rel="nofollow" href="#ulink_a3266530-cc63-5241-809c-c704451853c5">Writing Instruction in Nineteenth-Century American Colleges
Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in American Colleges, 1900–1985
“Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class”
The Platform That Berlin Built
Subjectivity: Entering the Network
Articulating Networked Process: Mapping Networked Subjectivity
Space/Time/History
Language/Discourse
Self
Alterity/Other/Horizon
Addressivity/Answerability
Networked Process: Networked Subjectivity and Writing Process(es)
4 Situating Networked Subjectivity
Discursive Relations
Multiple Epistemologies/Multiple Subjectivities
Multiple Literacies/Classroom
5 Textbooks, Writing Program Reforms, Institutionality, and the Public
Audience, Self, and Alterity
Understanding
Language/Discourse
Context and Horizon
Purpose: Addressivity and Answerability
Introduction to “Basic Work and Material Acts: The Ironies, Discrepancies, and Disjunctures of Basic Writing and Mainstreaming”
6 Networked Process and the Long Revolution
Institutional Place(ment)
The Writing Major
Re-visioning Rhetoric and Composition
Disciplinarity
Illustrations
Figure 1. Early Process/Post-Process/
Radical Post-Process Continuum
Figure 2. Networked Subjectivity
Figure 3. Space/Time/History
Figure 4. Language/Discourse
Figure 5. Self
Figure 6. Space of the Self
Figure 7. Alterity/Other/Horizon
Figure 8. Addressivity/Answerability
Figure 9. Networked Subjectivity
Figure 10. Multiple Epistemologies /
Multiple Subjectivities
Figure 11. Multiple Literacies/Classroom
Acknowledgments
As any book is, this one is likewise thoroughly intertextual, for every graduate professor I’ve studied with along with some intellectually formidable colleagues has influenced the scholarly journey that culminated in this book. My thanks go to all for the challenges and discussions. However, special consideration goes to the interlocutor who inspired the dissonance of this inquiry. Although he was gone before I had the chance to study with him, his passion, inspiration, and keen intellect live on in his work. Thank you Jim Berlin, wherever you are.
Without the patience and good humor of David Blakesley at Parlor Press, this book would literally not have been possible. Dave is a terrifically hard-working editor, whom I’m convinced rarely sleeps. And to Lauer Series’ editors Catherine Hobbs and Patricia Sullivan go my appreciation for careful readings and insightful comments.
For material support of my work, I am indebted to the University of Texas El Paso for a research grant, as well as to the English department for a course release.
My thanks extend to Claudia Rojas for contributing her talents in graphic design and to Scott Lunsford and Paul Lynch for their skills in manuscript editing. Thanks, too, for the thoughtful manuscript reading and questioning offered by Brian McNely. Although he’s convinced me that we use the notion intertextuality to our own detriment, I’m consigned to using it until he coins a more appropriate term, an event I eagerly anticipate in the not so distant future.
My love and appreciation go to my family who have never quite understood why I want to do this but who support and encourage me, nevertheless. To my children—Katy, Blair, and Hailey—thank you for tolerating me and my scholarly baggage. To my five-year old grand-daughter Kaitlyn, who recently asked me to read aloud a scholarly article only to stop me mid-sentence after about three pages to announce that “I know stuff, too!” thank you for the concrete reminder that all “stuff” has value. Finally, for the inexhaustible encouragement and inspiration, along with the occasional timely reminder that this line of work was my choice, I can never accurately measure my gratitude for the tolerance and understanding of my husband and best friend, Don.
Introduction
Rhetoric and composition emerged some forty years ago in response to a variety of institutional and cultural pressures occasioned by perceived crises in student writing and the inadequacy of prevalent writing curricula to successfully address them. As the teaching and learning of writing became the focus of study, the term writing process came to represent not only a material, curricular approach to the teaching of writing, but also a significant, symbolic representation of the field itself.
Dedicated faculty lines, thriving graduate programs, and field-specific scholarly journals and books have since created a dynamic knowledge base of writing studies that continues to benefit from and to be challenged by poststructuralist, feminist, critical, and postmodern theories. In the wake
