Conference on College Composition and Communication Logo

College Composition and Communication

 

Editor: Malea Powell
Michigan State University
Email: ccceditorialteam@gmail.com

View the submission guidelines here. Questions may be sent to editor Malea Powell at ccceditorialteam@gmail.com.

Access current and previous issues

Access CCC Online

Subscribe to College Composition and Communication!

 

About CCC

College Composition and Communication publishes research and scholarship in rhetoric and composition studies that supports college teachers in reflecting on and improving their practices in teaching writing and that reflects the most current scholarship and theory in the field. The field of composition studies draws on research and theories from a broad range of humanistic disciplines—English studies, rhetoric, cultural studies, LGBT studies, gender studies, critical theory, education, technology studies, race studies, communication, philosophy of language, anthropology, sociology, and others—and from within composition and rhetoric studies, where a number of subfields have also developed, such as technical communication, computers and composition, writing across the curriculum, research practices, and the history of these fields.

Next Editors Selected
NCTE and CCCC welcome Dr. Matthew Davis, of the University of Massachusetts Boston, and Dr. Kara Taczak, of the University of Central Florida, as incoming editors of College Composition and Communication. Kara and Matt were editorial assistants at CCC as graduate students and are thrilled to return to service at the journal after an editorial tenure at Composition Studies. Their first issue will be published in February 2025.

CCCC Technical and Scientific Communication Awards

Nomination Deadline: June 1

Purpose: CCCC recognizes works in Technical and Scientific Communication across these six categories:

  • Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
  • Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
  • Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
  • Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical or Scientific Communication
  • Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
  • Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication

The selection committee may decide not to grant an award in a given category if the quality of submissions is deemed insufficiently high.

Eligibility: The awards competition is open to works published in calendar years 2023 and 2024 for the 2025 award. To be eligible for the awards, a nominee must be a member of CCCC and/or NCTE at the time of nomination. To nominate a work for the awards, the author, editor, publisher, or reader must be a CCCC and/or NCTE member.

Award Specifics: For a work to be considered, the nomination must include:

  • A copy of the article or full citation information for a book. For articles in journals or collections, the individual article must be submitted. Any work originally written in a language other than English must be submitted in translation.
  • Identification of the category for which the work is to be considered. Each submission may be nominated in only one category. Individuals submitting nominations are encouraged to consult with authors about the category most appropriate for their work. Self-nominations are permitted.
  • Information about the author. This should include the author’s name, telephone number, mailing address, and email address.

Nominations should be sent by June 1, 2024, to cccc@ncte.org.

Winners will be notified in January and are presented with a certificate during the CCCC Awards Session at the CCCC Convention.

Past Winners
2024

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Michael L. Black, Transparent Designs: Personal Computing and the Politics of User-friendliness, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2022

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Amber Lancaster and Carie S. T. King, “Localized Usability and Agency in Design: Whose Voices Are We Advocating?,” Technical Communication, 2022

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Jessica Edwards and Josie Walwema, “Black Women Imagining and Realizing Liberated Futures,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2022

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Jianfen Chen, Sarah Hughes, and Nupoor Ranade, “Reimagining student-centered learning: Accessible and inclusive syllabus design during and after the COVID-19 pandemic,” Computers and Composition, 2023

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Candice A. Welhausen, “Wicked Problems in Risk Assessment: Mapping Yellow Fever and Constructing Risk as an Embodied Experience,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2023

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Kristin C. Bennett and Mark A. Hannah, “Transforming the Rights-Based Encounter: Disability Rights, Disability Justice, and the Ethics of Access,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2022

2023

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Andrew Fiss, Performing Math: A History of Communication and Anxiety in the American Mathematics Classroom, Rutgers University Press, 2021

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Rebecca Walton and Godwin Y. Agboka, Equipping Technical Communicators for Social Justice Work: Theories, Methodologies, and Pedagogies, Utah State University Press, 2021

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Lynda C. Olman, “Decolonizing the Color-Line: A Topological Analysis of W.E.B. Du Bois’s Infographics for the 1900 Paris Exposition,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2022

Honorable Mention
Jason Tham, “Pasts and Futures of Design Thinking: Implications for Technical Communication,” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 2022

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Godwin Y. Agboka and Isidore K. Dorpenyo, “Curricular Efforts in Technical Communication After the Social Justice Turn,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2022

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Cana Uluak Itchuaqiyaq and Rebecca Walton, “Reviewer as Activist: Understanding Academic Review Through Conocimiento,” Rhetoric Review, 2021

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Laura Gonzales, Robin Lewy, Erika Hernandez Cuevas, and Vianna Lucia Gonzalez Ajiataz, “(Re)Designing Technical Documentation About COVID-19 with and for Indigenous Communities in Gainesville, Florida, Oaxaca de Juárez, Mexico, and Quetzaltenango, Guatemala,” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 2022

Honorable Mention
Godwin Y. Agboka, “What is on the Traditional Herbal Medicine Label? Technical Communication and Patient Safety in Ghana,” Technical Communication, 2021

2022

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Huaton Sun, Global Social Media Design: Bridging Differences Across Cultures, Oxford University Press, 2020

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Michael J. Klein (Ed.), Effective Teaching of Technical Communication: Theory, Practice, and Application, WAC Clearinghouse and University Press of Colorado, 2021

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Naoko Ozaki, Jillian Hill, and Mike Duncan, “The Rhetoric of Kamikaze Manuals,” Technical Communication, 2020

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Shannon Butts and Madison Jones, “Deep Mapping for Environmental Communication Design,” Communication Design Quarterly, 2021

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Fernando Sánchez, “Examining Methectic Technical Communication in an Urban Planning Comic Book,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2020

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Steven Fraiberg, “Unsettling Start-Up Ecosystems: Geographies, Mobilities, and Transnational Literacies in the Palestinian Start-Up Ecosystem,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2021

2021

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Rebecca Walton, Kristen Moore, and Natasha Jones, Technical Communication after the Social Justice Turn: Building Coalitions for Action, Routledge, 2019

Honorable Mention
Heidi Yoston Lawrence, Vaccine Rhetorics, The Ohio State University Press, 2020

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Edward A. Malone, David Wright, and Daniel Reardon (Eds.), Special Issue on Transmedia, Participatory Culture, and Digital Creation in Technical Communication, 2019

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Edward A. Malone, “‘Don’t Be a Dilbert’: Transmedia Storytelling as Technical Communication during and after World War II,” Technical Communication, 2019

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Cecilia D. Shelton, “Shifting Out of Neutral: Centering Difference, Bias, and Social Justice in a Business Writing Course,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2020

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Avery C. Edenfield, Steve Holmes, and Jared S. Colton, “Queering Tactical Technical Communication: DIY HRT,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2019

Honorable Mention
David Wright, “Sounding Off: Toward a Rhetoric of Sound in Technical Communication,” Technical Communication, 2019

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Lucía Durá, Lauren Perez, and Magdalena Chaparro, “Positive Deviance as Design Thinking: Challenging Notions of Stasis in Technical and Professional Communication,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2019

Josephine Walwema, “A Values-Driven Approach to Technical Communication,” Technical Communication, 2020

2020

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Elizabeth L. Angeli, Rhetorical Work in Emergency Medical Services: Communicating in the Unpredictable Workplace, Routledge

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Angela M. Haas and Michelle F. Eble (Editors), Key Theoretical Frameworks: Teaching Technical Communication in the Twenty-First Century, Utah State University Press

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Natasha N. Jones and Miriam F. Williams, “Technologies of Disenfranchisement: Literacy Tests and Black Voters in the US from 1890 to 1965,” Technical Communication, 2018

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Daniel Kenzie and Mary McCall, “Teaching Writing for the Health Professions: Disciplinary Intersections and Pedagogical Practice,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2018

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Madison Jones, “Sylvan Rhetorics: Roots and Branches of More-than-Human Publics,” Rhetoric Review, 2019

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Rebecca Walton and Sarah Beth Hopton, “All Vietnamese Men Are Brothers: Rhetorical Strategies and Community Engagement Practices Used to Support Victims of Agent Orange,” Technical Communication, 2018

2019

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Christa Teston, Bodies in Flux: Scientific Methods for Negotiating Medical Uncertainty, University of Chicago Press

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Natalia Matveeva, Michelle Moosally, and Russell Willerton (Editors), Special Issue on Plain Language, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 2017

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Lilly Campbell, “Simulation genres and student uptakes: The patient health record in clinical nursing simulations,” Written Communication, 2017

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Julie Watts, “Beyond Flexibility and Convenience: Using the Community of Inquiry Framework to Assess the Value of Online Graduate Education in Technical and Professional Communication,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2017

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Jordan Frith, “Big Data, Technical Communication, and the Smart City,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2017

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Lynda Walsh, “Visual invention and the composition of scientific research graphics: A topological approach,” Written Communication, 2018

2018

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Ehren Helmut Pflugfelder, Communicating Technology and Mobility: A Material Rhetoric for Transportation, Routledge

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Clay Spinuzzi (Ed), Special Issue on the Rhetoric of Entrepreneurship: Theories, Methodologies, and Practices, Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2017

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication Honorable Mention
Derek G. Ross (Ed), Topic-Driven Environmental Rhetoric, Routledge

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Kenneth C. Walker, “Mapping the Contours of Translation: Visualized Un/Certainties in the Ozone Hole Controversy,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2016

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Scott Warnock, Nicholas Rouse, Christopher Finnin, Frank Linnehan, and Dylan Dryer, “Measuring Quality, Evaluating Curricular Change: A 7-Year Assessment of Undergraduate Business Student Writing,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2017

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Natasha N. Jones, Kristen R. Moore, and Rebecca Walton, “Disrupting the Past to Disrupt the Future: An Antenarrative of Technical Communication,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2016

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Jenni Virtaluoto, Annalisa Sannino, and Yrjo Engestrom, “Surviving Outsourcing and Offshoring: Technical Communication Professionals in Search of a Future,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2016

2017

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Sean Zdenek, Reading Sounds: Closed-Captioned Media and Popular Culture, University of Chicago Press

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Pavel Zemliansky et al. (Eds), Rethinking Post-Communist Rhetoric: Perspectives on Rhetoric, Writing, and Professional Communication in Post-Soviet Spaces, Rowman & Littlefield

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Chelsea Redeker Milbourne, “Disruption, Spectacle, and Gender in Eighteenth-Century Technical Communication,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2016

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Rebecca K. Britt and Kristen Nicole Hatten
, “The Development and Validation of the eHealth Competency Scale: A Measurement of Self-Efficacy, Knowledge, Usage, and Motivation,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 2016

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Joanna Wolfe, “Teaching Students to Focus on the Data in Data Visualization,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2015

2016

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Huiling Ding, Rhetoric of a Global Epidemic: Transcultural Communication about SARS

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Miriam F. Williams and Octavio Pimentel (Eds.), Communicating Race, Ethnicity, and Identity in Technical Communication

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Sam Dragga and Gwendolyn Gong, “Dangerous Neighbors: Erasive Rhetoric and Communities at R.” Technical Communication, 61:2, 2014, 76-94

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Jim Suchan, “Gauging Openness to Written Communication Change: The Predictive Power of Metaphor.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 28:4, 2014, 447-476

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Clay Spinuzzi, “Toward a Typology of Activities: Understanding Internal Contradictions in Multiperspectival Activities,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 29:1, 2015, 3-35

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Joseph Jeyaraj, “Engineering and Narrative: Literary Prerequisites as Indirect Communication for Technical Writing,” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 44:2, 2014, 191-210

2015

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Amy Koerber, Breast or Bottle: Contemporary Controversies in Infant-Feeding Policy and Practice

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Eva R. Brumberger and Kathryn M. Northcut, Designing texts: Teaching visual communication

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Dmitri Stanchevici, “The Rhetorical Construction of Social Classes in Stalin’s Secret Police.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 43:3, 2013, 261-288

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Miles A. Kimball, “Visual Design Principles: An Empirical Study of Design Lore.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 43:1, 2013, 3-41

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Patricia Sullivan and Kristen Moore, “Time Talk: On Small Changes That Enact Infrastructural Mentoring for Undergraduate Women in Technical Fields.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 43:3, 2013, 333-354

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Peter J. Fadde and Patricia Sullivan, “Designing Communication for Collaboration Across Engineering Cultures: A teaching case.” connexions, 1:2, 2013, 135-158

2014

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Robert R. Johnson, Romancing the Atom: Nuclear Infatuation from the Radium Girls to Fukushima

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Johndan Johnson-Eilola and Stuart A. Selber, Solving Problems in Technical Communication

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical and Scientific Communication
Neil Lindeman, “Subjectivized Knowledge and Grassroots Advocacy: An Analysis of an Environmental Controversy in Northern California.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 27:1, 2013, 62-90

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Natasha Jones, Justin McDavid, Katie Derthick, Randy Dowell, and Jan Spyridakis
, “Plain Language in Environmental Policy Documents: An Assessment of Reader Comprehension and Perceptions.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42:4, 2012, 331-371

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Karen Schriver
, “What We Know about Expertise in Professional Communication.” In V. W. Berninger, (Ed.), Past, Present, and Future Contributions of Cognitive Writing Research to Cognitive Psychology. Psychology Press, 2012, 275-312

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Yvonne Cleary and Madelyn Flammia
, “Preparing Technical Communication Students to Function as User Advocates in a Self-Service Society.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42:3, 2012, 305-322

2013

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Huatong Sun
, Cross-cultural technology design: Creating culture-sensitive technology for local users

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Jessica Reyman and Mary Lay Schuster
, “Special Issue: Technical Communication and the Law,” Technical Communication Quarterly

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical or Scientific Communication
Sarah Read
, “The Mundane, Power, and Symmetry: A Reading of the Field with Dorothy Winsor and the Tradition of Ethnographic Research,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 20:4, 2011, 353-383

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Jacob E. McCarthy, Jeffrey T. Grabill, William Hart-Davidson, and Michael McLeod
, “Content Management in the Workplace: Community, Context, and a New Way to Organize Writing,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 25:4, 2011, 367-395

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Doug Brent
, “Transfer, Transformation, and Rhetorical Knowledge: Insights From Transfer Theory,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 25:4, 2011, 396-420

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Cheryl Ball
, “Assessing Scholarly Multimedia: A Rhetorical Genre Studies Approach,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 21:1, 2012, 61-77

2012

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Brad Mehlenbacher, Instruction and technology: Designs for everyday learning

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Margaret Hundleby and Jo Allen, Assessment in Technical and Professional Communication

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical or Scientific Communication
Edward A. Malone, “’Chrysler’s ‘Most Beautiful Engineer’: Lucille J. Pieti in the Pillory of Fame.” Technical Communication Quarterly, 19:2, 2010, 144-183

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Clay Spinuzzi, “Secret Sauce and Snake Oil: Writing Monthly Reports in a Highly Contingent Environment.” Written Communication, 27:4, 2010, 363-409

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
Jason Swarts, “Recycled Writing: Assembling Actor Networks From Reusable Content.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24:2, 2010, 127-163

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Natasha Artemeva and Janna Fox, “Awareness Versus Production: Probing Students’ Antecedent Genre Knowledge.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 24:4, 2010, 476-515

2010

Best Book in Technical or Scientific Communication
Carol Siri JohnsonThe Language of Work: Technical Communication at Lukens Steel, 1810-1925

Best Original Collection of Essays in Technical or Scientific Communication
Christina Hass, Written Communication, Special issue on Writing and Medicine, 26(3-4) July-October 2009, 215-396

Best Article Reporting Historical Research or Textual Studies in Technical or Scientific Communication
Catherine Schryer, Elena Afros, Marcellina Mian, Marlee Spafford, & Lorelei Lingard,
“The Trial of the Expert Witness: Negotiating Credibility in Child Abuse Correspondence,” Written Communication, 26(3), July 2009: 215-246

Best Article Reporting Qualitative or Quantitative Research in Technical or Scientific Communication
Christa Teston, “A Grounded Investigation of Genred Guidelines in Cancer Care Deliberations,” Written Communication, 26(3), July 2009: 320-348

Best Article on Philosophy or Theory of Technical or Scientific Communication
S. Scott Graham, “Agency and the Rhetoric of Medicine: Biomedical Brain Scans and the Ontology of Fibromyalgia,” Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(4), Fall 2009: 376-404

Best Article on Pedagogy or Curriculum in Technical or Scientific Communication
Rachel Spilka, “Practitioner Research Instruction: A Neglected Curricular Area in Technical Communication Undergraduate Programs,” Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 23(2), April 2009: 216-237

Click here for a list of recipients of the NCTE Technical and Scientific Communication Awards prior to 2010.

CCCC Tribal College Faculty Fellowship

Application Deadline: November 15

Purpose: The Tribal College Faculty Fellowship offers financial aid to selected faculty members currently working at tribally controlled colleges or at Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions (NASNTI’s) to attend the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) April 9–12, 2025, in Baltimore, MD. We are offering two Tribal College Faculty Fellowships in the amount of $1,500 each.

Featuring over 500 sessions focusing on teaching practices, writing and literacy programs, language research, history, theory, information technologies, and professional and technical communication, the annual CCCC meeting provides a forum for thinking, learning, networking, and presenting research on the teaching and learning of writing.

With this Fellowship, CCCC hopes to create new opportunities for Tribal College Faculty members and faculty at Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions to become involved in CCCC and for CCCC to carry out its mission of serving as a truly representative national advocate for language and literacy education.

Eligibility: Open to faculty members currently working at tribally controlled colleges or Native American-Serving Nontribal Institutions. You do not need to present at the CCCC Convention in order to qualify for this award.

Award Specifics: The deadline for the 2025 award is November 15, 2024. Please submit an application letter (on institutional letterhead) describing:

  • Who you are as a teacher and what you teach at your tribal college or Native American-Serving Nontribal Institution
  • What your research interests are
  • What you hope to gain from the experience of attending CCCC (how it could help you in your teaching or research)

Send your application letter to cccc@ncte.org

Award Criteria: A selection committee including American Indian Caucus members will review applications for the Tribal College Faculty Fellowship. Fellowship awards will be based on overall quality of the application letter.

Other Considerations: In the event that the CCCC Annual Convention moves to an online-only event with no in-person component, recipients will receive a complimentary registration for the convention in lieu of any travel funds.

For More Information…
Visit the CCCC Convention website, or contact the CCCC Liaison at cccc@ncte.org.

Tribal College Faculty Fellows

2024
Meredith Marchioni, Alaska Pacific University, Anchorage

2023
Heather Flute, Sisseton Wahpeton College, SD
Nicholas Martin, Oglala Lakota College, SD

2022
Not awarded.

2021
Not awarded.

2020
Margaret Abbott, Fort Peck Community College, Poplar, MT
Ryan Winn, College of Menominee Nation, Keshena, Wisconsin

2019
Rebecca Frost, Keweenaw Bay Ojibwa Community College, Baraga, MI
Nina Knight, Saginaw Chippewa Tribal College, Mt Pleasant, MI

2018
Teresa Gomez, Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, Albuquerque, NM
Casandra Lopez, Northwest Indian College, Bellingham, WA

2017
LaFrenda Frank, Diné College, Tsaile, AZ

2016
Nina Knight, Saginaw Chippewa Tribal College
Bond Love, Haskell Indian Nations University

2015
Norma Marshall, College of the Muscogee Nation, Okmulgee, OK

2014
Sarah Prielipp, Saginaw Chippewa Tribal College, Mount Pleasant, Michigan
Christopher L. Stockdale, Little Priest Tribal College, Winnebago, Nebraska

2013
Ahmed Al-Asfour, Oglala Lakota College, Kyle, South Dakota
Jon Kohn, Little Big Horn College, Crow Agency, Montana

2012
Kate Bertin, Chief Dull Knife College, Lame Deer, Montana
Jeanne Sokolowski, White Earth Tribal and Community College, Mahnomen, Minnesota

2011
Eric Jurgens, College of Menominee Nation, Keshena, Wisconsin

2010
Christie Cooke, Haskell Indian Nations University, Lawrence, Kansas
Jennifer Ann Owens, Little Big Horn College, Crow Agency, Montana

2009
Sara Knight, College of Menominee Nation, Keshena, Wisconsin
Ryan Winn, College of Menominee Nation, Keshena, Wisconsin

2008
Nathan Jenkins, Haskell Indian Nations University

2007
Geselle Coe, Tohono O’Odham Community College

2006
Ron Carpenter, Turtle Mountain Community College
Brian Tosky, College of Menominee Nation

2005
Priscilla A. Fairbanks, Leech Lake Tribal College
Steven King, Sisseton-Wahpeton College
Laurie Koepplin, Little Big Horn College
Patrick J. Shields, Lac Courte Oreilles Ojibwa Community College

Plagiarism Detection Services: Unsettled Questions

By Kim D. Gainer, Radford University, Radford, VA

In 2007, four students filed suit in a U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, against iParadigms, a company that owns the Turnitin plagiarism detection service. This service compares uploaded student papers against not only materials available on the web but also against a database of previously uploaded papers. The students in this case argued copyright infringement: that the inclusion of their papers in the database of a for-profit company was an appropriation of their intellectual property.  In 2008, the judge in the case ruled against the students, noting that in the course of uploading their papers, the students had clicked an “I agree” button that signified their acceptance of the company’s terms of service. The judge also ruled that Turnitin’s use of the students’ writing was “highly transformative” because the texts were being used for a purpose fundamentally different from the purpose for which they were created.

The students appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth District Circuit, but in 2009, a ruling let stand crucial elements of the original decision. The students filed notice to appeal, but several months later entered into a settlement with iParadigms in which each side agreed not to pursue any legal action against the other. (As an aside, a student in the case had accessed the Turnitin database using another person’s user id and password, and the settlement ended this student’s legal exposure.)  Absent a Supreme Court ruling, the appeals court decision applies only to schools in Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia, and North and South Carolina.  Although the students did not prevail, the debate over plagiarism detection services is likely to continue.

In its Recommendations Regarding Academic Integrity and the Use of Plagiarism Detection Services, the CCCC-Intellectual Property Caucus suggests that both pedagogical and ethical issues are raised by these programs.  In terms of pedagogy, use of such services casts the student in the role of someone who must be monitored rather than as a self-motivated learner. Simultaneously, it may shift the role of the teacher from educating to policing, possibly “compromise[ing] the relationship between teachers and students.” Moreover, the reactions of students to what is effectively a presumption of guilt may create an “adversarial climate.” The statement also expresses concern that relying on computer software may become a substitute for the conversations about academic integrity that should be central to the educational process.  In regard to legal concerns, it raises questions about students’ privacy rights because student writing is shared with “commercial third parties not engaged in the relationship implied in the educational process.” (Issues such as these are also explored in “McClean Students File Suit against Turnitin.com,” an article in The CCCC-IP Annual: Top Intellectual Property Developments of 2007.)

Legal decisions have been rendered: a district court cited the fact that the students clicked on the “I agree” button and uploaded the papers themselves. Students may still question whether they may be required to agree to a plagiarism detection company’s terms of service. Moreover, students may raise objections if their papers are uploaded by their instructors without their consent. A student’s ‘ownership’ of her work may be undermined even if in the eyes of a judge her legal rights have not been violated.  Therefore, students may continue to challenge the use of Turnitin and other plagiarism detection services on intellectual property and other grounds, and some objections might lead to legal challenges. In essence, even if a case were to reach the Supreme Court and be decided against the students, educators may still wish to carefully consider the implications of using such services.

For further information, please contact the author, Kim Gainer.

 

Intellectual Property Reports Main Page

CCCC Outstanding Book Award

Nomination Deadline: May 1

Purpose: The CCCC Outstanding Book Award is presented annually for work in the field of composition and rhetoric.

Eligibility: A work eligible for the 2025 award will have been published in calendar year 2023 or 2024. To be eligible for the award, nominees must be members of CCCC and/or NCTE at the time of nomination. To nominate a volume for the award, the author, editor, publisher, or reader must be a CCCC and/or NCTE member.

Award Specifics: Each year two awards will be given: one award for a single-authored or multi-authored work and one award for an edited collection of scholarly work. Both categories will be evaluated for scholarship and research in the areas of pedagogy, practice, history, and theory.

Nominations must be received by May 1, 2024, and must include a brief statement of the book’s contribution to the profession (Note: You do not need to send copies of the nominated book with the nomination.). Please send the statement of the book’s contribution to the CCCC Outstanding Book Award Committee at cccc@ncte.org.

Outstanding Book Award Selection Committee Review Criteria and Timeline (pdf)

Email Questions

Outstanding Book Award Winners

2024 Winners

Annie S. Mendenhall, Desegregation State: College Writing Programs after the Civil Rights Movement, Utah State University Press, 2022

Christine Denecker and Casie Moreland, The Dual Enrollment Kaleidoscope: Reconfiguring Perceptions, of First-Year Writing and Composition Studies, Utah State University Press, 2022

2024 Honorable Mentions

Stephanie West-Puckett, Nicole I. Caswell, and William P. Banks, Failing Sideways: Queer Possibilities for Writing Assessment, Utah State University Press, 2023

Gesa E. Kirsch, Romeo García, Caitlin Burns Allen, and Walker P. Smith, Unsettling Archival Research: Engaging Critical, Communal, and Digital Archives, Southern Illinois University Press, 2023

2023
Aja Y. Martinez, Counterstory: The Rhetoric and Writing of Critical Race Theory, National Council of Teachers of English
Laura Gonzales and Michelle Hall Kells, Latina Leadership: Language and Literacy Education across Communities, Syracuse University Press

2022
Louis M. Maraj, Black or Right: Anti/Racist Campus Rhetorics, Utah State University Press
Patrick Sullivan, Sixteen Teachers Teaching: Two-Year College Perspectives, Utah State University Press

2022 Honorable Mentions
Rosanne Carlo, Transforming Ethos: Place and the Material in Rhetoric and Writing, Utah State University Press
Elizabeth Kimball, Translingual Inheritance: Language Diversity in Early National Philadelphia, University of Pittsburgh Press

2021
Shui-Yin Sharon Yam, Inconvenient Strangers: Transnational Subjects and the Politics of Citizenship, Ohio State University Press
Vivette Milson-Whyte, Raymond Oenbring, and Brianne Jaquette (Eds.), Creole Composition: Academic Writing and Rhetoric in the Anglophone Caribbean, Parlor Press

2020
Jessica Restaino, Surrender: Feminist Rhetoric and Ethics in Love and Illness, Southern Illinois University Press
Romeo García and Damián Baca, Rhetorics Elsewhere and Otherwise: Contested Modernities, Decolonial Visions, National Council of Teachers of English

2019
Rebecca Lorimer Leonard, Writing on the Move: Migrant Women and the Value of Literacy, University of Pittsburgh Press
Patrick Sullivan, Howard Tinberg, and Sheridan Blau, Deep Reading: Teaching Reading in the Writing Classroom, National Council of Teachers of English

2018
Rasha Diab, Shades of Sulh: The Rhetorics of Arab-Islamic Reconciliation, University of Pittsburgh Press
Tammie M. Kennedy, Joyce Irene Middleton, and Krista Ratcliffe, Rhetorics of Whiteness: Postracial Hauntings in Popular Culture, Social Media, and Education, Southern Illinois University Press

2018 Honorable Mention
Iris D. Ruiz, Reclaiming Composition for Chicano/as and Other Ethnic Minorities: A Critical History and Pedagogy, Palgrave Macmillan

2017
Asao B. Inoue, Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies: Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future, Parlor Press
David S. Martins, Transnational Writing Program Administration, Utah State University Press

2017 Honorable Mentions
Kate Vieira, American by Paper: How Documents Matter in Immigrant Literacy, University of Minnesota Press
Lisa King, Rose Gubele, and Joyce Rain Anderson, Survivance, Sovereignty, and Story: Teaching American Indian Rhetorics, Utah State University Press

2016
Risa Applegarth, Rhetoric in American Anthropology: Gender, Genre, and Science
Elizabeth Losh, The War on Learning: Gaining Ground in the Digital University

2015
Jonathan Alexander and Jacqueline Rhodes, On Multimodality: New Media in Composition Studies
David Bleich, The Materiality of Language: Gender, Politics, and the University

2014
Thomas Rickert, Ambient Rhetoric: The Attunements of Rhetorical Being
Asao B. Inoue and Mya Poe, eds., Race and Writing Assessment

2013
Susan H. Delagrange, Technologies of Wonder: Rhetorical Practice in a Digital World

Margaret Price, Mad at School: Rhetorics of Mental Disability and Academic Life

2012
David Fleming, From Form to Meaning: Freshman Composition and the Long Sixties, 1957-1974

Bruce Horner, Min-Zhan Lu, and Paul Kei Matsuda, Cross-Language Relations in Composition

2011
Xiaoye You, Writing in the Devil’s Tongue: A History of English Composition in China

2010
David Gold, Rhetoric at the Margins: Revising the History of Writing Instruction in American Colleges, 1873-1947

2009
Charles Bazerman, Handbook of Research on Writing: Society, School, Individual, Text

John M. Duffy, Writing from These Roots: Literacy in a Hmong-American Community

2008
Sharon Crowley, Toward a Civil Discourse: Rhetoric and Fundamentalism

2007
Norbert Elliot, On a Scale: A Social History of Writing Assessment in America

Krista Ratcliffe, Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness

2006
Morris Young, Minor Re/Visions: Asian American Literacy Narratives as a Rhetoric of Citizenship

2005
Kristie S. Fleckenstein, Embodied Literacies: Imageword and a Poetics of Teaching

Catherine Prendergast, Literacy and Racial Justice: The Politics of Learning after Brown v. Board of Education

2004
Mary Soliday, The Politics of Remediation: Institutional and Student Needs in Higher Education

2003
Deborah Brandt, Literacy in American Lives

Eileen Schell and Patricia Lambert Stock, Moving a Mountain

2002
Paul Kameen, Writing/Teaching:  Essays Toward a Rhetoric of Pedagogy

2001
Halasek, Kay, A Pedagogy of Possibility: Bakhtinian Perspectives on Composition Studies

2000
Susan Miller, Assuming the Positions: Cultural Pedagogy and the Politics of Commonplace Writing 

Barbara Couture, Toward a Phenomenological Rhetoric: Writing, Profession, and Altruism

1999
Marilyn Sternglass, Time to Know Them: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level

1998
James A. Berlin, Rhetorics, Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring College English Studies

1997
John Brereton, The Origins of Composition Studies in the American College, 1875-1925: A Documentary History

1996
Susan Peck MacDonald, Professional Academic Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences

1995
Thomas L. Kent, Paralogic Rhetoric: A Theory of Communicative Interaction

1994
Lester Faigley, Fragments of Rationality: Postmodernity and the Subject of Composition

1993
Richard Bullock, Charles Schuseter, and John Trimbur, The Politics of Writing Instruction: Postsecondary

1992
Patricia Bizzell and Bruce Herzberg, The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present

Susan Miller, Textual Carnivals: The Politics of Composition

1991
Mike Rose, Lives on the Boundary, The Struggles and Achievements of America’s Underprepared

CCCC Scholars for the Dream Travel Award

Application Deadline: October 10

Purpose: The Conference on College Composition and Communication sponsors the Scholars for the Dream Travel Award to encourage scholarship by historically underrepresented groups. This includes Black, Latinx, Asian, American Indian/Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander scholars, regardless of citizenship status—persons whose presence and whose contributions are central to the full realization of our professional goals.

CCCC offers selected Scholars for the Dream Travel Award winners travel awards of $1,000 each and sponsors a reception for all award winners. Award winners will have the opportunity to work with career mentors who are CCCC members as part of the award.

Eligibility: If you are from an eligible group and an emerging scholar, you are eligible to apply. Ten Scholars for the Dream Travel Awards will be first-time presenters at CCCC. Up to ten additional awardees may be selected from CCCC members whose proposals have been accepted to the convention, who have presented at no more than three previous CCCC conventions, and who have not previously received a Scholars for the Dream Travel Award.

Award Criteria: The Awards Selection Committee considers originality of research, significance of pedagogical or theoretical contributions to the field, and potential for larger, subsequent projects. Award winners will be notified by early December.

The Awards Selection Committee considers originality of research, significance of pedagogical or theoretical contributions to the field, and potential for larger, subsequent projects. Specifically, the Selection Committee will consider the following:

1. The Problem. The presentation promises to describe a significant problem or issue, meeting one or more of these criteria:

  • Timeliness: contributes to a current issue in rhetoric or composition studies.
  • Theory: references a specific theoretical framework within rhetoric or composition studies, sharpening concept definitions or presenting alternative viewpoints.
  • Research: provides exploration with new research techniques or creative use of known techniques; demonstrates and fills a research void; creates or improves an instrument for observing and analyzing research data.
  • Pedagogy: relates specific, creative classroom practices to particular theoretical frames, demonstrating potential for general application (more than a demonstration of a particular personality’s successful pedagogy).

2. The Potential. Whether theory, research, or pedagogy, the presentation should hold promise for future exploration and investigation.

Award Specifics: If you are from a historically underrepresented group, if you are an emerging scholar, and if you would be presenting at CCCC, you may apply by submitting the materials outline below.

Your proposal will be reviewed by the Scholars for the Dream Travel Award Selection Committee. If your proposal is accepted and it meets criteria, you are eligible for a travel award.

Candidates for travel awards should submit an expanded, 3 to 5-page abstract and a completed Scholars for the Dream Eligibility Form (.docx) as a single PDF attachment by October 10, 2024, to the CCCC Liaison at cccc@ncte.org. (Note: You must be be from one or more of the historically underrepresented groups noted above.)

Award winners will be notified by early December.

Other Considerations: In the event that the CCCC Annual Convention moves to an online-only event with no in-person component, recipients will receive a complimentary registration for the convention in lieu of any travel funds.

E-mail questions

Scholars for the Dream Award Winners

2024
Kofi Adisa, Howard Community College
Edzordzi Agbozo, University of North Carolina Wilmington
Saurabh Anand, University of Georgia
Purna Chandra Bhusal, University of Texas at El Paso
Andy Cheng, University of Cincinnati
Valeria Fernandez, Soka University of America
José Flores, University of Texas at El Paso
Priyanka Ganguly, Virginia Tech
Nicole Golden, Michigan State University
Xuan Jiang, Florida International University
Chloe Leavings, Wayne State University
Rency Luan, University of Waterloo
Nattaporn Luangpipat, University of Wisconsin–Madison
Anselma Prihandita, University of Washington
Sujash Purna, University of Wisconsin–Madison
Kurt Ramos, University of Central Florida
Bridgette Sanders, Florida State University
Jiaxing Shi (Carina), University of Maryland
Justine Trinh, Washington State University
Wei Xu, University of Arizona

2023
Sadia Afrin, University of Waterloo
Cody Ares Baynori, Columbia University
Khadidja Belhadi, Illinois State University
Anuj Gupta, University of Arizona
Lena Hakim, Wayne State University
Meng-Hsien (Neal) Liu, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Quang Ly, University of Miami
Angela Mack, Texas Christian University
Sherrel McLafferty, Bowling Green State University
Michelle Tram Nguyen, Bowling Green State University
Shankar Paudel, University of Texas at El Paso
María D. Pérez, Texas Christian University
Carolina Roni, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Chenxing Xie, North Carolina State University

2022
Kimberly Bain, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton
Steven Beardsley, University of California, San Diego
José Cano Jr., Texas Christian University, Fort Worth
Janelle Chu Capwell, University of Arizona, Tucson
Jianfen Chen, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Raquel DeLeon, Texas Tech University, Lubbock
Tabitha Espina, Northeastern University, Boston, MA
Angel Evans, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Wilfredo Flores, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Asmita Ghimire, University of Minnesota Twin Cities
Danie Jules Hallerman, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA
Nabila Hijazi, Loyola University Maryland, Baltimore
Raphael Ivan Reyes Juarez, University of Texas at El Paso
Suresh Lohani, University of Texas at El Paso
Misa Kinno Lucyshyn, Columbia University, New York, NY
Shyam B. Pandey, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Nupoor Ranade, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA
Hanan Saadi, Texas A&M International University, Laredo

2021
Kodwo Adam-Moses, Auburn University, AL
Thir B. Budhathoki, University of Arizona, Tucson
Jasmine Corona, California State University, Chico
Meghalee Das, Texas Tech University, Lubbock
Kara Larson, University of South Florida, Tampa
Rashida Mustafa, Teachers College, Columbia University, NY
Nitya Pandey, Florida State University, Tallahassee
Jagadish Paudel, University of Texas at El Paso
Qianqian Zhang-Wu, Northeastern University, Boston, MA

2020
Ariana Brazier, University of Pittsburgh, PA
Wenqi Cui, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Nicole C. Cunningham-Frisbey, University of New Hampshire, Durham
Samah Elbelazi, Stanford University, CA
Valentina Fahler, University of California Santa Barbara
Subhi Hindi, University of Houston, TX
Cana Uluak Itchuaqiyaq, Utah State University, Logan
Florianne Jimenez, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Salma C. Kalim, Miami University, Oxford, OH
Charmian Lam, Indiana University, Bloomington
Natalie Madruga, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Havva Zorluel Özer, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Loretta Ramirez, University of California, Irvine
Eric Manuel Rodriguez, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Sherwin Kawahakui Ranchez Sales, Washington State University, Pullman
Pritisha Shrestha, Syracuse University, NY
Sumyat Thu, University of Washington, Seattle
Dhipinder Walia, CUNY Graduate Center, NY
Zhaozhe Wang, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Yebing Zhao, Miami University, Oxford, OH

2019
Laura L. Allen, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Nouf Alshreif, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Sweta Baniya, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Ashok Bhusal, The University of Texas at El Paso
Liana Clarke, Florida State University, Tallahassee
Christopher Balajadia Garcia, University of Guam, Mangilao
Les Hutchinson, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Charisse S. Iglesias, University of Arizona, Tucson
Tamara Issak, St. John’s University, Queens, NY
Jialei Jiang, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Soyeon Lee, University of Houston, TX
Shewonda Leger, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Eduardo Mabilog, Nevada State College, Henderson
Charlotte Morgan, Cleveland State University, OH
Bibhushana Poudyal, The University of Texas at El Paso
Sukanto Roy, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Joanna E. Sanchez-Avila, University of Arizona, Tucson
Karen R. Tellez-Trujillo, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces
Landy Watley, Howard University, Washington, DC
Hua Zhu, Miami University, Oxford, OH

2018
Lama Alharbi, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Charissa Che, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Telsha L. Curry, Syracuse University, NY
Khirsten L. Echols, University of Louisville, KY
Marlene Galvan, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg
Christine Garcia, Eastern Connecticut State University, Willimantic
Kimberly C. Harper, North Carolina A&T State University, Greensboro
Brittany S. Hull, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Ashanka Kumari, University of Louisville, KY
Halcyon M. Lawrence, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Shaofei Lu, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Louis M. Maraj, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Samantha McCalla, St. John’s University, Jamaica, NY
Temptaous T. Mckoy, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
Kendra L. Mitchell, Florida State University, Tallahassee
Vincent Portillo, Syracuse University, NY
Cecilia D. Shelton, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC
Celeste Siqueiros, Murray State University, KY
Teigha Mae Van, Illinois Central College, East Peoria
Karrieann Soto Vega, Syracuse University, NY

2017
Maryam S Alikhani, Teachers College Columbia University, New York, NY
Candace Chambers, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa
Nina Feng, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
Michelle Grue, University of California, Santa Barbara
Logan Middleton, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Alejandra Irene Ramírez, University of Arizona, Tucson
Ella Dali Raynor, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Elijah Simmons, Miami University, Oxford, OH
Alison Lau Stephens, University of Oregon, Eugene
Mark Daniel Triana, Washington State University, Pullman

2016
Antonio Byrd, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Quanisha Charles, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Brandon M. Erby, Penn State University, University Park
André Melvin Jones, Jr., Kean University, Union, NJ
Jamila M. Kareem, University of Louisville, KY
Cona Marshall, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Kelly Medina-López, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces
Consuelo Carr Salas, The University of Texas at El Paso
Danielle Tillman Slaughter, Georgia State University, Atlanta
Sheeba Varkey, St. John’s University, Jamaica, NY

2015
Cara M. Chang, University of Hawai?i at Manoa
Shenika Hankerson, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Erika T. Johnson, Texas Woman’s University, Denton
Ashley L. Newby, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Joy Robinson, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Yanira Rodriguez, Syracuse University, NY
Sherita V. Roundtree, The Ohio State University, Columbus
James Chase Sanchez, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth
Rachel Sanchez, Washington State University, Pullman
Dawn N. Hicks Tafari, Winston-Salem State University, NC

2014
Pauline Felicia Baird, Bowling Green State University, OH
April Baker-Bell, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Amanda L. Funk, Kutztown University of Pennsylvania
Arianna M. Howard, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Luciana Junqueira, Georgia State University, Atlanta
Jennifer Lin LeMesurier, University of Washington, Seattle
Kyle T. Mays, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Reanae McNeal, Texas Woman’s University, Denton
Ana Milena Ribero, University of Arizona, Tucson
Flourice W. Richardson, Illinois State University, Normal

2013
Jada Augustine, California State University, Northridge
Catalina Bartlett, Texas A&M University, College Station
Tara Betts, Binghamton University, NY
Victor Jesus Del Hierro Texas A&M University, College Station
Romeo Garcia, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi
Michelle Garza, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi
Laura Martinez, University of Central Florida, Orlando
Indra N. Mukhopadhyay, University of Southern California, Los Angeles
Seonsook Park, New Mexico Highlands University-Rio Rancho
Alma Villanueva, Texas A&M University, College Station

2012
Steven Alvarez, The Graduate Center, City University of New York, NY
Erica Britt, University of Michigan-Flint
Karen Ching Carter, Arizona State University, Tempe
Christina Victoria Cedillo, Northeastern State University-Broken Arrow, OK
Marino Ivo Lopes Fernandes, University of New Hampshire, Durham
Juan M. Gallegos, University of Arizona, Tucson
Eileen Lagman, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Helen Lee, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Jimisha I. Relerford, Georgia State University, Atlanta
LaToya L. Sawyer, Syracuse University, NY

2011
Sonia C. Arellano, Texas State University-San Marcos
Lamiyah Bahrainwala, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Michael Sterling Burns, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Lehua Ledbetter, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Kelly McLain, University of Alaska Anchorage
Caroline Prieto, San Francisco State University, CA
Cheyenne Riggs, Texas State University, Austin
Elias Serna, University of California, Riverside
Reva E. Sias, Syracuse University, NY

2010
Tamika Barrett, University of Pittsburgh, PA
Eileen Ain Shams Eddy, Washington State University, Pullman
R. Candace Epps-Robertson, Syracuse University, NY
Fernando Febres, Emerson College, Boston, MA
Regina L. Golar, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa
ku’ualoha ho’omanawanui, University of Hawai’i at Manoa
Vivian García López, Boise State University, ID
Brandy Nalani McDougall, University of Hawai’i at Manoa
Cruz Medina, University of Arizona, Tucson
Gabriela Raquel Ríos, Texas A&M University, College Station

2009
Maryam Elena Jamali Ashtiani, California State University, Fresno
Lina Buffington, Philadelphia Futures, Pennsylvania
Jason B. Esters, Lincoln University, Pennsylvania
David F. Green, Jr., Penn State University, University Park
Janie Jaramillo-Santoy, Texas Tech University & Texas State Technical College-Harlingen
Marissa M. Juárez, University of Arizona, Tucson
Wen Ma, Le Moyne College, Syracuse, NY
Sarah Nieto Olivas, Texas State University-San Marcos
Bettina Ramón, Texas State University-San Marcos
Michelle Bachelor Robinson, University of Louisville, KY

2008
Qwo-Li Driskill, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Crystal M. Hills, Georgia State University, Atlanta
Donna Hunter, Stanford University, California
Aja Y. Martinez, University of Arizona, Tucson
Natalie A. Martínez, Arizona State University, Tempe
Leslie D. Norris, Rappahannock Community College, Glenns, Virginia
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia
Kathryn Ortiz, University of Arizona, Tucson
Andrea Osteen, California State University, Fresno
Melissa Berry Pearson, University of South Carolina, Columbia
Staci M. Perryman-Clark, Michigan State University, East Lansing

2007
Maria Bibbs, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Tamika L. Carey, Syracuse University, New York
Korina Jocson, Stanford University, California
Donna King, The Pennsylvania State University, State College
Lydia Balderamos Loskot, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces
Barbara Castillo Noyes, University of Texas at Arlington
Sung Ohm, Ohio University, Athens
Ryan Masaaki Omizo, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Debbie A. Reese, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Kimberly Thomas, Indiana University of Pennsylvania

2006
Timothy J. Brown, West Chester University, Pennsylvania
Kevin A. Browne, The Pennsylvania State University, College Park
Rachel Carrales, University of Texas at San Antonio
Elizabeth Imende, High Point University, North Carolina
Kendall Leon, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Jolivette Mecenas, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Soncerey L. Montgomery, Winston-Salem State University, North Carolina
Iris Ruiz, University of California, San Diego
Paul Velazquez, Texas State University-San Marcos
Han Yu, Illinois State University, Normal

2005
Cedric D. Burrows, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio
Linh Dich, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Robin Evans, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater
Maisha T. Fisher, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
Elisa Marie Norris, Syracuse University, New York
Daisy Pignetti, University of South Florida, Tampa
Eric Darnell Pritchard, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Adina Sanchez-Garcia, University of Miami, Florida
Justin Schapp, Syracuse University, New York
Robyn Tasaka, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu

2004
JuliAnna Avila, University of California, Berkeley
Jeffrey Duncan-Andrade, University of California, Los Angeles
Ted Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing
David Kirkland, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Melvette Melvin, Penn State University, State College
Rose Metts, Savannah State University, Georgia
Kelvin Monroe, Washington State University, Pullman
Spencer Salas, University of Georgia, Atlanta
Cecilia Solis-Sublette, Texas A&M University
Sandra Young, University of South Carolina, Columbia

2003
Jacqueline Brown, University of Louisville
Carol Brochin Ceballos, Laredo Community College, Texas
Rene Agustin De los Santos, University of California, Santa Barbara
Nichole Hamai, University of Hawaii, Honolulu
Jungmi Kim, Temple University
Seonjoo Moon, Temple University
Ken Rayes, University of New Orleans
Eunsook Rhee, Temple University
Tonya Scott, Texas A&M University, Commerce
Lillie Whetten, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces

2002
Haivan Hoang, The Ohio State University, Columbus
Carlos Evia, Texas Tech University, Lubbock
Michelle Johnson, Claremont Graduate University, California
Asao Inoue, Washington State University,  Pullman
Patricia Trujillo, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Hilary Owens, California State University, Chico
Derek Landers, Cincinnati State College
Piper Kendrix Williams, Rutgers University
Rachel Brooks-Rather, Ohio University, Athens
Margaret Wong, Quinsagamond Community College, Marlborough,  MA

2001
Terry Carter, University of South Carolina
Rose Gubele, Sonoma State University, California
Daniel Justice, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Rhea Estelle Lathan, University of Wisconsin at Madison
Kim Lee, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Meredith Lee, University of Hawaii at Manoa
Kathleen McColley, University of Hawaii
Paul Minifee, University of Texas at Austin
Josye Sadler, University of Southern Mississippi
Faye Spencer Maor, Valdosta State University, Georgia

2000
Aesha Adams, Marquette University, Milwaukee
Christina Bell, Montgomery College, Maryland
Rebecca Cisneros, University of Vermont
Lisa Trevino Roy-Davis, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Avis G. Hewitt, Grand Valley State University, Michigan
Joseph Ng/Eng, Eastern Washington University
Annette Harris-Powell, University of Louisville, Kentucky
Rebecca Small, Sonoma State University, California
Rhonda Robinson Thomas, University of New Hampshire, Durham
Kendra Vaglienti, Texas Woman’s University, Addison

1999
Wilson C. Chen, University of California
Resa Crane Bizzaro, East Carolina University
E. K. Daufin, Alabama State University
Charmin Granger, Miami University
Emily Porcincula Lawsin, California State University, Northridge
Levita D. Mondie, University of Maryland, College Park
Dora Ramirez, University of Nebraska, Lincoln
Kimberly A. Robinson, California State University, San Marcos
Gregory E. Rutledge, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Mae Lombos Wlazlinski, State University of West Georgia, Carrollton

1998
Fred Arroyo, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee
Steve Chu, Iowa State University
Sheldon George, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts
Serena R. Huffman, University of New Mexico, Alburquerque
Celestine W. Liu, New York University
Cedrick May, University of Texas, Arlington
Elizabeth McHenry, University of Texas, Austin
Diana Elena Moran Molina, University of Wisconsin, Madison
Luana Uluave, Northampton Community College, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Linda Walking-Woman, University of Iowa, Iowa City

1997
Cassandra J. Canada, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Ginny Carney, University of Kentucky, Lexington
Maria De Jesus Estrada, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
La Tisha Camille Fowlkes, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Chikako D. Kumamoto, College of DuPage, Glen Ellyln Illinois
Cynthia Mccollie-Lewis, Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York
Donald McCrary, Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York
Charlotte Simmonds-Hammons, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts
A. Tyson Sims, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana
Marion Okawa Sonomura, Brigham Young University, Laie, Hawaii

1996
Erika Aigner-Varoz, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Victoria Cliett, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan
Renita Duncan, Illinois State University, Normal
Amanda Espinosa-Aguilar, University of Nevada, Reno
Sandra M. Grayson, Bentley College, Waltham, Massachusetts
Terry Haynes, State University of New York/Westchester Community College, Valhalla Joyce Rain Latora, University of Massachusetts, Boston
Lynn A. Casmier-Paz, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Gwendolyn Pough, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio
K. Hyoejin Yoon, State University of New York, Albany

1995
Lena Ampadu, University of Maryland, College Park
María C. M. de Guerrero, Inter American University of Puerto Rico
Phyllis Pearson Elmore, North Lake College, Dallas, Texas
Carlton Floyd, University of Idaho, Moscow
Janice Gould, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
David Holmes, Pepperdine University, Malibu, California
Terese Monberg, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York
Shondel Nero, Long Island University, New York Pata Suyemoto, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
José L. Torres-Padilla, University of Puerto Rico, Cayey

1994
Jennifer Barfield, University of North Carolina, Wilmington
Kisha Brown, Long Island University, Brooklyn, New York
José Irizarry, University of Puerto Rico, Mayguez
Susan Kimoto, Cowell College, Santa Cruz, California
Alison O. Lee, College of San Mateo Tohcone College, San Francisco, California
Michelle McIver-Bell, Fayetteville State University, North Carolina
Natalia Apostolos Menendez, Foothill College, Los Altos Hills, California
Malea Powell, Miami University, Oxford, Ohio
Elaine Richardson, Michigan State University, East Lansing
Patricia Joan Saunders, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

1993
Meta G. Carstaphen, Texas Woman’s University, Denton
Louise M. Connal, University of Arizona, Tuscon
Evelyn Flores, University of Guam, Barrigada
Sharon Gamble, City College of New York, New York
Lisa M. Gonsalves, University of Massachusetts, Boston
Renee Moreno, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Jeryl Prescott, University of South Florida, Tampa
George Q. Xu, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, Clarion

Think Locally, Act Globally: Taking US Copyright Reform to a World Stage

Early last month, Lawrence Lessig, gave a keynote at the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) Global Meeting in Geneva.  The theme of this year’s meeting was “Emerging Copyright Licensing Modalities: Facilitating Access to Culture in the Digital Age,” and the goal of the meeting was to “raise the awareness of member states on the complexities underlining a vast variety of licensing practices in different sectors, including the online market for music, the software industry, and open access publishing.”  In his 38 minute speech, Lessig moved beyond merely raising awareness of US Copyright issues and issued a call to action: WIPO must take the lead in copyright reform if there is any chance to fix what is, in Lessig’s estimation, a “failed system.”1  

The system’s failure is not an “accident,” according to Lessig, “it’s implicit in the architecture of copyright as we inherited it.”  It isn’t that the law has grown more complicated, it’s that the law has stayed the same, even though the nature and scope of what it regulates has changed dramatically:

At the turn of the century US copyright law was technical, inconsistent, and difficult to understand, but it didn’t apply to very many people or very many things.  If one were an author or a publisher of books, maps, charts, paintings, sculptures, photographs, or sheet music, a playwright or producer of plays, or a printer, the copyright law bore on one’s business….ordinary citizens, however, could go about their business without ever encountering a copyright problem. 90 years later, US copyright law is even more technical, inconsistent, and difficult to understand.  More importantly, it touches everyone and everything.  Technology, heedless of law, has developed modes that insert multiple acts of reproduction and transmission – potentially actionable events under the copyright statute – into commonplace daily transaction.  Most of us can no longer spend even an hour without colliding with the copyright law. (Lessig quoting Jessica Litman, 1994)2

Technology may be “heedless” of law, but the law cannot remain “heedless” of technology.  In an analog world, most uses of culture were unregulated.  Think of the example of a book in physical space.  To read the book, give someone the book, sell the book, or sleep on the book are all free, unregulated uses of the book because none of these uses produce a copy.  “Enter the internet where, because of a digital platform, every single use produces a copy.  And we go from this balance of unregulated and regulated and fair uses, to a presumptively regulated use for every single use, merely because the platform through which we get access to our culture has changed.”3  

What has also changed, according to Lessig, are our “ecologies of creativity.”  Creativity happens within an ecology; ecologies are environments that set the conditions of exchange.  Our ecologies of creativity can be loosely categorized as those that “have money at the core” (the professional ecology), those that “don’t have money at the core” (the amateur ecology), and those where “people don’t use money to express value” at all (the sharing ecology).  These ecologies are not mutually exclusive and, in fact, must coexist to survive. 

The professional ecology depends upon an “effective and efficient system of copyright” to assure that compensation can provide the incentive the artist needs to create; the amateur ecology depends on the opportunity for “free use and sharing,” not on control and copyright and compensation.  It is within this sharing ecology that children, lovers, friends and family live – an ecology whose character would change radically if money were introduced as a mode of exchange.  “Imagine friends,” Lessig asks, “inviting the other for lunch the following week and the answer is ‘Sure, how about for 50 bucks?’”  Our work as scholars “is and has always been” a kind of hybrid activity: “creating within a mixed economy of free and paid” and depending not upon “exclusive control, but both on free and fair use of creative work that is built upon and then spread.”  The “critical point” Lessig makes with these examples is that a copyright system has to support each of these ecologies; it cannot privilege one and neglect the others.  Of course, these ecologies are moving targets – government, technology, and economics change and redefine them for every age – so it is critical that our laws keep up with these changes. 

Yet Lessig asserts that our copyright laws have “failed” They have “failed to assure the adequate incentives in the professional culture, and failed to protect the necessary freedoms in the amateur and critical or scientific culture.”  It is because of this failure that he “flings himself across the Atlantic” to ask WIPO to take the lead in reform.  In the short term, he asks that WIPO actively encourage systems of voluntary licensing (like Creative Commons) as they create a “better balance” between the ecologies of professional and amateur creativity.  Rather than using a one-size fits all copyright protection, creators can use voluntary licensing to more accurately mark their content with the freedoms they intend for it to carry (Al Jazeera, the White House, and Wikipedia have all released content under such licenses.)  In the long term, Lessig asked that WIPO support a “Blue Sky Commission,” a group that would have “the freedom to think about what architecture for copyright makes sense in the digital age, freed from the current implementation of copyright.”    

Lawrence Lessig has never been shy when it comes to enumerating the problems of the US copyright system.  Whether he is speaking to Stephen Colbert or to the preeminent IP agency of the UN, he makes clear that our existing system of copyright “could never work in the digital architecture of the Internet.”  “Either it will force people to stop creating,” Lessig argues, “or it will force a revolution.  And both options, in my view, are not acceptable.”  The extremes that Lessig identifies here – prohibition or revolt – are the extremes that will “lead to the destruction of the core value of copyright” as well as “corrupt the rule of law in a democracy.”  Reform needs to take place, not somewhere in the middle, but somewhere completely outside of the constrictive architecture of existing laws – in a wide-open place with a big “blue-sky” – where we can think freely and clearly about how to define the new, rather than about how to protect the old. 

Traci A. Zimmerman
Associate Professor – School of Writing, Rhetoric, and Technical Communication
James Madison University
Senior Chair – CCCC-IP Caucus

1All quotes from Lessig are from the transcript of his WIPO keynote  http://dotsub.com/view/d354cf7e-835e-464d-b171-ef1463ed15ee/viewTranscript/eng 

2In his keynote, Lessig uses this quote from Jessica Litman’s article “The Exclusive Right to Read”  13 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT. L.J. 29 (1994);  
For a video of his slideshow presentation, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AT02dOSbxc

3Lessig also gave a brief interview to IP Watch about the WIPO conference; it can be viewed at the following link http://vimeo.com/16512341

Intellectual Property Reports Main Page

Introducing NCTE-CCCC’s Intellectual Property Committee and Intellectual Property Caucus

With deep gratitude to editor Martine Courant Rife, I welcome you to a new feature: IP Reports. These monthly articles are being sponsored jointly by the Intellectual Property Committee and Intellectual Property Caucus to keep you updated on the latest developments and research.

What, then, is “intellectual property,” and why are two groups interested in it? Intellectual property issues have been vexed ever since laws were enacted in Great Britain (and then the United States) during the 1700s that treated products of the mind as tangible goods. In the centuries that have followed, “intellectual property” has come to include copyright, patents, trademarks, and trade secrets. For the NCTE/CCCC community, copyright issues are perhaps the most familiar.

Copyright laws define concepts such as “fair use”; copyright contracts manage our publications and instructional materials; and copyright holders must often be consulted to acquire permissions to reproduce images or other materials. In recent years, traditional understandings of copyright have been challenged by digital media, particularly with the advent of concepts such as the Creative Commons license, open source, and open access. Similarly, current social mores and research have reshaped our understandings of all aspects of intellectual property:  authorship, plagiarism, the public domain, a university’s capacity to hold patents, institutional repositories for preprint and postprint work, students’ rights to their own texts, the effects of institutional branding and trademarks, the conflict of interests between dissertation research and proprietary data, and so on.

To keep pace with these changes, the CCCC Intellectual Property Committee was established in 1996. The IP Committee is composed of nine members who represent different constituencies among the NCTE/CCCC memberships. The Committee is part of the official governing structure of the CCCC and reports directly to the Executive Committee. Its primary charge is “to keep the CCCC and NCTE memberships informed about intellectual property developments.” The IP Committee also proposes policy statements on a variety of issues to be considered by the Executive Committee and NCTE/CCCC memberships.

The IP Committee emerged from the work of like-minded scholars who came together in 1994 to establish the IP Caucus. The IP Caucus regularly sponsors its own events at the annual CCCC Convention. Caucus members undertake projects to devise new instructional materials; articles, books, and websites; policy statements; conference plans; and so on to support research, publication, and action on IP issues. The IP Caucus and the IP Committee are separate entities, but they coordinate. In some cases, the Caucus acts as a task force for the Committee; at other times, the Caucus proposes actions to be considered by the Committee. 

The most recent work of the IP Caucus and the IP Committee can be found online.  The IP Caucus maintains a resource website.  Meanwhile, the IP Committee sponsors The Top Intellectual Property Developments of the Year, reports that can be accessed through the NCTE website at /cccc/committees/ip.  As you will find, individual members of both IP groups are constantly engaged in new research and activist projects. The monthly IP Reports will enable you to stay informed on the latest progress. 

Karen Lunsford, Chair, Intellectual Property Committee

Intellectual Property Reports Main Page

Dean #2

Teresa Thomas: Case #2

Characterization of Institution

Research I University

Characterization of Department

Ph.D. granted in English

How would this case turn out in your department?  At your university/college?

At our institution, refereed electronic publications, in addition to print publications, are considered as evidence of published scholarship toward tenure.  However, distinctions are made between scholarship that results in a publishable textbook or classroom materials and scholarship that advances research and theory in the field.  Textbooks on occasion may represent an advancement in the field, but this must be demonstrated by the candidate and confirmed by referees.  Unclear in this case is the focus of the candidate’s on-line dissertation.  Contributions to the field of rhetoric and composition, on line or in print, may contribute to improved classroom practice without clearly relating to the development of rhetorical theory or empirical research in language, rhetoric, or non-literary writing.  An on-line or print reference work—a term also used to describe Professor Thomas’ dissertation—could be a bibliographic essay, glossary, or annotated bibliography, again works that are certainly valuable, but not considered to move a field forward.  At present, for a university press to only consider publishing the book on-line would suggest to me that it does not have the impact that one might expect—greater investment is implied by a print text.  This situation may change, even within the next five years, but at present, on-line publication by a university press would be viewed as an experimental venture.

What are the Department Chair’s responsibilities toward Thomas? Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

The Department Head has the responsibility to analyze each of Professor Thomas’s publications upon completing the third-year review as they illustrate that she had met departmental standards for tenure and promotion.  The Department Head also has the obligation to apprise new faculty of tenure and promotion requirements upon hiring and to articulate how the new hire’s research plans do or do not suggest that he/she is on the road to achieving tenure.  The dissent at the faculty meeting is a “teachable moment” for the department; here faculty and the chair should be giving serious consideration to how on-line publication is treated in the departmental and college tenure and promotion guidelines.  The latter are not mentioned anywhere in the case, and it would appear that this faculty member very well may be at risk of failing to reach tenure even if her publications were all print-based, given her lack of orientation to or understanding of the department’s T&P requirements.  Questions that remain unanswered: What part do grants play in the requirements for T&P?  Does the department make distinctions among research that advances the field, research that advances pedogogy in the field, and scholarship in the service of producing teaching materials?  What is considered a refereed publication and what criteria define the value of one kind of refereed publication as opposed to another?  Finally, if written publications in addition to electronic will be expected or accepted for tenure, this criterion , if not spelled out in the T&P requirements, should be reflected in the annual reviews of the candidate as well as the third-year review.

What are the Personnel Committee’s responsibilities toward Thomas?  Which  did they fulfill?  Fail?

If the department has a personnel committee that makes recommendations on T&P, this committee at each point of review should be reiterating the department’s expectations for publication venue, noting whether print publications in addition to electronic publications are expected, the quantity of publication expected, and how the quality of a publication venue will be accessed.  Factors that might be considered include: refereed vs. non-refereed work, university press or commercial press, regional or national journal, and so on.  The personnel committee that hired Professor Thomas, it appears to me, had the obligation to inform her, as part of the search process, of the department’s tenure and promotion guidelines, including expectations for publication as these are specified; however, this is more clearly the responsibility of the department head, who is the appointing authority.

What are the responsibilities of the Dean?  Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

The Dean, who also approves appointments, should assure that the candidate has received the written tenure and promotion guidelines of the department, College, and university (if the latter exist).  In my view, Deans also have the obligation to provide mentoring workshops that supplement departmental and university information to appropriately inform candidates about how their accomplishments will be reviewed by College T&P committees and how to prepare their portfolio for review.

What are Thomas’s responsibilities?  Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

Professor Thomas is obligated to inquire about the Department, College, and University tenure and promotion requirements upon being hired.  If her intention was only to publish on-line, she needed to state this up front, in my view, because this kind of profile for a publication record is so radically different from what is traditionally expected.  In short, she should be expected to know a thing or two about the requirements of the profession, and if she is uncertain, to ask these questions of her department head and assigned mentors.  The issue of receiving appropriate credit for on-line publications in an English Department is parallel to the issue of evaluating creative work as opposed to critical or theoretical work and of submitting pedagogical research as opposed to empirical or theoretical work related directly to the study of language or literature.   Another parallel issue is that of crediting for tenure single-authored publications as opposed to multiply-authored publications.  In each instance, a traditional area or mode is being challenged by a new approach.  Like it or not, the person “breaking the barriers” has a responsibility to define how their work achieves departmental research expectations, as does the department to define, in writing, what those expectations are.

What went wrong?  What went right?

As stated earlier, when the Department decided to hire a faculty member who was conducting research on a topic and in a mode never encountered before, the Department, through the chair, had an obligation to define how this research would be evaluated for tenure, preferably through articulating these expectations in tenure and promotion requirements.  Likewise, the faculty member who is doing non-traditional work cannot expect that a department in which he or she is breaking ground to accept this work without question.  New faculty members are obligated to present in their review portfolio the rationale for their publication choices, relating this rationale to articulated departmental standards.  Finally, the department head has the responsibility in annual reviews to consistently relate the candidate’s productivity to articulated standards for tenure and promotion.  Deans who review departmental evaluations have the obligation to communicate with department chairs and review committees about the helpfulness of their reviews as feedback for their faculty.

Department Chair #1

Teresa Thomas: Case #2

Characterization of Institution

“Research Intensive” institution (the new name for what used to be Research II, I think).

Characterization of Department

Ph.D. granted  in Rhetoric & Witing
M.F.A., granted in Literature
M.A. granted in Literature
M.A. TESL
M.A. granted in Tech Writin,
B.A. programs, full array

How would this case turn out in your department?  At your university/college?

The departmental recommendation would be positive, I believe.
This is partly because the department is quite diverse (grad programs in Comp & rhet, TESL, tech writing and creative writing as well as lit); because the Rhetoric & Writing PhD program emphasizes writing pedagogy; and because there has been a track record of strong non-print publication by at least two faculty whose cases were not as singlemindedly non-print as in this case.

Given questions and demands for back-up documentation when the department has recommended people heavy in non-print work, I’d expect “TeresaThomas” to have a much tougher time with the College Personnel Committee than with the Department.

What are the Department Chair’s responsibilities toward Thomas? Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

The chair seems to have assummed too much: that “Teresa” would draw the same meanings she did from the mid-term report, that she would act on that meaning by getting some things in literal print.  And the Chair seems to have had one non-directive conference and then let the matter go for (what?) two years.  The first failure is being inexplict, both in the conference and in not having written recommendations.  The second seems to be lack of follow-up.

What are the Personnel Committee’s responsibilities toward Thomas?  Which  did they fulfill?  Fail?

N/A

What are the responsibilities of the Dean?  Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

N/A

What are Thomas’s responsibilities?  Which did she/he fulfill?  Fail?

Teresa Thomas” probably fulfilled all her responsibilites–strong teaching, good research and publishing, even grants–AS SHE UNDERSTOOD them.  If the Chair failed to be explict about finetuning those responsibilities for her, she seems to have failed to check her understanding against other things in the department.  Given the split view of non-paper publishing in the three evaluations and given the Chair’s general words about a few print publications, she should have had some questions about her understanding and she should have asked questions.  And, over the next couple years, she should have initiated some contact with the Chair about what she was doing with her publishing.

What went wrong?  What went right?

…[I]t isn’t clear that anything is wrong: the non-print record “Teresa” has by the last paragraph could be so strong that department skeptics are convinced.  But it could go the other way too:  those who were dubious about non-print publishing two years earlier might take her paper-free record of scholarship and teachhing as evidence of rebeliousness and uncollegiality and see “Teresa” as a good person not to have as a tenured-faculty colleague.

My approach as a Chair would be to take a cautious approach: to assume that things might be sticky for the candidate and to be more proactive on her behalf.  So…, I’d suggest that this candidate and chair read a couple chapters about the matter in Academic Advancement in Composition Studies (Erlbaum, 1997):

“Preparing Yourself for Successful Tenure Review”  117-27)

“Mentor and Evaluator: The Chair’s Role in Promotion and Tenure Review (147-65)

See <http://personal.bgsu.edu/~richgeb/book.html> for information about:

Academic Advancement in Composition Studies: Scholarship, Publication, Promotion, Tenure (Erlbaum, 1997), edited by Richard Gebhardt and Barbara Genelle Smith Gebhard

Renew Your Membership

Join CCCC today!
Learn more about the SWR book series.
Connect with CCCC
CCCC on Facebook
CCCC on LinkedIn
CCCC on Twitter
CCCC on Tumblr
OWI Principles Statement
Join the OWI discussion

Copyright

Copyright © 1998 - 2024 National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved in all media.

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

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

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