Spring 2011 grad course description

Practicing Theory
CCR 712, Spring 2011

This iteration of CCR 712 will explore the ways in which theories of composing have developed; the ways in which "theories of composing" has been taken as a synonym for "composition theory"; and the resistances to and work that exceeds that synonymy. We will use the often-false binary of theory versus practice to explore the ways in which the composition job market values or ignores theory work. And we will investigate how a theory journal's book awards define contemporary work in the field.

That's the official description. Here's my work-in-progress on how I'll play this out:

At the beginning of the course we will visit early efforts to articulate "composition theory," following them into contemporary scholarship. We will also survey the practices named in the 2010 position announcements in the MLA Job Information List, WPA Job Board, and the Chronicle of Higher Education, looking to identify the frequently-sought categories. Each student will choose one of these areas of practice and spend the semester researching not only the practices but the informing theories. Each student will have the responsibility of teaching her or his material to the rest of the class. During lulls of project reporting, we will collaboratively investigate the evolution of process theory, postprocess theory, and "beyond." We will also collaboratively read the three most recent winners of the JAC/W. Ross Winterowd award for best book in composition theory, asking how these three books, taken together, would redefine or reinforce the representations of "theory" in the earlier works on the topic.

What texts? Well, here's what's currently on the shopping list. Given the major project I'm thinking about assigning, this list will have to be winnowed down considerably. Suggestions for deletions, additions gratefully received.

Identifying and defining "composition theory"

Kitzhaber, Albert R. Themes, Theories, and Therapy: The Teaching of Writing in College. New York: McGraw, 1963.

Park, Douglas B. "Theories and Expectations: On Conceiving Composition and Rhetoric as a Discipline." College English 41 (1979): 47-56.

Berlin, James A. "Contemporary Composition: The Major Pedagogical Theories." College English 44 (1982): 765-777.

Clifford, John, and John Schilb. Writing Theory and Critical Theory. New York: Modern Language Association, 1994.

Olson, Gary A., and Sidney I. Dobrin. Composition Theory for the Postmodern Classroom. Albany: SUNY Press, 1994.

Berthoff, Ann E. The Mysterious Barricades: Language and Its Limits. University of Toronto Press, 1999.

Williams, Jeffrey J. "The Posttheory Generation." Disciplining Composition: Alternative Histories, Critical Perspectives. Ed. David R. Shumway and Craig Dionne. SUNY P, 2002. 115-134.

Sanchez, Raul. The Function of Theory in Composition Studies. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2005.

Vandenberg, Peter, Sue Hum, and Jennifer Clary-Lemon. Relations, Locations, Positions: Composition Theory for Writing Teachers. NCTE, 2006.

Developing, rejecting, exceeding one theory/model of composing

Rohman, D. Gordon. "Pre-Writing: The Stage of Discovery in the Writing Process." College Composition and Communication 16 (1965): 106-112.

Crowley, Sharon. "Around 1971: Current-Traditional Rhetoric and Process Models of Composing." Composition in the Twenty-First Century: Crisis and Change. Ed. Lynn Z. Bloom, Donald A. Daiker, and Edward M. White. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1996. 64-74.

Murray, Donald M. "Teach Writing as a Process Not Product." The Leaflet (November 1972): 11-14. Rpt. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory: A Reader. Ed. Victor Villanueva, Jr. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 1997. 3-6.

Faigley, Lester. "Competing Theories of Process: A Critique and a Proposal." College English 48.6 (1986): 527-542.

Trimbur, John. "Taking the Social Turn: Teaching Writing Post-Process." College Composition and Communication 45 (1994): 108-118.

Kent, Thomas, ed. Post-Process Theory: Beyond the Writing-Process Paradigm. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1999.

Fulkerson, Richard. "Of Pre- and Post-Process: Reviews and Ruminations." Composition Studies 29.2 (Fall 2001): 93-120.

Enos, Theresa, and Keith D. Miller, eds. Beyond Postprocess and Postmodernism: Essays on the Spaciousness of Rhetoric. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2002.

Matsuda, Paul Kei. "Process and Post-Process: A Discursive History." Journal of Second Language Writing 12.1 (February 2003): 65-83.

Dobrin, Sidney I., ed. Beyond Post-Process. Utah State UP, 2010.

JAC/W. Ross Winterowd recent award winners for best book in composition theory

Hawk, Byron. A Counter-History of Composition: Toward Methodologies of Complexity. Pittsburgh: U Pittsburgh P, 2007.

Reid, Alexander. The Two Virtuals: New Media and Composition. Parlor Press, 2008.

Fleckenstein, Kristie S. Vision, Rhetoric, and Social Action. Southern Illinois University Press, 2009.

Another year

This summer hasn't been the one I'd planned. At the beginning of the season I had surgery that has improved the quality of my life enormously, but much of the summer has been diverted to incorporating that surgery into my life--coping with the terror of the suddenness of it, adjusting to the sheer freakiness of being cyborg, and beginning the process of rebuilding fitness. (I'm up to 22 miles for my long bike ride of the week, so that's proceeding very nicely, TYVM!)

So practically nothing else that I'd planned for the summer has actually happened. Now here I am, a week before classes begin, working on syllabi that I'd ordinarily have finished weeks ago. Tomorrow Syracuse's week of faculty orientations begin, and that involves me for three days on campus, so I have a lot of work to do in not very many available days. I've got plans for both courses well worked out (and will be talking about that here and on the teaching blog). But having plans and having syllabi are, sadly, very different animals.

The semester is going to be busy-busy. I'm on 12 doctoral exam or dissertation committees, I'm advising Writing majors and first-year Arts & Sciences students, I'm chairing my department's lower division curriculum committee, I'm my department's liaison for the Future Professoriate Program, I'm teaching an intro class and an advanced one, Sandra and I are working madly on data analysis for the Citation Project, I'm keynoting at the Center for Academic Integrity conference, the Georgia Conference on Information Literacy is featuring a Citation Project workshop, I'll be doing two regional symposia related to Writing Matters, and the Beloved Partner and I are planning our annual weekend with the fam at the Cass Scenic Railroad during the fall foliage season in southern West Virginia. The spring? Even busier.

Even though the swoosh of the semester is imminent, scooping me up and propelling me through 15 weeks of unabated lunacy, I can't feel any regret. I've had a terrific summer, and there's never yet been a semester that I haven't been happy to have arrive. Let the lunacy begin!

Does it sound like I'm giving myself a pep talk? Eh, yeah.

An open letter to my dissertators

Dear dissertation-writer,

Congratulations on having passed your exams. Now let's talk about the next stage. In it, three huge monsters await you, and I want you to know about them in advance so that you can recognize (and avoid) them when they rear their ugly heads. These are the monsters of inspiration, extended uninterrupted time, and additional reading.

Don't wait for inspiration or for huge blocks of time; set aside time (however brief) for writing every day, and during that time, write. Write even if it sounds stupid or off the mark as you write. Don't spend that time reading, checking your email, or making a fresh cup of tea.

And don't tell yourself that you can't write until you've read some more. Instead, write provisionally. Set aside reading time, too, and as you read, you can expand or correct what you've already written. But never read at the expense of writing. "I have to read some more first" is the oldest I'm-scared-to-write dodge in the academic universe.

Now let's get down to what you're actually writing. You and I both want your dissertation to be highly cohesive and gracefully written. The more important of these, though, is cohesion. Hence as you draft, cohesion is the thing you should attend to first. Worry about grace as you revise. And if you have to sacrifice one or the other, put the knife to grace and keep the cohesion.

To achieve cohesion,

1. Your introduction should overview the argument of the entire dissertation and do so concisely;
2. The introduction should not only summarize each chapter but should make wildly clear how that chapter contributes to the overall argument;
3. The beginning of each chapter should be explicit about what the chapter will do;
4. The beginning of each chapter should make clear how the chapter contributes to the overall argument of the dissertation;
5. The beginning of each chapter should be explicit about how this chapter connects back to the one before it;
6. Throughout the body of each chapter, readers should have no chance of losing sight of what the argument is and how what they're reading contributes to that argument;
7. The conclusion to each chapter should point to the next, so that one chapter flows logically into another.

If doing this makes your prose sound clumsy as you do it, go ahead and do it anyway. As you revise, we'll talk about how to smooth it out. It's also possible that you're thinking this is heinously formulaic, bound to squeeze all the life out of your prose. Trust me: you can be creative and still make life easy on your readers. This is a dissertation, not a mystery novel.

And if you're wondering how to do this cohesion thang when you're not actually sure how the next chapter will actually unfold: For cat's sake, write an abstract of your whole dissertation and one for each chapter. Write 300 words for the whole diss and 150 words for each chapter. Print them out and pin them to your wall. Don't let yourself spend more than 3 hours total on the first draft of these abstracts. It's just a draft. Then every time your ideas move forward a little, revise them. Always have an up-to-date draft of your dissertation and chapter abstracts; these are the axle grease of the drafting vehicle.

Another thing to note: A dissertation is an argument; it is not a transparent reporting of data. Your argument should be with scholars to whom you accord respect, even as you expand their work, point to new directions, or disagree with them.

And finally: When you send me drafts, make sure I have a list of the works you're citing. Maybe it would be useful to keep your working bibliography on Google Docs (despite all the formatting glitches) and give me permission to see the document. If I don't know who the "Miller" is that you're citing in Chapter 79 (heh heh), I'm going to have a hard time helping you develop your ideas.

Sincerely,

Your Beloved Director, she who knows that finally what you write will be quite brilliant. But brilliance comes from steady, focused work, and the faith to allow yourself to produce first- or even second-draft dross.