, and/or any friend or family member who needs assistance with daily activities. The grant may also be used for those who require a caregiver to attend the conference. Priority for these funds will be given to adjuncts, graduate students, and/or independent scholars with limited institutional support.

To apply for funds, please complete the application form by Monday, February 10, 2025, 11:59 p.m. ET.

Criteria for Evaluating Grant Applications

The committee will review the applications submitted and will rank them, prioritizing the following criteria:

• Available funding for conference attendance
• Conference participation commitments
• How participation in the convention will advance the applicant’s personal and professional goals
• How the award will support applicant’s contributions to the profession and the CCCC organization
• How the award will help with caregiving responsibilities

Applicants who have received funding from CCCC for another award or scholarship will not be considered. CCCC assumes no responsibility for any liabilities associated with dependent care or dependent care providers.

Selected recipients will be notified by the CCCC Feminist Caucus by March 12, 2025. Selected recipients will then work with the CCCC Liaison to submit paperwork required to receive funding. The award process will be completed in advance of the CCCC 2025 convention.

Procedures for Award Recipients

After the convention, grant recipients should submit a one-page summary indicating how the funding supported the recipient’s participation in convention activities. Please submit the funding report to Feminist Caucus Care Grants Coordinator Alex Hanson by May 12, 2025.

CCCC 2016 will be a great opportunity for attendees to think together about how to work systematically and strategically on issues related to writing and writers. Identify issues you want to act on or would like for CCCC to act on. Write these on white boards around the convention venue, post to Twitter with the #4C16 hashtag, or submit on postcards. We’ll aggregate all responses for the closing plenary on Saturday from 12:30 p.m. to 1:45 p.m.

The questions:

GOALS:

• What are your most important goals for writing and writers in one or more of these locations?

    course(s)
    institutions
    states or regions
    our professional organization, CCCC
    our discipline

VALUES AND PRINCIPLES:

• What values or principles are most important for you as you think about writers and writing?

STRATEGIES FOR ACTION:

• What have you learned at CCCC 2016 to achieve your goals?
• What does CCCC need to learn to do or to do better to reach or help you reach your goals?
• Who can you/we learn from and with for these goals, and with whom can we build alliances?

 

 

Name: Diane Martinez
Title: Assistant Professor
Institution: Western Carolina University
Location: Cullowhee, NC
Phone: 828-227-3923
Email: dlmartinez@email.wcu.edu
Skype: diane.martinez64

 

 

    

Name: Sushil K. Oswal
Title: Associate Professor
Institution: University of Washington
Skype: Sushiloswal1

Committee Members

Megan Busch, Chair
Jessica Jorgenson Borchert
Alex Evans
Michael Harker
Travis Margoni
Ben McCorkle
Sean Morey
Eliot Parker
Ellen Payne
Michael Rifenburg
Matt Rome
Katie Silvester
Christine Tulley

Committee Charge

General Charge: To function as a point of first contact for new members and to develop convention-specific programing and outreach.

Responsibilities

• Provides a staffed Welcome Table where new attendees can ask questions, receive suggestions, and find materials helpful for navigating the Convention.
• Creates, in cooperation with the NCTE national office, a Tip Sheet, designed to help new attendees make the most of their experience at the Convention.
• Hosts an Orientation to review strategies for Convention attendance.
• Sponsors a Career Quest roundtable to help participants develop a plan to find opportunities at the Convention and within the organization that can play an important part in their career development.
• Hosts a Coffee Hour where new attendees can hear from various member groups of the Convention (e.g., Meet Leaders of SIGs, TYCA, C’s the Day, etc.).
• Sponsors the Think Tank where new attendees can work with experienced professionals to discuss and develop proposals for the next year’s Convention.
• Maintains relationships with other subcommittees and groups (e.g., Digital Archive of Literacy Narratives, C’s the Day, etc.).

Membership

• Members will serve three-year terms.
• Chair: Selects members in consultation with administrative committee chairs and is responsible for fulfilling or delegating its charges.
• Members: Assist Chair in fulfilling the responsibilities of its charges.

Suggestions for Drafting Effective CCCC Proposals