Category: Uncategorized

Click here to view the individual articles in this issue at http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v43-3

Nystrand, Martin. Rev. of Reading-to-Write: Exploring a Cognitive and Social Process by Linda Flower, Victoria Stein, John Ackerman, Margaret J. Kantz, Kathleen McCormick and Wayne C. Peck. CCC 43.3 (1992): 411-415.

Herrington, Anne J. Rev. of Thinking and Writing in College by Barbara Walvoord, Lucille McCarthy, Virginia Anderson, John Breihan, Susan Robison and Kimbrough Sherman. CCC 43.3 (1992): 415-416.

Hansen, Kristine. Rev. of The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse by Walter Nash. CCC 43.3 (1992): 417-418.

Greenhalgh, Anne M. “Voices in Response: A Postmodern Reading of Teacher Response.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 401-410.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Teachers Voice Students Response Writing Comments Interpretation Interruption Postmodernism

Works Cited

Belsey, Catherine. Critical Practice. London: Methuen, 1980.

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

Bridwell, Lillian S. “Revising Strategies in Twelfth Grade Students’ Transactional Writing.” Research in the Teaching of English 14 (Oct. 1980): 197-222.

Brodkey, Linda. “On the Subjects of Class and Gender in ‘The Literacy Letters.’ ” College English 51 (Feb. 1989): 125-41.

Brodkey, Linda, and James Henry. “Voice Lessons in a Poststructural Key: Notes on Response andRevision.” A Rhetoric of Doing: Essays in Honor of James Kinneavy. Ed. Stephen P. Witte, Roger Cherry, and Neil Nakadate. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, forthcoming.

Faigley, Lester, and Stephen Witte. “Analyzing Revision.” CCC 32 (Dec. 1981): 400-14.

Matsuhashi, Ann, and Eleanor Gordon. “Revision, Addition, and the Power of the Unseen Text.” The Acquisition of Written Language: Response and Revision. Ed. Sarah Warshauer Freedman. Norwood: Ablex, 1985. 226-49. Silverman, David, and Brian Torode. The Material Word. London: Routledge, 1980.

Sommers, Nancy. “Responding to Student Writing.” CCC 33 (May 1982): 148-56.

— . “Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers.” CCC 31 (Dec. 1980): 378-88.

Mitchell, Felicia. “Balancing Individual Projects and Collaborative Learning in an Advanced Writing Class.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 393-400.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Students Writing Models AdvancedWriting Projects Collaboration Assignments Bibliography Style Process Authority Goals

Works Cited

Coe, Richard M. Process, Form, and Substance: A Rhetoric for Advanced Writers. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1990.

Flower, Linda. “Cognition, Context, and Theory Building.” CCC 40 (Oct. 1989): 282-311.

Kinneavy, James. A Theory of Discourse. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1971.

Reither, James A., and Douglas Vipond. “Writing as Collaboration.” College English 51 (Dec. 1989): 855-67.

Trimbur, John. “Critiquing Collaborative Learning.” College English 51 (Oct. 1989): 602-16.

Holt, Mara. “The Value of Written Peer Criticism.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 384-392.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Writers Students Writing Papers KBruffee Critique Response PElbow PeerGroups Outline Essays PBelanoff

Works Cited

Bruffee, Kenneth A. A Short Course in Writing: Practical Rhetoric for Teaching Composition through Collaborative Learning. 3rd ed. Boston: Little, 1985.

Elbow, Peter. Embracing Contraries. New York: Oxford UP, 1986.

—. Writing without Teachers. New York: Oxford UP, 1973.

—. Writing with Power. New York: Oxford UP, 1981.

Elbow, Peter, and Pat Belanoff. A Community of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing. New York: Random, 1989.

—. Sharing and Responding. New York: Random, 1989.

Huff, Roland, and Charles R. Kline, Jr. The Contemporary Writing Curriculum: Rehearsing, Composing, and Valuing. New York: Teachers College P, 1987.

Kail, Harvey, and John Trimbur. “The Politics of Peer Tutoring.” Writing Program Administration 11.1-2 (Fall 1987): 5-12.

Harris, Muriel. “Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 369-383.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Writing Students Collaboration Tutors PeerGroups Response Writers Teacher WritingCenters Comments CollaborativeWriting

Works Cited

Allen, Nancy, Dianne Atkinson, Meg Morgan, Teresa Moote, and Craig Snow. “What Experienced Collaborators Say About Collaborative Writing.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 1.2 (Sept. 1987): 70-90.

Arkin, Marian, and Barbara Shollat. The Tutor Book. New York: Longman, 1982.

Beaven, Mary. “Individualized Goal Setting, Self-Evaluation, and Peer Evaluation.” Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging. Ed. Charles Cooper and Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE, 1977. 135-56.

Benesch, Sarah. Improving Peer Response: Collaboration Between Teachers and Students. ERIC, 1984. ED 243 113.

Berkenkotter, Carol. “Student Writers and Their Sense of Authority over Texts.” CCC 35 (Oct. 1984): 312-19.

Broglie, Mary. “From Teacher to Tutor: Making the Change.” Writing Lab Newsletter 15.4 (Dec. 1990): 1-3.

Brooks, Jeff. “Minimalist Tutoring: Making the Student Do All the Work.” Writing Lab Newsletter 15.6 (Feb. 1991): 1-4.

Brown, Jane. “Helping Students Help Themselves: Peer Evaluation of Writing.” Curriculum Review 23 (Feb. 1984): 47-50.

Carter, Ronnie. By Itself Peer Group Revision Has No Power. ERIC, 1982. ED 226 350.

Clark, Beverly Lyon. Talking about Writing. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1985.

Clark, Irene. Writing in the Center: Teaching in a Writing Center Setting. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt, 1985.

Clifford, John. “Composing in Stages: The Effects of a Collaborative Pedagogy.” Research in the Teaching of English 15 (Feb. 1981): 37-53.

Crowhurst, Marion. “The Writing Workshop: An Experiment in Peer Response to Writing.” Language Arts 56 (Oct. 1979): 752-62.

Davis, Francine. Weaving the web of Meaning: Interaction Patterns in Peer Response Groups. ERIC, 1982. ED 214 202.

Dossin, Mary. “Untrained Tutors.” Writing Lab Newsletter 15.4 (Dec. 1990): 11.

Ede, Lisa, and Andrea Lunsford. “Why Write. . . Together?” Rhetoric Review (Jan. 1983): 150-57. Elbow, Peter. Writing without Teachers. New York: Oxford, 1973.

Flynn, Elizabeth. “Students as Readers of Their Classmates’ Writing: Some Implications for Peer Critiquing.” Writing Instructor 3 (Spring 1984): 120-28.

Gebhardt, Richard. “Teamwork and Feedback: Broadening the Base of Collaborative Writing.” College English 42 (Sept. 1980): 69-74.

George, Diana. “Working with Peer Groups in the Composition Classroom.” CCC 35 (Oct. 1984): 320-26.

Gere, Anne Ruggles. Writing Groups: History, Theory, and Implications. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1987.

Gere, Anne Ruggles, and Robert Abbott. “Talking about Writing: The Language of Writing Groups.” Research in the Teaching of English 19 (Dec. 1985): 362-85.

Gere, Anne Ruggles, and Ralph Stevens. “The Language of Writing Groups: How Oral Response ShapesRevision.” The Acquisition of Written Language: Response and Revision. Ed. Sarah Warshauer Freedman. Norwood: Ablex, 1985.85-105.

Glassner, Benjamin. Discovering Audience/Inventing Purpose: A Case Study of Revision in a Cooperative Writing Workshop. ERIC, 1983. ED 227 513.

Grimm, Nancy. “Improving Students’ Responses ro Their Peers’ Essays.” CCC 37 (Feb. 1986): 91-94.

Harris, Muriel. “Contradictory Perceptions of Rules of Writing.” CCC 30 (May 1979): 218-20.

—. “Diagnosing Writing-Process Problems: A Pedagogical Application of Speaking-Aloud Protocol Analysis.” When a Writer Can’t Write. Ed. Mike Rose. New York: Guilford, 1985. 166-81. -. Teaching One-to-One: The Writing Conference. Urbana: NCTE, 1986.

Jensen, George, and John DiTiberio. Personality and the Teaching of Composition. Norwood: Ablex, 1989.

Kantor, Kenneth. “Classroom Contexts and the Development of Writing Intuitions: An Ethnographic Case Study.” New Directions in Composition Research. Ed. Richard Beach and Lillian Bridwell. New York: Guilford, 1984.72-92.

Karegianes, Myra, Ernest Pascarella, and Susanna Pflaum. “The Effects of Peer Editing on the Writing Proficiency of Low-Achieving Tenth Grade Students.” Journal of Educational Research 73.4 (March/April 1980): 203-07.

Livesey, Matthew. “Ours Is to Wonder Why.” Writing Lab Newsletter 15.2 (Oct. 1990): 9-11.

Maid, Barry, Sally Crisp, and Suzanne Norton. “On Gaining Insight into Ourselves as Writers and as Tutors.” Writing Lab Newsletter 13.10 (June 1989): 1-5.

Meyer, Emily, and Louise Smith. The Practical Tutor. New York: Oxford UP, 1987.

Newkirk, Thomas. “Direction and Misdirection in Peer Response.” CCC 35 (Oct. 1984): 300-11.

North, Stephen. “Training Tutors to Talk about Writing.” CCC 33 (Dec. 1982): 434-41.

Perdue, Virginia, and Deborah James. “Teaching in the Center.” Writing Lab Newsletter 14.10 (June 1990): 7-8.

Rose, Mike. “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer’s Block.” CCC 31 (Dec. 1980): 389-401.

Spear, Karen. Sharing Writing: Peer Response Groups in English Classes. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1988.

Trimbur, John. “Peer Tutoring: A Contradiction in Terms?” Writing Center Journal 7.2 (Spring/Summer 1987): 21-28.

Wauters, Joan. “Non-Confrontational Pairs: An Alternative to Verbal Peer Response Groups.” Writing Instructor 7 (Spring/Summer 1988): 156-66.

Weiner, Harvey. “Collaborative Learning in the Classroom.” College English 48 (Jan. 1986): 52-61.

Weller, Rebecca. “Authorizing Voice: Pedagogy, Didacticism, and the Student-Teacher-Tutor Triangle.” Writing Lab Newsletter 17.2 (Oct. 1992): 9-12.

Ziv, Nina. Peer Groups in the Composition Classroom: A Case Study. ERIC, 1983. ED 229799.

Bridwell-Bowles, Lillian. “Discourse and Diversity: Experimental Writing within the Academy.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 349-368.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Writing Students Language Discourse Diversity Experimental Feminism Women Voice Work Difference Rhetoric HCixous

Works Cited

Albrecht, Lisa, and Rose M. Brewer, eds. Bridges of Power: Women’s Multicultural Alliances. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers, 1990.

Anzaldua, Gloria. “Bridge, Drawbridge, Sandbar or Island: Lesbians-of-Color Hacienda Alianzas.” Bridges of Power. Albrecht and Brewer. 216-31.

Beaugrande, Robert de. “In Search of Feminist Discourse: The ‘Difficult’ Case of Luce Irigaray.” College English 50 (Mar. 1988): 253-72.

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

Bock, Mary. “How Do Western Homosociality and Heterosexuality Fit Together? An Invincible Rhetoric for a Vulnerable Cultural Tension.” Unpublished manuscript, n.d.

Calderonello, Alice. “Toward Diversity in Academic Discourse: Alice, Sue and Deepika Talk about Form and Resistance.” ATAC Forum 3.1 (Spring/Summer 1991): 1-5.

Cameron, Deborah. Feminism and Linguistic Theory. New York: St. Martin’s, 1985.

Chase, Geoffrey. “Accommodation, Resistance and the Politics of Student Writing.” CCC 39 (Feb. 1988): 13-22.

Chicago, Judy. The Birth Project. Garden City: Doubleday, 1985.

Cixous, Helene, and Catherine Clement. The Newly Born Woman. Trans. Betsy Wing. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1986.

Daly, Mary. Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism. Boston: Beacon, 1978.

Ede, Lisa, and Andrea Lunsford. Singular Texts, Plural Authors: Perspectives on Collaborative Writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1990.

Flynn, Elizabeth A. “Composing as a Woman.” CCC 39 (Dec. 1988): 423-35.

Gauthiet, Xaviete. “Existe-t-il une ecriture de femme?” New French Feminisms. Matks and de Courtivron 161-64.

Geathart, Sally Millet. “The Womanization of Rhetotic.” Women’s Studies International Quarterly 2.2 (1979): 195-201.

Heilbrun, Carolyn G. Writing a Woman’s Life. New York: Ballantine, 1988.

hooks, bell. Ain’t I a Woman: Black Women and Feminism. Boston: South End, 1981.

Irigaray, Luce. This Sex Which Is Not One. Trans. Catherine Porter, Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1985.

Jespersen, Otto. Language: Its Nature, Development and Origin. London: G. Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1922.

Jones, Ann Rosalind. “Writing the Body: Toward an Understanding of I’Ecriture feminine.” The New Feminist Criticism: Essays on Women, Literature, and Theory. Ed. Elaine Showalter. New York: Pantheon, 1985.361-77.

Juncker, Clara. “Writing (with) Cixous.” College English 50 (April 1988): 424-36.

Kaufer, David S., and Cheryl Geisler. “Novelty in Academic Writing.” Written Communication 6: (Jul. 1989): 286-311.

Kristeva, Julia. “La femme, ce n’est jamais ca.” Marks and de Courtivron 137-41.

Lilly, Mark, ed. Lesbian and Gay Writing: An Anthology of Critical Essays. Philadelphia: Temple UP, 1990.

Lorde, Audre. “African-American Women and the Black Diaspora.” Albrecht and Brewer 206-09.

—. “The Master’s Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master’s House.” This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color. Ed. Cherrie Moraga and Gloria Anzaldua. Boston: Persephone, 1981. 98-101.

Lu, Min-zhan. “From Silence to Words: Writing as Struggle.” College English 49 (Apr. 1987): 437-47.

Marks, Elaine, and Isabelle de Courtivron. New French Feminisms: An Anthology. New York: Schocken Books, 1981.

Maylath, Bruce. “A Question, Please?” Unpublished manuscript, n.d.

McNaron, Toni A. H. I Dwell in Possibility: A Memoir. New York: The Feminist Press at CUNY, 1992.

Meisenhelder, Susan. “Redefining ‘Powerful’ Writing: Toward a Feminist Theory of Composition.” Journal of Thought 20 (Fall 1985): 184-95.

Messer-Davidow, Ellen. “The Philosophical Bases of Feminist Literary Criticisms.” New Literary History 19 (Autumn 1987): 65-103.

Moi, Toril. Sexual/Textual Politics. London: Methuen, 1985.

Murray, Donald M. Write to Learn. 2nd ed. New York: Holt, 1987.

Olano, Pamela. “Lesbian Feminist Literary Criticism: A Summary of Research and Scholarship.” Women’s Studies Quarterly 19 (Fall/Winter 1991) 174-79.

—. Letter to the author. 11 Nov. 1990.

Penelope, Julia. Speaking Freely: Unlearning the Lies of the Fathers’ Tongue. New York: Pergamon, 1990.

Rich, Adrienne. On Lies, Secrets and Silences: Selected Prose 1966-18. New York: Norton, 1979.

Ripoll, Tania. “Women’s Voices?” Unpublished manuscript, n.d.

Ritchie, Joy S. “Confronting the ‘Essential’ Problem: Reconnecting Feminist Theory and Pedagogy.” Journal of Advanced Composition 10 (Fall 1990): 249-73.

Rose, Mike. Lives on the Boundary: A Moving Account of the Struggles and Achievements of Americas Educational Underclass. New York: Penguin, 1989.

Russ, Joanna. How to Suppress Women’s Writing. Austin: U of Texas P, 1983.

Schuberr, Lisa. “The Thing I Came For. . . .” Undergraduate thesis. U of Minnesota, 1990.

Spender, Dale. Man Made Language. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 1985.

Suleiman, Susan Rubin. “(Re)writing the Body: The Politics and Poetics of Female Eroticism.” Poetics Today 6 (1985): 44-55.

Tompkins, Jane. “Me and My Shadow.” New Literary History 19 (Autumn 1987): 169-78.

Williams, Patricia J. The Alchemy of Race and Rights. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1991.

Woolf, Virginia. A Room of Ones Own. San Diego: Harcourt, 1929.

Yates, Gayle Graham. Mississippi Mind: A Personal Cultural History of an American State. U of Tennessee P, 1990.

Hollis, Karyn L. “Feminism in Writing Workshops: A New Pedagogy.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 340-348.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Gender Students Narratives Writing Research Women Men Play Feminism Workshops Pedagogy

Works Cited

Annas, Pamela J. “Silences: Feminist Language Research and the Teaching of Writing.” Teaching Writing Pedagogy, Gender and Equity. Ed. Cynthia L. Caywood and Lillian R. Overing. Albany: State U of New York P, 1987. 3-17.

— .”Style as Politics: A Feminist Approach to the Teaching of Writing.” College English 47 (Apr. 1985): 360-71.

Belenky, Mary Field, Blythe McVicker Clinchy, Nancy Rule Goldberger, and Jill Mattock Tarule. Women’s Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice and Mind. New York: Basic, 1986. Bleier, Ruth ed. Feminist Approaches to Science. New York: Pergamon, 1986.

—. Science and Gender: A Critique of Biology and Its Theories on Women. New York: Pergamon, 1984.

Cambridge, Barbara. “Equal Opportunity Writing Classrooms: Accommodating Interactional Differences between the Genders in the Writing Classroom.” Writing Instructor 7 (Fall 1987): 30-39.

Caywood, Cynthia L., and Lillian R. Overing, eds. Teaching Writing: Pedagogy, Gender and Equity. Albany: State U of New York P, 1987.

The Chicago Manual of Style. 13th ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1982.

Chodotow, Nancy. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley: U of California P, 1978.

Cooper, Marilyn, and Cynthia L. Selfe. “Computer Conferences and Learning: Authority, Resistance, and Internally Persuasive Discourse.” College English 52 (Dee. 1990): 847-70.

Culley, Margo, and Catherine Portuges, eds. Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching. Boston: Routledge, 1985.

Flynn, Elizabeth A. “Composing as a Woman.” CCC 39 (Dec. 1988): 423-35.

—. “Composing ‘Composing as a Woman’: A Perspective on Research.” CCC 41 (Feb. 1990): 83-89.

Frank, Francine Wattman, and Paula A. Treichler. Language, Gender, and Professional Writing. New York: MLA,1989.

Frey, Olivia. “Beyond Literary Darwinism: Women’s Voices and Critical Discourse.” College English 52 (Sept. 1990): 507-26.

Gibaldi, Joseph, and Walter S. Achtert. MIA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers. 3rd ed. New York: MLA,1988.

Gilligan, Carol. In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1982.

Harding, Sandra. The Science Question in Feminism. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1986.

Jensen, George H., and John K. DiTiberio. Personality and the Teaching of Composition. Norwood: Ablex, 1989.

Miller, Casey, and Kate Swift. The Handbook of Nonsexist Writing. 1980. 2nd rev. ed. New York: Harper, 1988.

National Council of Teachers of English. Guidelines for Nonsexist Use of Language in NCTE Publication. Urbana: NCTE, 1975. Rpt. in Sexism and Language. Ed. A.P. Nilsen et al. Urbana: NCTE, 1977, 1985. 181-91.

Osborne, Susan. “‘Revision/Re-vision’: A Feminist Writing Class.” Rhetoric Review 9 (Spring 1991): 258-73.

Rosenthal, Rae. “Male and Female Discourse: A Bilingual Approach to English 101.” Focuses 2 (Fall 1990): 99-114.

Selfe, Cynthia. “Technology in the English Classroom: Computers Through the Lens of FeministTheory.” Computers and Community. Ed. Carolyn Handa. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1990. 118-40.

Sirc, Geoffrey. “Gender and ‘Writing Formations’ in First-Year Narratives.” Freshman English News 18 (Fall 1989): 4-11.

Weedon, Chris. Feminist Practice and Poststructuralist Theory. New York: Basil Blackwell, 1987.

Weiler, Kathleen, ed. Women Teaching for Change: Gender, Class and Power. South Hadley: Bergin, 1988.

Kraemer, Don J., Jr. “Gender and the Autobiographical Essay: A Critical Extension of the Research.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 323-339.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Women Writing Faculty Students Gender Autobiography Feminism Language Knowledge Groups Teachers Research LPeterson

Works Cited

Berlin, James. “Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class.” College English 50 (Sept. 1988): 477-94.

Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.

Flynn, Elizabeth A. “Composing as a Woman.” CCC 39 (Dec. 1988): 423-35.

Habermas, Jurgen. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures. Trans. Frederick G. Lawrence. Cambridge: The MIT P, 1987.

Kraemer, Don J., Jr. “Teaching the Way We Learn.” Works and Days 17 (Fall 1991): 15-28.

Peterson, Linda H. “Gender and the Autobiographical Essay: Research Perspectives, Pedagogical Practices.” CCC 42 (May 1991): 170-83.

Phelps, Louise Wetherbee. Composition as a Human Science: Contributions to the Self-Understanding of a Discipline. New York: Oxford UP, 1988.

Pigott, Margaret B. “Sexist Roadblocks in Inventing, Focusing, and Writing.” College English 40 (Apr. 1979): 922-27.

Rose, Shirley K. “Reading Representative Anecdotes of Literacy Practice; or ‘See Dick and Jane Read and Write!”’ Rhetoric Review 8 (Spring 1990): 244-59.

Sirc, Geoffrey. “Gender and ‘Writing Formations’ in First-Year Narratives.” Freshman English News 18 (Fall 1989): 4-11.

Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll. “Writing History: Language, Class, and Gender.” Feminist Studies/Critical Studies. Ed. Teresa de Lauretis. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1986.31-54.

Winnett, Susan. “Coming Unstrung: Women, Men, Narrative, and Principles of Pleasure.” PMLA 105(May 1990): 505-18.

Zebroski, James Thomas. “The English Department and Social Class: Resisting Writing.” The Right to Literacy. Ed. Andrea A. Lunsford, Helene Moglen, and James Slevin. New York: MLA, 1990. 81-87.

Sciachitano, et al. “A Symposium on Feminist Experiences in the Composition Classroom.” CCC 43.3 (1992): 297-322.

Abstract:

Keywords:

ccc43.3 Students Women Classrooms Feminism Difference Composition Experience Authority Writing Teachers Body Pedagogy Discussion

Works Cited

Bauer, Dale M. “The Other ‘F’ Word: The Feminist in the Classroom.” College English 52 (Apr. 1990): 385-96.

Bauer, Dale M., and Susan C. Jarratt. “Feminist Sophistics: Teaching with an Attitude.” Changing Classroom Practices. Ed. David Downing. U of Illinois P, forthcoming.

Bennett, S. K. “Student Perceptions and Expectations for Male and Female Instructors: Evidence Relating to the Question of Gender Bias in Teaching Evaluation.” Journal of Educational Psychology 74 (Apr. 1982): 170-79.

Berlin, James A. Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in American Colleges, 1900-1985. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1987.

Bizzell, Patricia. “Power, Authority, and Critical Pedagogy.” Journal of Basic Writing 10.2 (Fall 1991): 54-70.

Brodkey, Linda. “Picturing Writing: Writers in the Modern World.” Academic Writing as Social Practice. Philadelphia: Temple UP, 1987. 54-86.

—. “Transvaluing Difference.” College English 51 (Oct. 1989): 597-601.

Culley, Margo, et al. “The Politics of Nurturance.” Gendered Subjects: The Dynamics of Feminist Teaching. Ed. Margo Culley and Catherine Porruges. Boston: Routledge, 1985.

Elbow, Peter. “Reflections on Academic Discourse: How It Relates to Freshmen and Colleagues.” College English 53 (Feb. 1991): 135-55.

Faludi, Susan. Backlash: The Undeclared War against American Women. New York: Crown, 1991.

Flynn, Elizabeth A. “Composing as a Woman.” CCC 39 (Dec. 1988): 423-35.

—. “Composing ‘Composing as a Woman’: A Perspective on Research.” CCC 41 (Feb. 1990): 83-89.

Friedman, Susan Stanford. “Authority in the Feminist Classroom: A Contradiction in Terms?” Culley and Portuges. 203-07.

Giroux, Henry A. Schooling and the Struggle for Public Life. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1988. Goldberg, Natalie. Writing Down the Bones: Freeing the Writer Within. Boston: Shambhala, 1986. Holbrook, Sue Ellen. “Women’s Work: The Feminizing of Composition.” Rhetoric Review 9 (Spring 1991): 201-29.

hooks, bell. “Feminist Focus on Men: A Comment.” Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. Boston: South End, 1989. 127-33.

—. Yearning. Race, Gender, and Cultural Politics. Boston: South End, 1990.

Hunter, Susan. “A Woman’s Place Is in the Composition Classroom: Pedagogy, Gender, and Difference.” Rhetoric Review 9 (Spring 1991): 230-45.

Jarratt, Susan C. “Feminism and Composition: The Case for Conflict.” Contending with Words: Composition in a Postmodern Era. Ed. Patricia Harkin and John Schilb. New York: MLA, 1991. 105-25.

Lather, Patti. Getting Smart: Feminist Research and Pedagogy With/In the Postmodern. New York: Routledge, 1991.

Lewis, Magda, and Roger 1. Simon. “A Discourse Not Intended for Her: Learning and Teaching within Patriarchy.” Harvard Educational Review 56 (Oct. 1986): 457-72.

Martin, Emily. The Woman in the Body: A Cultural Analysis of Reproduction. Boston: Beacon, 1987.

Miller, Susan. “The Feminization of Composition.” The Politics of Writing Instruction: Postsecondary. Ed. Richard Bullock and John Trimbur. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook, 1991. 39-53.

Morrison, Toni. A World of Ideas. With Bill Moyers. Public Television. New York Public Library. n.d.

Myers, Greg. “Reality, Consensus, and Reform in the Rhetoric of Composition Teaching.” College English 48 (Feb. 1986): 154-74.

Ohmann, Richard. Politics of Letters. Middletown: Wesleyan UP, 1987.

Rich, Adrienne. “Taking Women Students Seriously.” On Lies, Secrets, Silences. New York: Norton, 1979. 237-45.

Runciman, Lex. “Fun?” College English 53 (Feb. 1991): 156-62.

Salholz, Eloise, et al. “Women Under Assault.” Newsweek 16 July 1990: 23-24.

Sandler, Bernice Resnick. “Women Faculty at Work in the Classroom, or, Why It Still Hurts to Be a Woman in Labor.” Communication Education 40 (Jan. 1991): 6-15.

Shor, Ira. Critical Teaching and Everyday Life. Boston: South End, 1980.

Trimbur, John. “Consensus and Difference in Collaborative Learning.” College English 51 (Oct. 1989): 602-16.

Weiler, Kathleen. Women Teaching for Change: Gender, Class, and Power. South Hadley: Bergin, 1988.

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/v41-2

Pickett, Nell Ann. Rev. of The American Community College by Arthur M. Cohen and Florence B. Brawer. CCC 41.2 (1990): 226-227.

Harris, Joseph. Rev. of Rescuing the Subject: A Critical Introduction to Rhetoric and the Writer by Susan Miller; The Written World: Reading and Writing in Social Contexts by Susan Miller. CCC 41.2 (1990): 227-229.

Brandt, Deborah. Rev. of Writing as Social Action by Marilyn M. Cooper and Michael Holzman. CCC 41.2 (1990): 229-231.

Middleton, Joyce Irene. Rev. of The Double Perspective: Language, Literacy, and Social Relations by David Bleich. CCC 41.2 (1990): 231-233.

Gere, Anne Ruggles. Rev. of Writing and Response: Theory, Practice, and Research by Chris M. Anson. CCC 41.2 (1990): 233-234.

Philbin, Alice. Rev. of Technical and Business Communication: Bibliographic Essays for Teachers and Corporate Trainers by Charles H. Sides. CCC 41.2 (1990): 234-235.

Holdstein, Deborah H. Rev. of Writing and Technique by David Dobrin. CCC 41.2 (1990): 235-237.

Bernhardt, Stephen A. Rev. of Worlds of Writing: Teaching and Learning in Discourse Communities at Work by Carolyn B. Matelene. CCC 41.2 (1990): 237-239.

Fenza, D. W. Rev. of Creative Writing in America: Theory and Pedagogy by Joseph M. Moxley. CCC 41.2 (1990): 239-240.

Cook, Albert B. “Response to Donald C. Stewart, ‘What Is an English Major, and What Should It Be?'” CCC 41.2 (1990): 223-224.

Stewart, Donald C. “Reply by Donald C. Stewart.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 224-225.

Fulwiler, Toby. “Looking and Listening for My Voice.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 214-220.

Brueggemann, Brenda Jo. “Signs and Numbers of the Times: Harper’s ‘Index’ as an Essay Prompt.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 220-222.

Huot, Brian. “Reliability, Validity, and Holistic Scoring: What We Know and What We Need to Know.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 201-213.

Abstract:

The author’s purpose in this essay is “to outline the present state of holistic writing evaluation, the inflated position of reliability and the neglected status of validity, and to consider what we know and what we need to know in order to establish the theoretic soundness of holistic scoring procedures.” Holistic, rubric-based scoring emphasizes the reliability of scores, but the author warns that these holistic scoring procedures change the natural relationship between the reader and the text, forcing the scorer to look narrowly at a piece of writing instead of valuing a personal, subjective reaction to the text. The author argues that the field needs to further develop holistic scoring procedures that will be more accurate and valid in assessing the effectiveness of student writing.

Keywords:

ccc41.2 Holistic Writing Validity Reliability Raters Score Testing Students Evaluation Quality Research EWhite

Works Cited

Anastasi, Anne. Psychological Testing. 4th ed. New York: Macmillan, 1976.

Anderson, Richard c., and P. David Pearson. “A Schema-Theoretic View of Basic Processes in Reading Comprehension.” Handbook of Reading Research. Ed. P. David Pearson. New York: Longman, 1984. 225-92.

Baurer, Barbara A. A Study of the Reliabilities and Cost Efficiencies of Three Methods of Assessment for Writing Ability. ERIC, 1981. ED 216 357.

Bleich, David. Readings and Feelings: An Introduction to Subjective Criticism. Urbana: NCTE, 1975.

—. Subjective Criticism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1978.

Braddock, Richard, Richard Lloyd-Jones, and Lowell Schoer. Research in Written Composition. Champaign: NCTE, 1963.

Breland, Hunter M. “Can Multiple-Choice Tests Measure Writing Skills?” College Board Review 103 (Spring 1977): 11-13, 23-33.

Breland, Hunter M., and Robert J. Jones. “Perceptions of Writing Skills.” Written Communication 1 (Jan. 1984): 10 1-09.

Charney, Davida A. “The Validity of Using Holistic Scoring to Evaluate Writing: A Critical Overview.” Research in the Teaching of English 18 (Feb. 1984): 65-81.

Collins, James L., and Michael M. Williamson. “Spoken Language and Semantic Abbreviation in Writing.” Research in the Teaching of English 15 (February 1981): 23-35.

Cooper, Charles R. “Holistic Evaluation of Writing.” Evaluating Writing: Describing, Measuring, Judging. Ed. Charles R. Cooper and Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE, 1977. 3-32.

Crowhurst, Marion. “Syntactic Complexity and Teachers’ Ratings of Narratives and Arguments.” Research in the Teaching of English 14 (Oct. 1980): 223-32.

Davis, Barbara G., Michael Scriven, and Susan Thomas. The Evaluation of Composition Instruction. Inverness: Edgepress, 1981.

Diederich, Paul B. Measuring Growth in English. Urbana: NCTE, 1974.

Diederich, Paul B., John W. French, and Sydell T. Carlton. Factors in the judgment of Writing Quality. Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1961. ETS RB NO 61-15.

Faigley, Lester, Roger D. Cherry, David A. Jolliffe, and Anna M. Skinner. Assessing Writers’ Knowledge and Processes of Composing. Norwood: Ablex, 1985.

Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in This Class? Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1980.

Freedman, Sarah W. “How Characteristics of Students’ Essays Influence Teachers’ Evaluation.” Journal of Educational Psychology 71 (June 1979): 328-38.

—. “Influences of Evaluation of Expository Essays: Beyond the Text.” Research in the Teaching of English 15 (Oct. 1981): 245-55.

—. “Influences on the Evaluators of Student Writing.” DAI 37 (1977): 5306A. Stanford U.

—. “Why Do Teachers Give the Grades They Do?” CCC30 (May 1979): 161-64.

Freedman, Sarah W., and Robert C. Calfee. “Holistic Assessment of Writing: Experimental Design and Cognitive Theory.” Research on Writing. Ed. Peter Mosenthal, Lynne Tamor, and Sean A. Walmsley. New York: Longman, 1983. 75-98.

Gebhard, Anne O. “Writing Quality and Syntax: A Transformational Analysis of Three Prose Samples.” Research in the Teaching of English 12 (Oct. 1978): 211-31.

Gere, Anne R. “Written Composition: Toward a Theory of Evaluation.” College English 42 (Sept. 1980): 44-48.

Godshalk, Fred I., Frances Swineford, and William E. Coffman. The Measurement of Writing Ability. Research Monograph 6. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1966.

Goodman, Kenneth S. Language and Literacy: The Selected Writings of Kenneth S. Goodman. London: Rouc1edge and Kegan Paul, 1982.

Greenberg, Karen. The Effects of Variations in Essay Questions on the Writing Performance of CUNY Freshmen. New York: CUNY Instructional Resource Center, 1981.

Grobe, Cary. “Syntactic Maturity., Mechanics and Vocabulary as Predictors of Quality Ratings.” Research in the Teaching of English 15 (Feb. 1981): 75-88.

Harris, Winfred H. “Teacher Response to Student Writing: A Study of the Response Patterns of High School English Teachers to Determine the Basis for Teacher Judgment of Student Writing.” Research in the Teaching of English 11 (May 1977): 175-85.

Hoetker, James. “Essay Examination Topics and Student Writing.” CCC 33 (Dec. 1982): 377-92.

Holland, Norman N. The Dynamics of Literary Response. New York: Oxford UP, 1968.

Huot, Brian. “The Validity of Holistic Scoring: A Comparison of the Talk-Aloud Protocols of Novice and Expert Holistic Raters.” Diss. Indiana U of Pennsylvania, 1988.

Iser, Wolfgang. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1978.

Jones, Bennie E. “Marking of Student Writing by High School Teachers in Virginia During 1976.” DAI 38 (1978): 3911A. U of Virginia.

Lyman, Howard B. Test Scores and What They Mean. 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice, 1978.

Markham, Lynda R. “Influences of Handwriting Quality on Teacher Evaluation of Student Work.” American Educational Research Journal 13 (Fall 1976): 277-83.

McColly, William. “What Does Educational Research Say About the Judging of Writing?” Journal of Educational Research 64 (December 1970): 148-56.

Myers, Miles. A Procedure for Writing Assessment and Holistic Scoring. Urbana: NCTE, 1980.

Neilsen, Lorraine, and Gene Piche. “The Influence of Headed Nominal Complexity and Lexical Choice on Teachers’ Evaluation of Writing.” Research. in the Teaching of English 15 (Feb. 1981): 65-74.

Nold, Ellen W. The Basics of Research: The Evaluation of Writing. ERIC, 1978. ED 166 713.

Nold, Ellen W., and Sarah W. Freedman. “An Analysis of Readers’ Responses to Essays.” Research in the Teaching of English 11 (May 1977): 164-74.

Odell, Lee, and Charles R. Cooper. “Procedures for Evaluating Writing: Assumptions and Research.” College English 42 (Sept. 1980): 35-43.

Popham, James W. Modern Educational Measurement. Englewood: Prentice, 1981.

Puma, Vincent D. “The Effects of the Degree of Audience Intimacy on Linguistic Features and Quality in the Audience Specified Essays of First Year College Students.” Diss. Indiana U of Pennsylvania, 1986.

Scherer, Darlene L. Measuring the Measurements: A Study of the Evaluation of Writing-An Annotated Bibliography. ERIC, 1985. ED 260 455.

Sloan, Charles A., and Iris McGinnis. The Effects of Handwriting on Teachers’ Grading of High School Essays. ERIC, 1978. ED 220 836.

Smith, Frank. Understanding Reading. 3rd ed. New York: Holt, 1983.

—. “The Writer as Reader.” Language Arts 60 (1983): 558-67.

Smith, William L. Personal Correspondence. U of Pittsburgh, 1988.

Spandel, Vicki, and Richard J. Stiggins. Direct Measures of Writing Skill: Issues and Applications. Portland: Northwest Regional Laboratory, 1980.

Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests. Washington: American Psychological Association, 1974.

Stewart, Murray F., and Cary H. Grobe. “Syntactic Maturity, Mechanics, Vocabulary and Teachers’ Quality Ratings.” Research in the Teaching of English 13 (Oct. 1979): 207-15.

Stock, Patricia L., and Jay L. Robinson. “Taking on Testing.” English Education 19 (May 1987): 93-121.

Tierney, Robert J., and P. David Pearson. “Toward a Composing Model of Reading.” Language Arts 60 (May 1983): 568-80.

Vaughan, Carolyn. “What Affects Raters’ Judgments)” CCCC Convention. Atlanta, Mar. 1987.

Veal, L. Ramon, and Sally A. Hudson. “Direct and Indirect Measures for Large-Scale Evaluation of Writing.” Research in the Teaching of English 17 (Oct. 1983): 290-96.

White, Edward M. Teaching and Assessing Writing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.

White, Edward M., and Linda G. Polin. Research in Effective Teaching of Writing: Volumes I and II. Final Project Report to California State U Foundation. ERIC, 1986. ED 275007.

White, Edward M. “Language and Reality in Writing Assessment.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 187-200.

Abstract:

This article investigates the difference between how compositionists assess writing and how those outside the field, such as administration, assess writing performance, citing that the difference comes from a conflict between discourse communities. This spells trouble for writing programs, who are evaluated by measurement specialists who come from other fields that have a different set of assumptions, definitions, and beliefs about writing. The author argues that writing teachers are right to be vocal against measurement techniques that reduce writing to a mechanical skill, but to dismiss all assessment is unwise, for there is value in measurement practices that take into account the complex nature of writing. Above all, the author argues, compositionists interested in assessment should broaden their reading in order to understand, appreciate, and use knowledge on writing evaluation produced by other fields.

Keywords:

ccc41.2 Language Writing Measurement Assessment Value World Community Score Discourse Students Data Testing Reality

Works Cited

Bloom, Benjamin, et al. Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw, 1971.

Cronbach, 1. J., M. Rajaratnam, and G. Gleser. “Theory of Generalizability: A Liberation of Reliability Theory.” British Journal of Statistical Psychology 16.2 (963): 137-63.

Hillocks, George, J r. Research on Written Composition: New Directions for Teaching. Urbana: NCTE, 1986.

Leitch, Vincent. “Deconstruction and Pedagogy.” Writing and Reading Differently. Ed. G. Douglas Atkins and Michael Johnson. Lawrence: UP of Kansas, 1985. 1-26.

Sapir, Edward. “The Status of Linguistics as a Science.” Selected Writings in Language. Culture and Personality. Ed. David G. Mandelbaum. Berkeley: U of California P, 1963. 160-66.

Skinner, B. F. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New York: Knopf, 1972.

White, Edward M. Teaching and Assessing Writing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985.

White, Edward M., and Leon Thomas. “Racial Minorities and Writing Skills Assessment in The California State University and Colleges.” College English 43 (Mar. 1981): 276-83.

Whorf, Benjamin L. “Science and Linguistics'” Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings. Ed. John B. Carroll. Cambridge: MIT P, 1956. 207-19.

Tirrell, Mary Kay. “James Britton: An Impressionistic Sketch.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 166-171.

Pradl, Gordon M. “Collaborating with Jimmy Britton.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 171-175.

Warnock, John. “Rejoicing in the Margins.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 176-181.

Britton, James. “James Britton: An Impressionistic Sketch: A Response.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 181-186.

Keywords:

ccc41.2 JBritton Language Teaching Writing Research Theory Development Discourse Field English Knowledge

Works Cited

Bernstein, Richard J. Praxis and Action. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1971.

Bloom, Harold. The Anxiety of Influence: A Theory of Poetry. New York: Oxford UP, 1973.

Boomer, Garth. “The Helping Hand Strikes Again.”‘ English Education 21 (Oct. 1989): 132-51.

Britton, James. “Attempting to Clarify Our Objectives for Teaching English.” English Education 18 (Oct. 1986): 153-58.

—. “English Teaching: Prospect and Retrospect.” Prospect and Retrospect 201-15.

—. Language and Learning. Harmondsworth, Eng.: Penguin, 1970.

—. “Language and the Nature of Learning: An Individual Perspective.” The Teaching of English. Ed. James Squire. The 76th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1977. 1-38.

—. “A Note on Teaching, Research and ‘Development.'” Prospect and Retrospect 149-52.

—-. “Notes on a Working Hypothesis about Writing.” Prospect and Retrospect 123-39.

—. Prospect and Retrospect: Selected Essays of James Britton. Ed. Gordon M. Pradl. Upper Montclair: Boynton, 1982.

—. “Second Thoughts on Learning.” Language Arts 62 (Jan. 1985): 72-77.

—. “The Spectator as Theorist: A Reply.” English Education 21 (Feb. 1989): 5.)-60.

—. “Spectator Role and the Beginnings of Writing.” Prospect and Retrospect 46-67.

—. “Writing and the Story World.”‘ Exploration of Children’s Writing Development. Ed. Gordon Wells and Barry Kroll. Chichester: Wiley, 1983. 3-30.

Britton, James, Tony Burgess, Nancy Martin, Alex McLeod, and Harold Rosen. The Development of Writing Abilities (11-18). London: Macmillan, 1975.

Burke, Kenneth. “In Response to Booth: Dancing with Tears in My Eyes.” Critical Inquiry 1. 1 (Sept. 1974): 23-31.

Coles, William E. The Plural I: The Teaching of Writing. New York: Holt, 1978.

Emig, Janet. The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders. Urbana: NCTE, 1971.

Gill, Margaret. “And Gladly Learn.”‘ Lightfoot and Martin 271-72.

Halliday, M. A. K. Explorations in the Function of Language. London: Edward Arnold, 1973.

Kinneavy, James. A Theory of Discourse. New York: Prentice, 1971.

Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1970.

Lightfoot, Martin, and Nancy Martin. The Word for Teaching Is Learning: Essays for James Britton. London: Heinemann, 1988.

Macrorie, Ken. Twenty Teachers. New York: Oxford UP, 1984.

Moffett, James. Teaching the Universe of Discourse. Boston: Houghton, 1968.

North, Stephen M. The Making of Knowledge in Composition: Portrait of an Emerging Field. Upper Montclair: Boynton, 1987.

Oakeshott, Michael. The Voice of Poetry in the Conversation of Mankind. London: Bowes, 1959.

Phelps, Louise Wetherbee. Composition as a Human Science. New York: Oxford UP, 1988.

Pradl, Gordon. “Learning Listening.”‘ Lightfoot and Martin 33-48.

Pringle, Ian. “Jimmy Britton and Linguistics.” Lightfoot and Martin 264-66.

Rosenblatt, Louise. Literature as Exploration. 1938. 3rd ed. New York: Barnes, 1976.

Schon, Donald A. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey, 1987.

Tirrell, Mary Kay. “A Study of Two Scholar/Practitioners in Composition: Developmental Themes in the Work of James Moffett and James Britton.” Diss. U of Southern California, 1988.

Tompkins, Jane. “Fighting Words: Unlearning to Write the Critical Essay.” Georgia Review 42 (Fall 1988): 585-90.

Volosinov, V. N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York: Seminar, 1973.

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

Warnock, John. “Brittonism.” Rev. of The Development of Writing Abilities (11-18). Rhetoric Society Quarterly 9 (Winter 1979): 7-15.

Young, Richard. “Paradigms and Problems: Needed Research in Rhetorical Invention.” Research on Composing: Points of Departure. Ed. Charles R. Cooper and Lee Odell. Urbana: NCTE, 1978. 29-47.

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

Raines, Helon Howell. “Is There a Writing Program in This College? Two Hundred and Thirty-Six Two-Year Schools Respond.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 151-165.

Abstract:

This article, based on a survey of 236 community college writing programs and eight telephone interviews of chairs of two-year college writing departments, argues that “two year schools are…as different from one another as they are alike.” The survey asked questions about the schools’ institutional structure for writing and English departments, the curriculum, the conceived purpose of writing courses, the faculty, the students, the teaching loads, and support services, such as WAC and writing centers, at the college. The challenges of teaching at two-year institutions – given its much more socially and economically diverse student population – are not often heard because two-year college writing instructors are too busy with large teaching loads and do not have the financial assistance to do research and travel to national composition conferences to share their experiences.

Keywords:

ccc41.2 Writing WritingProgram Colleges Schools Students Faculty Survey Questions English

Works Cited

American Association of Community and Junior Colleges. Membership Directory 1988. Ed. Jim Palmer. Washington: National Center for Higher Education, 1988.

American Association of Community and Junior Colleges Commission on the Future of Community Colleges. Building Communities: A Vision for a New Century. Washington: Center for Higher Education, 1988.

Bartholomae, David. ” Freshman English, Composition, and CCCC .” CCC 40 (February 1989); 38-50.

English in the Two-Year College. Report of a Joint Committee of the National Council of Teachers of English and the Conference on College Composition and Communication. Urbana: NCTE, 1965.

“Facts in Brief.” Higher Education and National Affairs 6 Oct. 1986: 3.

Fish, Stanley. Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretative Communities. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1980.

Hairston, Maxine. “Breaking Our Bonds and Reaffirming Our Connections.” CCC 36 (Oct. 1985); 272-82.

Lunsford, Andrea. ” Composing Ourselves: Politics, Commitment, and the Teaching of Writing .” CCC 41 (Feb. 1990): 71-82.

National Association of College and University Business Officers. 1987 Comparative Financial Statistics. Washington; Financial Management Center, 1987.

North, Stephen M. The Making of Knowledge in Composition: Portrait of an Emerging Field. Montclair: Boynton, 1988.

Raines, Helon. “Teaching Writing in the Two-Year College.” Writing Program Administration 12.1-2 (Fall/Winter 1988): 29-37.

United States Department of Education. Center for Education Statistics. Institutional Characteristics of Colleges and Universities. Washington: Dept. of Education, 1986.

McPherson. Elisabeth. “Remembering, Regretting, and Rejoicing: The Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the Two-Year College Regionals.” CCC 41.2 (1990): 137-150.

Abstract:

This article is a history and a reflection of the two-year college regional conventions, which were sponsored by NCTE and CCCC and established in 1965 for the purpose of providing professional development and recognition for the teachers of English at junior community colleges. Beginning in the 1970s, community college writing instructors, through the collective voice of the National Junior College Committee, issued statements about the training and the workload of writing teachers at community colleges. Over the past twenty-five years, two-year college writing instructors have been subject to trends and fads in writing instruction and pressure from government and corporate interests. The author insists that teachers cut through these distractions and influences and instead focus on the purpose of college writing – “helping students think more clearly” – by constantly reevaluating their courses through asking “What is this class for?”

Keywords:

ccc41.2 College Students Teachers NCTE CommunityColleges JuniorColleges CCCC Community Conferences Regionals Meetings

Works Cited

An Annotated List of Training Programs for Community College English Teachers: A CCCC Report. Urbana: ERIC Clearing House for Junior Colleges, 1977.

Barton, Thomas L., and Anna M. Beachner, eds. Teaching English in the Two- Year College. Menlo Park: Cummings, 1970.

English in the Two-Year College. Champaign: NCTE, 1965.

Guidelines for the Workload of the College English Teacher. Urbana: NCTE, 1987.

Research and the Development of English Programs in the Junior College. Champaign: NCTE, 1965.

Stewart, Donald C. ” What is an English Major, and What Should It Be? ” CCC 40 (May 1989): 188-202.

Students’ Right to Their Own Language. CCC [Special Issue] 25 (Fall 1974): 1-32.

Subscribe to CCC
Purchase a print copy of this issue

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

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).

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

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.