Ecocomposition

Reference

Walker, P. (2010). “(Un)earthing a Vocabulary of Values: A Discourse Analysis for Ecocomposition.” Composition Studies. Vol. 38 (1). pp. 69-87.

Topic

Using discourse analysis can demonstrate to composition students how “environmental issues…are embedded in language” and that values surrounding environmental issues can be uncovered through conflict-language analysis (70-1).

Thesis

“The objective of this article is to propose an analytic method through with composition students and others might discover and understand the ecological complexities of prevailing environmental terminology that create “wicked” problems” (70).

Methodology

· Corpus: Walker uses discourse analysis to look at a number of textual artifacts (exact number was not identified) over a span of six years.

· Case Subject: The researcher examines documents from various stakeholders associated with the Arizona Snowbowl’s (Flagstaff) proposed expansion and plans to manufacture snow out of “reclaimed” water for better and longer skiing seasons. The stakeholders include The United States Forest Services (Flagstaff office), Arizona Snowbowl, Save the Peaks Coalition, and Native American Tribe Members.

· Framework: Walker uses Alfred Guttenberg’s (planning scholar) classification system for planning and language which includes indicative, optative, imperative, and indeterminative classifications. However, the researcher simplifies the model for his students, using the terminology referential, appraising, prescriptive, and optative. Using this heuristic, Walker performs a conflict-language analysis to show difference in stakeholder responses to the Executive Summary of Environmental Impact Statements.

Results

In analyzing the discourse of newspaper articles, quotes, websites, etc. with reactions to the proposal, Walker finds various differences in priorities when looking at the proposed land action:

• United States Forest Service: Saw itself as owner of the land and maintainer/overseer of land; Native American concerns seemed to be an afterthought of their plans.
• Arizona Snowbowl: Focus was on economic need and the progress of business and economy.
• Save the Peaks Coalition: Concerned with the “care for cultural and land preservation” (81).
• Native American Tribe Members: Valued land and was concerned with use of land and its connection to spirituality.

Author’s Interpretation of Results:

Value analysis can better reveal the concerns of stakeholders and vocabulary transmits such meaning. Thus, asking students to analyze language gives them a broader sense of the complexities of discussing environmental and sustainability issues.

Suggested Further Research:

None Reported

Critique:

Walker presented a great idea for students to explore the multidimensional nature of language and the importance of analyzing such language when examining environmental issues. However, in terms of research, the author has fundamental problems with his methods. First, Walker does not make clear if he is demonstrating an original case study, or if this case study has been developed by his students. This is problematic in understanding the depth to which the research has gone and the overall focus of his goal as well as the nature of cross-checking methods. The author tends to switch terminology and does not clearly identify his source material for the case study (the exact documents reviewed are not made clear). Furthermore, Walker has missing citations which further questions the ethos of his research. Perhaps my biggest criticism is that Walker does not clearly define which case study is the focal point for this thesis: the case study of his students working with this ‘ecocomposition’ schema or his example of discourse analysis. Overall, there seems to be a lack of critical consideration of audience and the need for clarity in research methods.

Coursework Across Terms

Reference

Anson, C. M., & Miller-Cochran, S. K. (2009). Contrails of Learning: Using New Technologies for Vertical Knowledge-building. Computers and Composition, 26(1), 38-48. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2008.11.002

Topic

Inspired by The Responsive Ph.D: Innovations in Doctoral Education from the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation, Anson and Miller-Cochran use a constructivist model of education to create a “Vertical Model of Course Articulation and Progress,” where students collaborate beyond space and time.

Research Question

The research question is presented as a thesis: “we argue that the vertical model in Figure 2 is well suited to graduate education which provides and for the kinds of experimentation and innovation necessary to realize the outcomes called in The Responsive Ph.D” (40).

Methodology

Anson and Miller-Cochran frame their study in their “Technologies and Pedagogies in the Communication Arts” course at North Carolina State University. Anson taught the course in fall and Miller-Cochran taught the course in the spring. Anson developed a wiki for the course, which Miller-Cochran continued using the next term. Students were asked to contribute, alter, revise the course wiki throughout the term to add and create new knowledge to the course, thus creating a collaboration beyond space and time.

Results

Anson observed that students hesitated to post, alter, or add content to the wiki. Miller-Cochran at first felt uncomfortable changing the format of the wiki from what Anson established in the fall and also noticed that students were hesitate to engage with the wiki.

Authors’ Interpretation of Results

Anson and Miller-Cochran theorize that the lack of engagement with the wiki could be the result of power dynamics; just because the course utilized technology does not mean that “the power dynamics” were not present (45). The professors also asked students to change their notion of learning which is deep rooted (i.e. objectivist vs. constructivist). It is suggested that students may need to have more specific “guidelines about how to contribute to the wiki,” but this of course reemphasize the power structure. Questions about ownership may also contribute to the hesitancy of collaboration.

Suggested Further Research

The authors suggest that students may understand the nature of the wiki if they discussed the role of using the wiki/collaboration in their pedagogies. Furthermore, Anson and Miller-Cochran suggest that the wiki could become a public forum for academics and professional outside of the course.

Critique

The observations of graduate student collaboration was interesting and the authors’ acknowledge interesting variable for why their wiki project saw resistance from students. However, it would have been interesting if the students had been directly surveyed or interviewed for their impressions and reactions to the wiki. The lack of engagement may have been a misunderstanding of purpose, time management, or discomfort using the technology. Without the “user” responses, it is hard to pin down the motivation, or lack of motivation, of graduate students using this technology for collaboration.

Professional Development in Multimodal Teaching and Research

Reference

Graupner, M., Nickoson-Massey, L., & Blair, K. (2009). Remediating Knowledge-Making Spaces in the Graduate Curriculum: Developing and Sustaining Multimodal Teaching and Research. Computers and Composition, 26(1), 13-23. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2008.11.005

Topic

The authors emphasize the importance of providing graduate students with a framework for how to use digital technologies for teaching, research, and professional development.

Research Questions

The research question is stated in thesis format: “In response to the need for professionalizing graduate students who are likely to work in a range of spaces, including digital environments, it is only fitting that programs take a multimodal approach to teaching and research” (13).

Methodology

The author’s provide a case study of the work they do at Bowling Green State University, mostly focusing on the digital tools used by co-author and doctoral student, Meredith Graupner, in course work and teaching assignments. In addition, the authors draw from current scholarly research to provide a critical analysis of the state of multimodal composition/writing in teaching and research contexts.

Results

The authors provide five benchmarks for creating and maintaining “multimodal teaching and research” (21) [the following benchmarks are quoted directly from the text]:

• Developing technological learning outcomes
• Establishing an online professional identity
• Identifying site-specific opportunities to develop and sustain technological learning outcomes
• Technological mentoring and the dissertation committee
• Continued support for graduate faculty (21)

Author’s Interpretation of Results

As a field, composition and rhetoric programs need to begin utilizing new digital technologies to create space for “formal and informal collaborative knowledge-making” where there is “shared [expertise and power] among and between students and faculty” (22).

Suggested Further Research

No further research was suggested by the authors.

Critique

The authors analyze and utilize textual scholarship on digital composition adequately to support the thesis that more training and opportunity is needed to develop effective digital spaces for professional development and pedagogical development for graduate students. However, empirical data is scant as only one graduate students’ work is analyzed for the purpose of this article. The author could have provided more analysis or evidence of how digital identity could or does benefit graduate students when they become faculty. Furthermore, the emphasis on discussing the importance of Electronic Thesis and Dissertations is interesting, especially in discussing the format ETDs take on (i.e. pdf texts). However, the author’s do not explore the complexities of housing more sophisticated ETDs in the academy. Overall, the interpretation of the current state of graduate education in composition and rhetoric was interesting, but more research that showed the benefits to students and programs would have strengthened this study.

Yancey "Remixing" Comp/Rhet

Reference

Yancey, K. B. (2009). Re-designing Graduate Education in Composition and Rhetoric: The Use of Remix as Concept, Material, and Method. Computers and Composition, 26(1), 4-12. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2008.11.004

Topic

In this article, Yancey focuses on how Florida State University “remixed,” or redesigned, their graduate program in composition and rhetoric to focus more on multimodal composition models and opportunities. The emphasis of this change is not in ‘reinventing the wheel’, but updating it to respect traditional scholarship and values and adjusting them to address new generational developments, needs, and uses.

Research Questions

There is not a definitive research question stated. However, through a historical lens, Yancey implies that the need to reinvent the program was largely due to a stall in enrollment and recruitment of graduate students and faculty.

Methodology

Again, a specific methodology was not presented. Yancey looks at the history of her program and outlines the changes and decisions made to reinvent FSU’s Rhetoric and Composition program. She begins this historical narrative in 2005, briefly looking back at the events a couple years prior, and noting the developments of the program through 2007. Occasionally Yancey provides anecdotes from her own or her colleagues’ pedagogical choices and even describes student projects that were characteristic of the “remix” notion of the program. However, how she chose to collect this information (whether by document analysis, interview, or observation) is not provided.

Results

Yancey finds that her program has become more successful because new technologies were introduced within the original framework of composition and rhetorical studies (rather than off sets or as new, unrelated knowledge) giving graduate students the opportunity to use traditional frameworks to try new multimodal approaches.

Author’s Interpretation of Results

Yancey notes that the current changes can inform program development in three ways: first, the “program has benefited …from programs that have come before”; second, the programs “specific emphasis on technology, culture, and literacy as also benefiting from earlier generations” whom “developed computer classroom pedagogy course that help contextualize and forecast” their focus; and third, they “will need to change as [they] become one of the earlier generations” and contemplating how to “build that consideration into existing models” (11). Thus “re-seeing” and “remixing” needs to be built “into the model” (11).

Suggested Further Research

Specific to FSU’s program, Yancey provides questions to be considered in upcoming years [the following are quoted directly]:

• Do we review program components annually and make incremental changes?
• Dow we stage a retreat when the entire program is reviewed and changes are suggested?
• Do we do both?
• In each case, what do we need? Who will be involved and why? (11)

Critique

Yancey does a fine job in explaining the evolution of FSU’s Rhetoric and Composition program between 2005 and 2007. However, this research could have been much more concrete had there been information about the change in enrollment, quantitative research showing how many theses and dissertations approached rhetoric and composition using digital tools or emphases, or interviewing students about if the opportunity to incorporate such technology into scholarship was a deciding factor in their choice to study at FSU. Perhaps this is an opportunity for future study when more time has passed and a larger sample can be studied.

Furthermore, considering this article was submitted to a journal intended for students and faculty studying composition and, seemingly, digital components, I would have expected Yancey to discuss more overtly the implications for graduate study in Rhetoric and Composition on a larger scale. A reader could certainly make such leaps, but comparing and contrasting graduate curricula could have been an interesting study in how the field is working with new developments in computers, rhetoric, and composition, and how to prepare graduate students for ongoing change.