Search

"Tenured Bosses and Disposable Teachers: Writing Instruction in the Managed University "exposes the poor working conditions of contingent composition faculty and explores practical alternatives to the unfair labor practices that are all too common on campuses today. Editors Marc Bousquet, Tony Scott, and Leo Parascondola bring together diverse perspectives from pragmatism to historical materialism to provide a perceptive and engaging examination of the nature, extent, and economics of the managed labor problem in composition instructiona field in which as much as ninety-three percent of all classes are taught by graduate students, adjuncts, and other disposable teachers. These instructors enjoy few benefits, meager wages, little or no participation in departmental governance, and none of the rewards and protections that encourage innovation and research. And it is from this disenfranchised position that literacy workers are expected to provide some of the core instruction in nearly everyone's higher education experience. Twenty-six contributors explore a range of real-world solutions to managerial domination of the composition workplace, from traditional academic unionism to ensemble movement activism and the pragmatic rhetoric, accommodations, and resistances practiced by teachers in their daily lives.Contributors are Leann Bertoncini, Marc Bousquet, Christopher Carter, Christopher Ferry, David Downing, Amanda Godley, Robin Truth Goodman, Bill Hendricks, Walter Jacobsohn, Ruth Kiefson, Paul Lauter, Donald Lazere, Eric Marshall, Randy Martin, Richard Ohmann, Leo Parascondola, Steve Parks, Gary Rhoades, Eileen Schell, Tony Scott, William Thelin, Jennifer Seibel Trainor, Donna Strickland, William Vaughn, Ray Watkins, and Katherine Wills."

Sometimes, you know, you have a moment. For us, this is one such moment. In coming together at CCCC, we leave our institutional sites of work; we gather together-we quite literally conveneat a not-quite-ephemeral site of disciplinary and professional work. At this opening session in particular, inhabited with the echoes of those who came before and anticipating the voices of those who will follow-we pause and we

This is an attempt to define what being a responsible and responsive user of English might mean in a world ordered by global capital, a world where all forms of intra- and international exchanges in all areas of life are increasingly under pressure to involve English. Turning to recent work in linguistics and education, I pose a set of alternative assumptions that might help us develop more responsible and responsive approaches to the relation between English and its users (both those labeled Native-Speaking, White or Middle Class, and those Othered by these labels), the language needs and purposes of individual users of English, and the relation between the work we do and the work done by users of English across the world. I argue that these assumptions can help us compose English against the grain of all systems and relations of injustice.

Community service learning in college-level composition has been widely proclaimed as a microrevolution in higher education. Advocates enthusiastically assert that "both faculty and student participants report radical transformations of their experiences and understanding of education and its relation to communities outside the campus" (Adler-Kassner et al. 1). This pedagogy, they argue, addresses writing as a situated, social act and "points us toward a curriculum of textual studies based on [rhetorical] inquiry into variation in discourse" (Bacon 53). Students write about the community in journals and rhetorical analyses of mission statements, or with the community in an urban

In this article, I argue that critical discourse analysis (CDA) can complement and extend existing critical and radical writing pedagogies; CDA provides the theoretical and methodological context that can articulate explicitly the relationship between language practices and politics. I use CDA to analyze texts that circulated on the campus of Miami University, Ohio, surrounding a conflict that exacerbated ongoing disputes about diversity, access, and standards, and I discuss how CDA might inform composition pedagogy.

We argue against the metaphor of the "level playing field" and its natural coercive power; in so doing, we call for an end to the invisibility that the debate over accommodations has imposed on learning disabilities in the past decade. A literature review of LD in composition shows how this invisibility has manifested itself in our field through limited professional discussion of LD. In response, we propose not a level playing field but a new playing field altogether, a visible one that actively promotes alternative assistance for student writers with LD in first-year composition programs. We seek to show how the LD and composition fields could create a powerful partnership by serving students with LD through the principle of the liberal theory of distributive justice.

The project Andrea Greenbaum attempts in EmancipatoryMovements in Composition is both worthwhile and ambitious. The project is worthwhile because introducing newcomers, particularly graduate students, to the multiple disciplines that have been incorporated into critical pedagogy in the last decade can be daunting, and there is certainly room in the field for a text that names and organizes them. The project is ambitious because it attempts to do this in a mere one hundred pages, with additional pages devoted to an appended syllabus, notes, and citations. Greenbaum opens her book with a personal narrative of the Passover story, drawing from it the lesson that "human beings need to experience oppression-even if it is relived only mythically-in order to understand our social responsibility to counter and resist those forces that seek to dominate, repress, and disempower individuals" (xi), setting the polemical tone she maintains through the rest of the work. She organizes the book around what she identifies as four key approaches to critical pedagogy for the writing classroom: neosophistic rhetoric, cultural studies, feminist studies, and postcolonial studies, examining each for what they offer writing teachers seeking to enact critical pedagogy in their classrooms. Her first two chapters offer a brief historical development of sophistic rhetoric and cultural studies approaches. Greenbaum begins with the reclamation of a sophistic rhetoric, drawing particularly on Susan Jarratt, Thomas Kent, John Poulakos, Sharon Crowley, and a handful of others. She proposes that this neosophistic rhetoric contributes to a "rhetoric of possibility" by drawing attention to the indeterminacy of language, an empowering shift from a logos privileged in Western philosophy to a mythos that invites disruptive stoof the frontier is reconstrued as a collabo ative zone of cultur l and linguistic contact, "a historical moment of meeting, clashing, and cooperating ulticultura encounters" (66).

AL s service-learning scholarship enters its second generation, the writing on service-learningl must begin to reflect our own-and our institutions'complex relationship to "doing good." Since service-learning is a widely accepted part of many college curriculums, those who write about servicelearning must go beyond the pragmatics of when and how to integrate service into composition courses and begin to theorize who participates in servicelearning programs and why they do so. I hope, as Cynthia Rosenberger writes, that service-learning can create a "more just and humane society," and believe that in order to do this service-learning must "generate a thoughtful and critical consciousness in all stakeholders" (39). We must begin theorizing how service-learning is experienced differently by those from different groups and look closely at the gaps between our theories of service-learning and our theories of subject position(s), of race, class, gender, sexuality, and writing. Recent work

This article links failed reform to failed education through a case study of an annual collaborative revision of a program textbook in the Composition Program at the Uni- versity of California at Irvine. Review of successive editions of the program's Student Guide to Writing at UCI reveals a progressive retreat from the program's pedagogical commitments and the reappearance of product-oriented instruction. here is increasing evidence that the failure of education reform is located in the educative act itself. James Milroy and Lesley Milroy observe that teach- ers' "rational conviction" about the intellectual bankruptcy of traditional no- tions of correctness in language use did not necessarily alter teachers' classroom practices, even though teachers appeared to believe they had done so (104). In a 1995 review of the assessment-driven reform movement across the United States, Larry Cuban reports a similar phenomenon. Teachers who actively embraced in-service training required to teach to the new assessments did not change their instructional practice to any significant degree, although teachers appeared to believe they had made the changes they had been taught

In today's classroom and larger cultural climate, overtly politicized "critical" composition pedagogies may only exacerbate student resistance to issues and identities of difference, especially if the teacher is marked or read as different her/himself. I therefore suggest that the marginalized teacher-subject look to contemporary theoretical notions of the "radical resignification" of power as well as to the neglected rhetorical concept of metis, or "cunning," to engage difference more efficaciously, if more sneakily. Specifically, I argue that one possible praxis for better negotiating student resistance is the performance of the very neutrality that students expect of teachers.

Jasper Neel, "Reclaiming Our Theoretical Heritage" C. Jan Swearingen, "Rhetoric and Composition as a Coherent Intellectual Discipline" Gary A. Olson, "The Death of Composition as an Intellectual Discipline" Charles Bazerman, "The Case for Writing Studies as a Major Discipline" Susan Miller, "Writing Studies as a Mode of Inquiry" Susan Wells, "Claiming the Archive for Rhetoric and Composition" Susan C. Jarratt, "New Dispositions for Historical Studies in Rhetoric" Gary A. Olson, "Ideological Critique in Rhetoric and Composition" Tom Fox, "Working Against the State" Lynn Worsham, "Coming to Terms" Keith Gilyard, "Holdin' It Down" Steven Mailloux, "From Segregated Schools to Dimpled Chads" Thomas Kent, "Paralogic Rhetoric" Barbara Couture, "Writing and Truth" Victor J. Vitanza, "Seeing in Third Sophistic Ways" Sharon Crowley, "Body Studies in Rhetoric and Composition" John Trimbur, "Delivering the Message" Cynthia L. Selfe and Richard J. Selfe, "The Intelligent Work of Computers and Composition Studies" William A. Covino, "The Eternal Return of Magic-Rhetoric"

This article echoes Robert J. Connors's call for a reexamination of sentence pedagogies in composition teaching and offers an explanation of the unsolved mystery of why sentence combining improves student writing, using insights provided by work in contemporary research in linguistics and in language processing. Based the same insights, I argue that we invite words and phrases, the true members of sentences, to important positions in writing classes and describe practical methods for doing so. I deeply appreciated RobertJ. Connors's article "The Erasure of the Sentence" published in College Composition and Communication in fall 2000. It was not only a thoughtful look at sentence-based pedagogies but a clear and muchneeded historical analysis of their curious eclipse. I have always wondered why, pedagogically, acknowledging the importance of writing sentences is so often construed as diminishing the importance of other levels of discourse. While I have taught both graduate and undergraduate U.S. students, most of my work as a composition teacher has been with international students who come through university ESL classes or who come for help writing theses and dissertations. In teaching ESL composition, the devaluation of the sentence as a locus of instruction is particularly surreal. It has been as though "process" somehow precludes the immediate process most central to translating thoughts

I begin with an analogy: teaching research-based argumentation and critique in composition studies is like learning how to perform hip-hop music. My analogy's focus on argumentation does not exclude traditional methods of argumentative pedagogy based on models like Stephen Toulmin's complex hierarchies or the Aristotelian triad of deliberative (offering advice), forensic (taking a side in a debate, often a legal or controversial matter), and epideictic (a speech of praise or blame appealing to an already won-over audience) discourse. Instead, I pose the analogy as a first step towards developing alternative or additional ways to engage composition students with the argumentative essay. In choosing hip-hop as a model for the composition essay, I attempt to draw upon a dominant form of contemporary culture familiar to the majority of students I encounter in my classrooms. Does a relationship between hip-hop and com

Reflecting the rich complexity of contemporary college composition pedagogy, this unique collection presents twelve original essays on several of the most important approaches to the teaching of writing. Each essay is written by an experienced teacher/scholar and describes one of the major pedagogies employed today: process, expressive, rhetorical, collaborative, feminist, critical, cultural studies, community service, and basic writing. Writing centers, writing across the curriculum, and technology and the teaching of writing are also discussed. The essays are composed of personal statements on pedagogical applications and bibliographical guides that aid students and new teachers in further study and research. Contributors include Christopher Burnham, William A. Covino, Ann George, Diana George, Eric H. Hobson, Rebecca Moore Howard, Susan C. Jarratt, Laura Julier, Susan McLeod, Charles Moran, Deborah Mutnick, Lad Tobin, and John Trimbur. An invaluable tool for graduate students and new teachers, A Guide to Composition Pedagogies provides an exceptional introduction to composition studies and the extensive range of pedagogical approaches used today.

The CCCC Guidelinesfor the Ethical Treatment of Students and Student Writing in Composition Studies written by Paul Anderson, Davida Charney, Marilyn Cooper, Cristina Kirklighter, Peter Mortensen, and Mark Reynolds provides a common frame to help composition specialists as we navigate and discuss the various ethical dilemmas we face while conducting research. As a graduate student involved in my own qualitative research, I find the Guidelines beneficial, and I am committed to following them, including the first guideline that calls for composition researchers to comply with all Institutional Review Board (IRB) policies.1 However, in the past two years I have submitted proposals for the same study to eleven IRBs at colleges and universities across the country. While I strongly support the need for obtaining IRB approval, I believe as a discipline and as individuals we need to work to revise the IRB process. As it is now practiced at many institutions, the IRB process positions composition researchers and composition research in potentially problematic ways. In fall 2000 when I began my research into the Intercollegiate E-Democracy Project, a national online project where students across the country discuss various social and political issues, I knew I had to mail consent forms to

Using a variety of common forms from first-year composition, this paper examines the purposes of CCCC, transformative experiences at professional conferences, and the elements of my literacy autobiography. I then argue for recognition of the knowledgebuilding role of writing programs in two-year colleges and for a "write to work"principle, calling for full pay for all who teach required writing courses. Originally, this manuscript was a speech integrated with a PowerPoint? presentation using more than 100 slides (text, photographs, and music), which cannot be fully represented here.

In an attempt to bring composition studies into a more thoroughgoing discussion of the place of visual literacy in the writing classroom, I argue that throughout the history of writing instruction in this country the terms of debate typical in discussions of visual literacy and the teaching of writing have limited the kinds of assignments we might imagine for composition.

In this article, we identify in the formation of U.S. college composition courses a tacit policy of English monolingualism based on a chain of reifications of languages and social identity. We show this policy continuing in assumptions underlying arguments for and against English Only legislation and basic writers. And we call for an internationalist perspective on written English in relation to other languages and the dynamics of globalization.

Since 1989, the Missouri Colloquium on Writing Assessment (CWA) has conducted, compiled, and published the results of thirteen annual writing surveys completed by writing program administrators at Missouri's two-year and four-year institutions (primarily public) as well as at Johnson County Kansas Community College, a part of the Kansas City metropolitan area. In all, thirty-seven different colleges and universities (nineteen two-year and eighteen four-year institutions) are represented in the thirteen years of survey results, with eight institutions included in all thirteen surveys and twenty-seven (72 percent) of the colleges and universities participating eight or more survey years (see Tables 1 and 2).1 The collected data are unique in that the same cohort of schools responded to the same detailed inquiries related to the assessing, curricular design, delivery, and staffing of general studies writing courses. An examination of the re

The fiftieth anniversary issue of CCC included a call from Geneva Smitherman for compositionists to renew the fight for language rights. In this article, we take up Smitherman's call by situating the theory of language rights in composition studies in a brief history of rights rhetoric in the United States. C ommemorating its fiftieth year, Geneva Smitherman celebrated CCC as an "advocate for those on the linguistic margins" (349). As Smitherman makes clear in both the title of her commemorative article-"CCCC's Role in the Struggle for Language Rights"-and in her opening reference to "Students' Right to Their Own Language," composition's advocacy for those on the linguistic margins has been most meaningful when it has been expressed through a rhetoric of rights. Drawing attention to the legacy of a rights rhetoric in composition studies, Smitherman demonstrates that the constitutive ambiguity of rights rhetoric continues to create contexts for exchange, deliberation, and progress. While rights rhetoric has served us in our search to understand and enact a just redistribution of literacy resources through the teaching of writing, the rights rhetoric of compositionists has not been without its problems. A rhetoric of rights is limited by the collision of shifting meanings of rights in

This study examines composition at public Midwestern normal schools, the teacher training institutions of the nineteenth and early twentieth century. It argues that the unique social environment, educational aims, and intellectual traditions of the normal school gave rise to attitudes about composition theory, methods, teachers, and students that are much more compatible with composition's contemporary ethic than those associated with the elite Eastern colleges where the origins of composition have most often been studied.

This chair's address to the 52nd Annual Convention of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, March 2001, draws on the poetry of Gerard Manley Hopkins to explore and celebrate a life in composition. Acknowledging institutional fatigue, I outline possibilities for individual renewal, particularly through the process of mentoring new members. Ending with a convention poem, I invite readers to compose their own.

Joseph Conrad's tale The Secret Sharer reminds us of the human double, the doppleglinger or twin that represents the other (or under) side of a person. Interpreters of Conrad frequently explain that the fully mature man at the end of The Secret Sharer emerges from an integration of the two. Without acknowledging and incorporating his other (and darker) self, the young captain narrator would never become an adult. I make a similar claim about composition's capacious term personal writing. Briefly, I want to call attention to its other (silent) side as a way of mediating among the conflicting discourses that currently swirl around personal writing and as a way of rethinking the pedagogies

When we read Michael Murphy's article, "New Faculty for a New University," we were surprised and troubled by the story about adjuncts that Murphy purports to tell. Murphy's argument, that a teaching substructure in rhetoric and composition exists but remains invisible and that to recognize such a substructure would cost universities "very little," is based on a notion of universities that has not existed in most places for a very long time, if ever. Murphy's idea of a "teaching track" that supports full-time faculty research is based on a conception of a university at a handful of research institutions. Schools that train graduate students, produce the bulk of scholarship in the field of rhetoric and composition, and grant PhDs are about 7 percent of the total number of universities in this country (Phelan 76). To make an argument about adjunct work and adjunct labor without considering the other 93 percent of us seems to us to be thoughtless, at best, and unethical, at worst. The other aspect of adjuncting that Murphy leaves out is, of course, gender. As Theresa Enos writes, "When a field has been feminized and when a disproportionate number of its workers are female, that field is devalued and is subject to both disciplinary and gender bias" (43). As the latest report on Women in the Profession indicates, women are still "more likely than white men ... to obtain jobs in lower-paying institutions .., and they tend to linger

In early Methodism John Wesley created an extracurricular site of literacy and rhetoric that empowered women and the working classes to read, write, and speak in public. Wesley's "method" of literacy in community not only transformed religious life in Britain but also redefined the intersections of education, class, and gender. In an article based on her 1993 CCCC Chair's address, Anne Ruggles Gere critiqued the field of composition: "In concentrating upon establishing our position within the academy, we have neglected to recount the history of composition in other contexts; we have neglected composition's extracurriculum" (79). Influenced by Shirley Brice Heath's study of community literacy practices, Glenda Hull's work on workplace literacy, Patricia Bizzell's concept of multiple discourse communities, and others, Gere examined the cultural work and literacy practices of writing groups outside the academy, focusing particularly on nineteenth- and early twentieth-century American clubwomen, both white and African American. Gere urged us not only to expand our field's history to

The Conduit Metaphor has been roundly condemned by language scholars, including scholars in rhetoric and composition, but it is time to reevaluate its import and value. Rather than simply asserting a mistaken view of linguistic communication, the Conduit Metaphor combines with the metaphor Language Is Power to form a prudentially applied ethical measure of discourses, genres, and texts.

Mapping the Terrain of Feminist Cyberscapes, Kristine Blair and Pamela Takayoshi Map of Location I: The Body in Virtual Space Technological Fronts: Lesbian Lives "On the Line," Joanne Addison and Susan Hilligoss Postmodernist Looks at the Body Electric: Email, Female and Hijra, Sarah Sloane Re-Membering Mama: The Female Body Embodied and Disembodied Communication, Barbara Monroe Making the Map: Interview with Helen Schwartz Map of Location II: Constructions of Online Identities Our Studnets, Our Selves I, A Mestiza, Continually Walk Out of One Culture Into Another: Alba's Story, Sibylle Gruber Pedagogy, Emotion and The Protocol of Care, Shannon Wilson. Writing (Without) The Body: Gender and Power in Networked Discussion Groups, Donna LeCourt Making the Map: Interview with Gail Hawisher Map of Location III: Discourse Communities Online and in Classrooms A Virtual Locker Room in Classroom Chat Spaces: The Politics of Men as "Other," Christine Boese The Use of Electronic Communication in Facilitating Feminine Modes of Discourse: An Irigaraian Heuristic, Morgan Gresham and Cecilia Hartley Over the Line, Online, Gender Lines: Email and Women in the Classroom, Dene Grigar Maps of Location IV: Virtual Coalitions and Collaborations Designing Feminist Multimedia for The United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, Mary Hocks Voicing The Landscape: A Discourse of Their Own, Laura Julier, Paula Gillespie, And Kathleen Blake Yancey Thirteen Ways of Looking at an M-Word, Margaret Daisley and Susan Romano Making The Map: Interview With Mary Lay and Elizabeth Tebeaux Map of Location V: The Future: to be Mapped Later Feminist Research in Computers and Composition, Lisa Gerrard An Online Dialogue with the Contributors to Feminist Cyberscapes Mapping the Future: Interview with Cynthia Selfe

Composition has neglected the circulation of writing by figuring classroom life as a middle-class family drama. Cultural studies approaches to teaching writing have sought, with mixed success, to transcend this domestic space. I draw on Marx's Grundrisse for a conceptual model of how circulation materializes contradictory social relations and how the contradictions between exchange value and use value might be taken up in writing classrooms to expand public forums and popular participation in civic life.

Ian: I want to interrogate what I am calling the silence of whiteness in composition pedagogy. I'd like to develop Keith Gilyard's statement made at the CCCC in Phoenix in 1997 that the pressing issue with respect to white and black relations in this country is not race, but racism. I believe it is impossible to invoke whiteness without also invoking racism; that is, an interrogation of whiteness is an interrogation of racism.

Challenging the common assumption that the rise of an instructorate unsupported to do traditional forms of research will necessarily result in an exploited academic labor force, inferior teaching, and the final triumph of anti-intellectualism and bureaucracy in academia, this article explores the ways in which the "teaching substructure" existing now in composition and rhetoric has already begun to contribute substantially to the intellectual vitality and institutional standing of the discipline.

This article examines the sentence-based pedagogies that arose in composition during the 1960s and 1970s-the generative rhetoric of Francis Christensen, imitation exercises, and sentence-combining--and attempts to discern why these three pedagogies have been so completely elided within contemporary composition studies. The usefulness of these sentence-based rhetorics was never disproved, but a growing wave of anti-formalism, antibehaviorism, and anti-empiricism within English-based composition studies after 1980 doomed them to a marginality under which they still exist today. The result of this erasure of sentence pedagogies is a culture of writing instruction that has very little to do with or to say about the sentence outside of a purely grammatical discourse.

We offer institutional critique as an activist methodology for changing institutions. Since institutions are rhetorical entities, rhetoric can be deployed to change them. In its effort to counter oppressive institutional structures, the field of rhetoric and composition has focused its attention chiefly on the composition classroom, on the department of English, and on disciplinary forms of critique. Our focus shifts the scene of action and argument to professional writing and to public discourse, using spatial methods adapted from postmodern geography and critical theory.

On September 25, 1999, several members of CCCC met in New York with staff and faculty representing the MLA and several other academic organizations to discuss problems in staffing introductory courses in composition, literature, and foreign languages. The impetus for the meeting was a call from its 1997 delegate assembly for the MLA to set "staffing standards" in introductory courses-that is, to define appropriate ratios of fulland part-time faculty teaching in such courses. Phyllis Franklin, the Executive Director of the MLA, responded to this call by proposing a possible set of percentages in a brief piece on "Setting Standards: Acceptable Ratios of Fullto Part-Time Faculty Members" in the fall 1998 issue of the MLA Newsletter

For many generations, writing teachers were able to turn their faces from the deep contradiction of our profession. They could teach writing, an activity whose success depends above all on the relationship between the created text and its rhetorical context, within the single and peculiar context of the classroom. They could have their students read textbooks with a few paragraphs about audience awareness and perhaps a few about defining a purpose while assigning essay after essay written for the same audience (the teacher) and the same purpose (to complete a requirement, to earn a grade). They could assign such tasks to every first-year college student in happy innocence as long as they shared the assumption upon which the universal college composition requirement is predicated: When students write school essays, they develop a set of generalizable skills-in organizing ideas, building paragraphs, controlling syntax

College writing remediation has become increasingly controversial in recent years. David Bartholomae has suggested that we reexamine the term "basic writing" ("The Tidy House"); Mike Rose has argued that an ideology of intellectual inferiority permeates remedial instruction ("The Language of Exclusion"); and a highly influential basic writing curriculum dissolves distinctions between remedial writing and college composition (Bartholomae and Petrosky). During this same era, several writing programs have begun to experiment with enrolling remedial-placed students in full-credit-bearing college composition courses (Grego and Thompson; Rodby; Royer and Gilles). As names such as Bartholomae and Rose would suggest, this "antiremediation" movement is being propelled by scholars who are sympathetic to the aspirations of those labeled "remedial writers." At the same time, however, forces opposed to the admission of "unqualified" students have launched their

"I value "Gypsy Academics and Mother-Teachers "for the compassionate way in which Schell combines a feminist and materialist analysis of the historical and economic conditions that have led to the exploitation of adjunct faculty, the majority of whom are women." - College EnglishFully two-thirds of all part-time teachers in English studies are women, many with no permanent faculty standing, no benefits, no job security, and little or no chance for promotion. How does the "feminization" of writing programs affect the newly formed discipline of rhetoric and composition? "Gypsy Academics and Mother-Teachers" illuminates the complex gendered ideologies that surround writing instruction--drawing on feminist theories of women's work, Marxist theories of class and labor, sociological and economic studies of part-time academic employment, and personal interviews with part-time women writing faculty. Eileen Schell contends that part-time faculty members' interests and contributions have been underrepresented in our research narratives and professional histories in rhetoric and composition. Her book attempts to revalue practitioner knowledge and to reclaim the voices and perspectives of part-time women writing instructors as a vital part of the history and growth of rhetoric and composition as a discipline. Both a theoretical and practical study, "Gypsy Academics and Mother-Teachers" not only theorizes the structures of gender and labor in writing programs; it also offers administrators, theorists, and practitioners ideas for improving the working conditions and professional status of part-time writing instructors.

Foreword(s): Research and Teaching. 1. Growth. 2. Voice. 3. Process. 4. Error. 5. Community. Afterword(s): Contact and Negotiation. Notes. Works Cited.

The field of composition has always prided itself upon its theoretical and methodological diversity. In the first published address from a CCCC chair, Richard LloydJones rehearsed the field's typical gesture of pride and inclusion by reciting the laundry list of disciplines that contribute concepts and methods to composition: "rhetoric, linguistics, literary criticism, cultural history, sociology, psychology, neurology, speech therapy, politics, communication theory-all that can be gathered" (27). The field of composition has likewise prided itself upon its long-standing commitment to ethical research practices. Again we can look back to Lloyd-Jones' address, where he described the "ethical badge of membership in our guild" as the pursuit of "knowledge and perhaps a larger truth" (25). Perhaps naively, Lloyd-Jones seemed to assume unproblematically the connection between laudable ethical practices and all of the forms of research gathered into the growing field of composition. But in the twenty years since this connection was articulated implicitly, the field has grown more narrow in its explicit articulation of the

Before I was an English teacher, I was a bartender. When I tell my first-year composition students this as we take turns exchanging getting-to-know-you trivia during the first class session, they laugh-some, I suspect, struck by the improbability of the leap from one profession into the other; others, I know, amused by the irony of ending up with an ex-bartender for a teacher. For these others, sons and daughters of iron workers and auto mechanics and waitresses, my move from barroom to classroom traces the trajectory of their own lives. When I first began teaching, I thought-or, I have to say, I hoped-that the university was the farthest point from the local tavern, and that teaching writing to college students was the furthest thing from opening bottles of Bud for laborers. So I was surprised to find myself, after three years of teaching writing, feeling compelled to return to the bar where I'd worked for several years to do community research into local rhetorical practices. In the ethnographic tale that was to grow out of this research, I wanted to map out connections between class, culture, and rhetoric by investigating how rhetorical genres-and in particular, arguments about politics-participated in the public construction of knowledge in, and ultimately in the production of, working-class culture. I was not, of course, surprised to see my data confirm what I'd already suspected: that this small blue-collar society at the bar differed significantly from the cultures of middle-class academics in orientations to word, work, and world. What did come as something of a surprise, however, were what I have come to recognize as