warning: Creating default object from empty value in /home/culturec/public_html/modules/taxonomy/ on line 34.

Writing Program Administration/Design: Mapped

I'm trying to capture in a concept map the various elements of writing program design and administration. What am I missing? (Photo below links to larger one.)


Writing Center Work: Mapped

I'm trying to capture in a concept map the work that writing centers do. What am I missing? (Photo below links to larger one.)


What presentation format is most conducive to your learning?

Reading a paper aloud (provided the presenter reads well and makes eye contact, paper is written *as a talk*)
34% (28 votes)
Speaking extemporaneously (provided there's a clear structure in the talk and the speaker doesn't go off topic)
40% (33 votes)
Poster presentation
1% (1 vote)
Discussion (couple of questions/prompts and/or visual aids/artifacts, then presentation time is allotted to group discussion)
25% (21 votes)
Total votes: 83

CCCC Awards

You heard it here first, dude! These are the awards that were presented tonight at the ceremony:

Best Book

On a Scale: A Social History of Writing Assessment by Norbert Elliot

Rhetorical Listening: Identification, Gender, Whiteness by Krista Ratcliffe

Berlin Award for Best Dissertation

I didn't quite catch the title, but the first part was Learning to Love the Bomb, and it was about risk communication, nuclear weapons, and the political climate after 9/11 (I think). It's by Julie Staggers, who got her PhD at Purdue. Her dissertation was directed by Patricia Sullivan.

Braddock Award for Best Article

The Place of World Englishes in Composition: Pluralization Continued by A. Suresh Canagarajah

Outstanding Dissertation in Technical Communication

Again, I didn't catch the title, but the author is Natasha Artemeva, who got her PhD at McGill. Anthony Paré directed her dissertation.

Writing Program Certificates of Excellence

  • Ball State
  • Michigan Tech Writing Center
  • Purdue's ICAP (Introductory Composition at Purdue)
  • Swarthmore's Writing Associates Program
  • University of Toronto

Best Article in TETYC

Reading Lolita in Tehran Leads to Reading, Writing, Drawing, Painting, Sewing, and Thinking in Saranac Lake, New York by Shir Filler

Nell Ann Pickett Service Award

Jody Millward (an old site, but it seemed to have the most information about her)

CCCC Blogging

Day 3 of CCCC...I've been so busy up to this point. The old tootsies are killing me, what with doing all the walking -- even in comfortable shoes with insoles.

So what have I been doing? On Wednesday, I was doing some work in the morning and then went to the Intellectual Property Caucus. I took notes on it, and I'll pull these together and post them, but it probably won't be until next weekend. I have to go to New Jersey for MediaCommons-related stuff, and after I get back on Tuesday, tons of teaching-related work to do.

On Thursday, I had my session. I can never go to other sessions before mine on the day I present -- apologies to Mike, whose panel was right before mine. I don't know why, except to say that I want to focus for a while before my presentation. My session went okay, for the most part; at the beginning, we were trying to prod the previous presenters out, and one of them didn't seem to want to leave the podium, where she was answering questions. Then there were other technological stumbles that set us back. As a result, we started at 1:51 -- six minutes late. I looked at the time right before and right after my talk, and my presentation went from 1:52 to 2:12. I'm pretty good at cutting my presentations on the fly, but I thought I'd planned my talk to go under time anyway, so I didn't. But I should have, especially given the late start.

We ended up not having any time for questions, which is bad. I hope everyone who had burning questions, at least questions for me, was able to talk to me after the session.

After my session, I got together with some Minnesota people:

Amy P and Amy P Jen and me

Then I went back to my room and watched Take 20: Teaching Writing: the documentary film in which 22 rhetoric and composition scholars and teachers are asked twenty questions about teaching writing. As one would expect, it's a valuable resource. The highlights for me were the stories people told of their first semesters as new teachers, as well as the repetition of the same answers when they were asked the following three questions:

"If you had to pick only one book for a writing teacher to read, what would it be?" [one popular answer: Pedagogy of the Oppressed]

"If you had to pick only one essay for a writing teacher to read, what would it be?" [one popular answer: "Inventing the University"]

"If you had to pick only one scholar for a writing teacher to read, who would it be?" [one popular answer: Peter Elbow]

Of course, I also have some criticisms, particularly on the issue of camera time: David Bartolomae, Erika Lindemann, and Nancy Sommers seemed to get more camera time than the others, and Howard Tinberg and Paul Kei Matsuda seemed to get less. I know editing decisions are difficult, but I wonder if Todd Taylor went through the final edit and timed each person's appearances in the film.

Another point about the film (and I hate to end on a somewhat cynical note): three questions I would have liked to hear answered are:

1. Are you teaching a first-year composition course this semester?

2. Did you teach a first-year composition course last semester?

3. When was the last time you taught a first-year composition course? [Or: how often do you teach first-year composition? This issue is one reason I wanted far more Tinberg in the film. Another reason, obviously, is community college representation.]

It's quite possible that I would have been pleasantly surprised by the answers. I wish I could have had the opportunity to be.

In the weeds

You may know the title of my post if you've ever worked in a restaurant. That's the only place I've ever heard that expression, anyway. You have two tables already, then someone seats you with a large party. The first table wants mustard, more bread, a side of ranch, another beer, a spill wiped up. The big party wants to place their drink orders. And who's going to run those salads to that second table so that their entrees don't come out five seconds after their salads?

I love "in the weeds" as a metaphor. You're standing in weeds, some already tall, others getting taller by the minute. Still others are quickly sprouting up out of the ground.

"In the weeds," obviously, can apply to any line of work, including academia. I've been in the weeds for weeks, especially with teaching prep for two new courses. I'm told this is one of the worst things about the first year or two on the tenure track. It looks like I'll be teaching another new one in the fall. After that I'm going to try to teach the same courses for a while, if I can.

Wins and Losses

Number of publication rejections I've received in the past three days: 2

But it was balanced out with an exciting editorial opportunity that I'm not sure I should talk about now. Squee!

Also, I hate State Farm Insurance. I'm trying to get renters insurance, and they are making the entire process positively prohibitive. They're asking for information about the history of the house and the structural features that my landlord doesn't even know -- which is to say, his homeowners insurance reps didn't ask him to provide. The kicker is that I'm asking for such a low level of coverage; even in the event that the entire house was destroyed, the payout would be so low for them that I don't understand why they're treating this situation as so high-risk. Why can't they just sign me up and take my money? [Edited: Yes, I suppose they have to know if my heating and electrical units are fire boxes about to blow any day now, but my point stands that my landlord's homeowners insurance company was apparently fine with insuring this house without that information.]

Meetings, tee-hee

Yeah, so a while back I was wondering what all the fuss was about (I still do, to an extent). But I thought some of you would like to see what my upcoming week looks like:

12:00-?, a lunch with guests of the department
2:00-3:00, a workshop with the same guests
3:00-?, a meeting of faculty who teach writing-intensive classes

12:30-1:45, teach
2:00-5:00 office hours (will have to be truncated today)
3:30-?, a meeting with our visiting professor -- a master class

3:00-5:00, faculty meeting

Thursday (always ends up being a 12-hour day for me!)
9:30-10:30, meeting for FYC teachers -- I may or may not go this time
12:30-1:45, teach
2:00-5:00, office hours
6:30-9:00, teach

11:00-12:00, job talk (finalist for a position in Asian American literature)
12:30-2:00, new faculty luncheon (we'll be able to talk to representatives from the IRB, Office of Sponsored Programs, etc.)

I have to say, though, this week is an anomaly. During any other week, I'd have no meetings at all in addition to teaching, or maybe one. Last semester some of us had a writing group, and that was usually my only meeting. Needless to say, this week I'll have to use my mornings wisely for research and grading.

Syndicate content