History of the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition

Revised Version 2-15 -15 History of the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition Janice Lauer, Consortium Archivist Professor of English, Emerita Purdue University 1992 Background In 1992, at the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) in Cincinnati a small group of scholars was convened by Charles Bazerman to discuss ideas for a consortium: Linda Flower, Dick Hayes, Janice Lauer, Louise Phelps, and Barbara Walvoord In 1993 at the San Diego CCCC a steering committee was formed to include Charles Bazerman, Linda Flower, Dick Hayes, Janice Lauer, Louise Phelps, and Barbara Walvoord Janice Lauer accepted the position of coordinator of the Consortium At these two sessions the attendees confirmed the need for a consortium of doctoral programs Preparation 1993 In the summer of 1993, Janice Lauer sent a draft of the invitation letter and timetable to the R/C subgroup (Appendix A) She then sent invitations (Appendix B) to join the Consortium to all programs that identified themselves as offering doctoral degrees in Rhetoric and Composition in response to a survey published in Rhetoric Review To those responding to the invitation, she asked them to designate a representative from each affiliating program and to provide a list of dissertations (Appendix C) Fifty-six programs registered to be part of the Consortium and designated their representatives In addition a workshop on doctoral education was planned for the next meeting of the CCCC First Meeting 1994 Nashville The first official meeting of the Consortium was convened by Janice Lauer in the Spring of 1994 at the CCCC in Nashville Attendees discussed the following items The construction of an identity and set of purposes for the Consortium Identity: “A research-oriented coalition of doctoral programs in Rhetoric and Composition” Purposes: a to facilitate the exchange of research by R/C faculty and graduate students through online postings of dissertations and ongoing faculty research projects, including historical, theoretical, interpretive, and empirical studies b to provide a listserv to enable online exchange among members of the Consortium c to establish Rhetoric and Composition categories in the Dissertation Abstracts Index d to provide mutual support of each other’s programs in terms of ideas, needs, and problem areas, e.g., ` the development of graduate curricula, faculty resources, library enhancement, course and dissertation loads, promotion, and tenure issues the admission and financial needs of graduate students, academic support, and job placement the building of relationships with English departments and other disciplines The establishment of subcommittees to address the above purposes and issues a A Home Page: Catherine Hobbs b On-line dissertations: Janice Lauer, James Porter, Patricia Sullivan c On-line bibliographies: Gail Hawisher d On-line exchanges: Cindy Selfe e Dissertation categories in the DAI: Robert Johnson, Catherine Hobbs, and Anne Rosenthal f Research strands at the CCCC: Richard Young, Louise Phelps, and Michael Halloran g Collaboration with the CCCC Research Network Forum: person to be determined h Regional Networking: Janet Atwill, Paul Ranieri, Lisa McClure i Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman j Exchange of information on exams, organization of programs: Michael Flanigan k Graduate Student Exchange: person to be determined l Course requirements and descriptions: Lisa McClure and Gerald Nelms Other agenda items: a Review of the membership list: Janice Lauer b Graduate Program Survey: Stuart Brown c Dues and Stationery: Janice Lauer, $10.00 for two years to cover mailings and stationery d Workshops for program directors e Plans for a whole day pre-convention workshop at the next CCCC on the following topics: Graduate curriculum: designs, requirements, representations, courses, texts Doctoral Students: admissions, continuing financial and academic support, job placement Graduate faculty: resources, course and dissertation loads, promotion and tenure, faculty and graduate students exchanges Contexts: relationships with English departments and other fields: starting and maintaining doctoral programs ON FILE: In the Consortium Archives files for 1994 are: -A Report from the Task Force on the Convention, -The list of programs that joined the Consortium -Several memos 1995 Washington, D.C Workshop The Consortium sponsored a whole-day pre-convention workshop “Graduate Programs in Rhetoric and Composition: Curriculum, Faculty, Graduate Students, and Contexts,” led by Janice Lauer, Frank O’Hare, Ross Winterowd, and Richard Young Meeting Janice Lauer convened the second meeting following the workshop Agenda items included: Report and discussion of key issues from the workshop Revised membership list: Janice Lauer Reports of subcommittees: a On-line dissertations: Catherine Hobbs b On-line bibliographies: Gail Hawisher c On-line exchanges: Cindy Selfe d Dissertation Categories in the DAI: Robert Johnson, Catherine Hobbs, and Anne Rosenthal e Research Strands at the CCCC: Richard Young, Louise Phelps, and Michael Halloran f Regional Networking: Janet Atwill, Lisa McClure, and Gerald Nelms g Course requirements and descriptions: Lisa McClure and Paul Ranieri h Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman i Exchange of program information: Michael Flanigan ON FILE: -Member list -Online discussions about the job market -Program descriptions 1996 Milwaukee At the CCCC, Janice Lauer convened the Consortium meeting Agenda items included: A presentation of the Consortium background: Janice Lauer Membership list, dues, and stationery: Janice Lauer (Dues payable to "Doctoral Consortium in Rhetoric and Composition." Tax ID number: 35-192-1404TT) Reports and discussion of the subcommittees’ work a Home page (Agora: http://www.uoknor.edu/agora/): Catherine Hobbs b Dissertation categories in the DAI: Chuck Bazerman, Linda Ferreira Buckley, Rhonda Grego c Web site: Consortium programs and courses: Lisa McClure d Graduate student exchange of information: Lisa McClure e Regional networking, etc.: Paul Ranieri f Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman, Ann Merle Feldman g Graduate program survey: Stuart Brown New business a Program criteria or ranking: John Warnock b Program review: Louise Phelps ON FILE : -Updated member list, -Minutes, -Correspondence, -Email about program networking and placement in the English Department 1997 Phoenix At the CCCC convention in Phoenix, Janice Lauer convened the Consortium meeting Representatives of the subcommittees of the Consortium addressed the following items: Consortium Home Page and Doctoral Dissertations: Catherine Hobbs The new address was: http://www.ou.edu/cas/English/agora, hosted by the University of Oklahoma Dissertation titles were to be sent to Catherine Hobbs for inclusion Dissertation Abstracts International: Janice Lauer and Linda Ferreira-Buckley A new category was established in the DAI: 0681 Rhetoric and Composition A New On-line Index of Essay Anthologies and Composition Journals Lee Honeycutt, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, established an index of books, composition journals and essays in anthologies by scholars in Rhetoric and Composition: http:www.rpi.edu/~honeycuttl/bib/index.html 4.Web Site, Graduate Student Exchanges Lisa McClure and colleagues at Southern Illinois University constructed a template for each doctoral program Each could be linked to the consortium website The site also posted a chart listing graduate student addresses and interests Consortium Ad in Journal(s): Linda Ferreira-Buckley An ad will be placed in a journal to announce the Consortium’s on-line resources for prospective students or others interested in Rhetoric and Composition doctoral programs Doctoral Program Development and Review The Consortium will create an archive of documents that have been used to develop and argue for R/C programs and a list of members willing to advise others A subcommittee will write criteria to guide program review; a draft will be shared on-line: Louise Phelps, Carol Berkenkotter, Lynne Dianne Beene A report on a survey of graduate student placement: Jeanne Fahenstock, Marie Secor, and Robert Schwegler Regional networking: Janice Lauer reported on the annual Midwest gatherings of faculty and graduate students in Rhetoric and Composition from Purdue, Ohio State, U of Illinois at Urbana, U Illinois at Chicago, Illinois State, Ball State, Miami U of Ohio, U of Louisville, and Carnegie Mellon The gatherings met at different universities, senior graduate students presented their research, and informal networking occurred ON FILE: -Letter from Louise Phelps about criteria for doctoral candidates, -Bob Schwegler’s analysis of the MLA Job List, -A chart of graduate students’ research interests, -The membership list, -A Website update by Lisa McClure and Catherine Hobbs, -Program descriptions, and -Correspondence about diverse matters 1998 CHICAGO Patricia Sullivan convened the Consortium meeting at the CCCC in Chicago (Janice Lauer’s husband was dying.) Representatives from the subcommittees presented reports, which were discussed by the members Web site and Graduate Student Exchanges: Lisa McClure Dissertation titles (Agora: http://www.uo.edu/cas/): Catherine Hobbs Other desirable categories in the DAI: Consortium Ad in a Journal: Linda Ferreira-Buckley The archive for program development and review: Louise Phelps, Carol Berkenkotter, and Lynne Dianne Beene Regional networking, etc.: Members Student job placement A report on the On-line Index of Rhetoric and Composition publications (Lee Honeycutt) 9 Updating of the membership list ON FILE: -An updated membership list No other material is available 1999 ATLANTA At the CCCC meeting of the Consortium in Atlanta, Patricia Sullivan again chaired the meeting for Janice Lauer, whose husband had just died Agenda On-going Efforts a Website and Graduate Student exchanges: Lisa Mcclure b Dissertation Categories in the Dai c Program Development and Review (Workshop): Louise Phelps d Regional Networking, etc.: Members e This year’s student placement: Gail Stygall f Correct addresses New Business 10 Integrated Programs with strong element of Rhetoric/Composition : Example: Illinois State Program Categories for the NRC Taxonomy Programs in Rhetoric and Composition not yet exhibit a high degree of specialization in the form of subfields that have branched off and attained the status of separate degree programs Rather, they vary at the level of how they define the field in interdisciplinary terms (through affiliated faculty and courses) or in the way they focus the degree by their mission At present we identify only one true subfield with its own degrees: rhetoric and professional/technical or scientific communication (or writing) Rather than branching off from Rhetoric and Composition, this specialization has a semiautonomous status and independent history that converged with the development of Rhetoric and Composition in the nineteen-seventies and eighties Within Rhetoric and Composition, this specialization usually links studies in professional, technical, business, or scientific communication to rhetoric or writing studies, producing researchers and communication directors for the professions as well future faculty members for undergraduate majors and graduate programs Thus we propose categorizing programs in Rhetoric and Composition as follows: Field: • Rhetoric and Composition [generic] Examples: Carnegie Mellon, Penn State, University of Wisconsin Madison, Miami University, Ohio State, University of Louisville Subfield/specialization: • Rhetoric and Professional/Technical or Scientific Communication (and variants] Examples: Iowa State, New Mexico State, Texas Tech As I understand the NRC draft taxonomy, we should instruct our programs in Rhetoric and Professional/Technical or Scientific Communication to list themselves both in the generic category of Rhetoric and Composition and also in this well-defined specialization as a subfield Some programs not fit neatly into these categories For example, some universities define their programs as completely integrated or fused studies (e.g., in “English” studies or “Cultural Critical Studies”) rather than an intersection of relatively autonomous fields, including Rhetoric and Composition Classification of these as Rhetoric and Composition programs can only be determined in the short run by their self-reports (representing faculty identification with the discipline) and in the long run by the scholars they graduate who affiliate primarily with the scholarly community of Rhetoric and Composition Other specializations are likely to emerge in the next decade, but they have not reached the level of differentiation that supports major tracks or degree programs, especially since most Rhetoric and Composition programs are quite small However, some are distinct enough to be standard categories in job ads, including, for instance, technology and digital media, writing program administration, writing across the curriculum or writing in the disciplines (WAC/WID), writing centers, and basic writing (see Stygall) Autonomy and Relationship to Cognate Disciplines Relationship to English In my conversation with Dr Kuh, she raised the possibility of listing Rhetoric and Composition both as an independent field and also as a subfield of English The Consortium discussed this possibility at its annual meeting and strongly opposed classifying Rhetoric and Composition as a subfield of English studies, even temporarily Scholars in the Consortium see such a classification of Rhetoric and Composition as historically inaccurate and misleading because of this field’s multiple source disciplines and the varied intellectual configurations and institutional locations of its doctoral programs English itself is becoming an umbrella term for increasingly disparate specializations that find themselves historically placed in the same department and often now take the form of different degree programs (e.g., Creative Writing, Linguistics, Cultural Studies) Although many Rhetoric and Composition programs are still located nominally in English degrees, or placed in English departments, most have a distinct identity and have moved toward autonomy within those structures, or even separation in independent units 70 In addition, the Consortium believes that a subfield classification, allowing for ranking only those R/C programs located in English departments, would be unfair to programs located elsewhere (including some of the strongest and best-established) and would produce skewed, misleading results Relationship to Communication Studies Although it may appear that Rhetoric and Composition programs could easily be confused with Rhetoric programs in Communication Studies, in fact the two are quite distinct in perspective and institutional location Some Rhetoric and Composition programs include Communication as an interdisciplinary element or affiliated field, and the two fields engage in cross-disciplinary dialogue within shared journals and professional organizations Among these are the newly formed Alliance of Rhetoric Societies, discussed below Relationship to Creative Writing and Other Studies of Writing There is very little possibility for confusion with Creative Writing, since doctorates in this area are rare In a few doctoral programs in Rhetoric and Composition, Creative Writing is an interdisciplinary component, either as one strand of English studies or as part of a broadly inclusive study of writing and writing instruction Increasingly, Rhetoric and Composition faculty are preparing graduate students to teach in disciplinary or interdisciplinary majors in writing or rhetoric that cover a broad range of genres Meeting the Criteria for Critical Mass Many of the founders of the field had their original scholarly training in other disciplines But in the last two decades, the cumulative impact of graduates trained specifically in the field of Rhetoric and Composition has created a very robust national faculty, included several generations of tenured professors These scholars publish not only in Rhetoric and Composition (journals, edited collections, and single-authored books) but also in related disciplines (e.g., Communication Studies, Applied Linguistics, ESL, Cultural Studies) and in interdisciplinary publication venues Attached (Appendix C) is evidence of this large body of scholarly work, including 1) a selected list of refereed journals in which Rhetoric and Composition scholars publish their work 2) a list of edited series in Rhetoric and Composition and in which R/C scholars are published The primary professional organization with which R/C scholars affiliate is the Conference on College Composition and Communication, founded in 1949 Its membership (combined individual and institutional) is currently around 8000, including 1000 graduate students Scholars in the field can also join a variety of specialized organizations, some of which are themselves cross-disciplinary in nature and membership (See Appendix D, for a selected list of organizations in Rhetoric and Composition as well as listservs and discussion groups.) Scholars in Rhetoric and Composition tend to hold citizenship in multiple disciplinary and transdisciplinary communities Recently, scholars in Rhetoric and Composition joined together with colleagues in Communication Studies and other disciplines to form an Alliance of Rhetoric Societies around their common interests in rhetoric; its membership comprises both individual departments and professional organizations (e.g., CCCC, Rhetoric Society of America, National Communication Association, International Society for the History of Rhetoric) According to President Gerald Hauser, “ARS came into being as a response to the difficulty rhetoric scholars have experienced in learning about each other’s work, in sharing insights with those who are working on similar projects but in different traditions, in making their collective voice heard by granting agencies, and through an absence of coordination among their respective scholarly organizations” (ARS Home Page, www.rhetoricalliance.org) The sheer number of tenured and tenure-track faculty members across the country who teach and publish primarily or exclusively in Rhetoric and Composition argues that the field has probably met the NRC criteria for critical mass in its doctoral degrees However, documenting this reality in terms of degrees in R/C granted by doctoral programs is not easy Until 1996, there was no dissertation code for Rhetoric and Composition in the DAI, and it is not yet used consistently enough to offer reliable figures Not all programs have kept accurate records, especially in early years while transitioning from minor concentrations to full specializations While the overall number of degree-granting programs has stabilized at somewhere around 70, they are still in a generative 71 and somewhat volatile phase, especially those that are small or less autonomous Some highly productive programs in the early years (e.g., University of Southern California) have closed, while promising new ones are too young to have many graduates The last of three surveys of program development (by self-report) was published in 2000 (Enos, Jackson, and Brown) and is out of date; a new one is planned for 2006 For the purposes of documenting degree production and other features of programs (faculty size, enrollment, etc.) for NRC, the Consortium is presently gathering data through a survey of R/C doctoral programs that will be tabulated and analyzed within the next month Meantime, the process of distributing and administering the survey has updated the Consortium’s membership to include at least 10 more universities with R/C programs than its 2003-04 membership A number of these are recently founded, in final stages of approval, or in planning The attached interim report (Appendix E) provides preliminary data from the survey Final results will follow in about a month Finally, I have attached a bibliography which includes not only works cited here but selected works on the discipline and its doctoral programs Participating in the NRC Study Whatever the decision of the Committee on inclusion of Rhetoric and Composition in the taxonomy, we plan to mobilize our members to provide information to campus coordinators of the 2005 NRC survey on their degree programs in Rhetoric and Composition as an independent field According to Dr Kuh, NRC could facilitate these efforts by identifying Rhetoric and Composition to the campus coordinators as an emerging field and requesting information on its programs As the survey planning proceeds, I will seek Dr Kuh’s further advice on how the program directors and campus coordinators can ensure that this information on Rhetoric and Composition programs is integrated and interpreted as evidence for one field with multiple representations, rather than (as we surmise happened in the past) being overlooked or invisible because of the programs’ diverse names and variable locations I would be very pleased to answer questions from the Committee, Dr Kuh, or researchers associated with the NRC doctoral survey I would appreciate your letting me know when we might expect a response that I can report to the R/C Consortium at its annual meeting, March 16, 2004 Thank you for your consideration of our request Here is contact information for me: Louise Wetherbee Phelps, Professor of Writing and Rhetoric Syracuse University (home) 7465 Northfield Lane Manlius, NY 13104 (h) 315-682-9180 (o) 315-443-1091 email: lwphelps@syr.edu Selected Bibliography in Rhetoric and Composition Bazerman, Charles "The Case for Writing Studies as a Major Discipline." Rhetoric and Composition as Intellectual Work Ed Gary A Olson Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 2002 32-38 Brown, Stuart C., Rebecca Jackson, and Theresa Enos "The Arrival of Rhetoric in the Twenty-First Century: The 1999 Survey of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric." Rhetoric Review 18 (2000): 233-42 Brown, Stuart C., Paul R Meyer, and Theresa Enos "Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition: A Catalog of the Profession." Rhetoric Review 12 (1994): 240-51 Chapman, David W., and Gary Tate "A Survey of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition." Rhetoric Review (1987): 124-85 Enos, Theresa, ed Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication from Ancient Times to the Information Age New York: Garland, 1996 Faigley, Lester “Veterans’ Stories on the Porch.” In Rosner, Boehm, and Journet, 23-37 Galin, Jeffrey, Carol Peterson Haviland, and J Paul Johnson "Afterword: Composition's Emergent Disciplinary Identity: Aims, Patterns, Problems, and Possibilities." Teaching/Writing in the Late Age of Print Eds Jeffrey Galin, Carol Peterson Haviland, and J Paul Johnson Cresskill, NJ: Hampton, 2003 379-407 72 Gebhardt, Richard "Reviewing and Refocusing Doctoral Education in Composition Studies." JAC 22 (2002): 159-67 Kennedy, Mary Lynch, ed Theorizing Composition; A Critical Sourcebook of Theory and Scholarship in Contemporary Composition Studies Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1998 Kirsch, Gesa, and Patricia A Sullivan, eds Methods and Methodology in Composition Research Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1992 Kitzhaber, Albert R Rhetoric in American Colleges, 1850-1900 Diss 1953 Dallas: Southern Methodist UP, 1990 Lauer, Janice M "Constructing a Doctoral Program in Rhetoric and Composition." Rhetoric Review (1993): 392-97 _ "Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric." Rhetoric Society Quarterly 10 (1980): 190-94 _ "Rhetoric and Composition Studies: A Multimodal Discipline." Defining the New Rhetorics Ed Theresa Enos and Stuart Brown Newbury Park: Sage, 1993 44-54 _, and J William Asher Composition Research: Empirical Designs New York: Oxford, 1988 Lindemann, Erika, and Gary Tate, eds An Introduction to Composition Studies New York: Oxford, 1991 Moran, Michael G., and Ronald Lunsford, eds Research in Composition and Rhetoric: A Bibliographical Sourcebook Westport,CT: Greenwood, 1984 _, and Michelle Ballif, eds Twentieth-Century Rhetorics and Rhetoricians: Critical Studies and Sources Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2000 North, Stephen M The Making of Knowledge in Composition: Portrait of an Emerging Field Upper Montclair: Boynton/Cook, 1987 Nystrand, Martin, and John Duffy “The Sociocultural Context for the New Discourse about Writing.” Rhetoric of Everyday Life: New Directions on Writing, Discourse, and Text Madison, WI: Univ of Wisconsin P, 2003 xv-xxxxiv _, Stuart Greene, and Jeffrey Wiemelt "Where Did Composition Studies Come From? An Intellectual History." Written Communication 10 (1993): 267-333 Olson, Gary A Rhetoric and Composition as Intellectual Work Carbondale: Southern Illinois Univ P, 2002 _, and Todd W Taylor Publishing in Rhetoric and Composition Albany: SUNY Press, 1997 Phelps, Louise Wetherbee Composition as a Human Science: Contributions to the Self-Understanding of a Discipline New York: Oxford University Press, 1988 _ "Composition Studies." Encyclopedia of Rhetoric and Composition: Communication from Ancient Times to the Information Age Ed Theresa Enos New York: Garland, 1995 123-34 _ "Reproducing Composition and Rhetoric: The Intellectual Challenge of Doctoral Education." Composition Studies 23 (1995): 115-32 Rosner, Mary, Beth Boehm, and Debra Journet, eds History, Reflection, and Narrative: The Professionalization of Composition, 1963-1983 Stamford, CT: Ablex, 1999 Strain, Margaret M "Local Histories, Rhetorical Negotiations: The Development of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition." Rhetoric Society Quarterly 30 (2000): 57-76 Stygall, Gail “At the Century’s End: The Job Market in Rhetoric and Composition.” Rhetoric Review 18 (2000): 375-89 Young, Richard E., and Erwin R Steinberg "Planning Graduate Programs in Rhetoric in Departments of English." Rhetoric Review 18 (2000): 390-402 Zebroski, James "Composition Studies." Encylopedia of Postmodernism Eds Victor E Taylor and Charles E Winquist New York: Routledge, 2001 73 APPENDIX F CONSORTIUM OF DOCTORAL PROGRAMS IN RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION 2006 University of Alabama University of Arizona Arizona State University Ball State University Bowling Green State University University of California, Santa Barbara University of California, San Diego Carnegie Mellon University Case Western Reserve University University of Central Florida Clemson University University of Connecticut East Carolina State University Florida State University Georgia State University Illinois State University University of Illinois, Chicago University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Indiana University Indiana University of Pennsylvania Iowa State University Kent State University University of Louisiana, Lafayette Louisiana State University University of Louisville University of Maryland, College Park University of Massachusetts, Amherst Miami University University of Michigan Michigan State University 74 Michigan Tech University University of Minnesota University of Mississippi University of Missouri, Columbia University of Nebraska University of Nevada, Reno University of New Hampshire University of New Mexico New Mexico State University City University of New York SUNY, Albany SUNY, Stony Brook University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of North Carolina, Greensboro North Carolina State University Northern Illinois University Ohio State University University of Oklahoma Penn State University University of Pittsburgh Purdue University Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute University of Rhode Island Rowan University University of South Carolina University of South Florida Southern Illinois University Syracuse University University of Tennessee Texas A & M University, College Station Texas A & M University, Commerce Texas Christian University University of Texas, Austin University of Texas, El Paso Texas Tech University Texas Woman’s University University of Utah Virginia Tech University of Washington Washington State University 75 Wayne State University University of Wisconsin, Madison University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee APPENDIX G CONSORTIUM ORGANIZATIONAL ROLES Executive Committee: Revolving Roles and Continuing Roles Revolving Roles & Duties (2 years each) Chair (2006-8 Gail Hawisher) - CCCC Meetings -Executive Committee Luncheon Meeting (Wednesday 11:30) -Program Submissions -Wednesday’s Special Events (Wednesday 1:30—5:00) -Consortium Meeting and Workshop -Business Meeting -Session(s) during the Conference -Point person/ Spokesperson for the Consortium -Liaison to the CCC Associate Chair (2006-8 John Ackerman) -Secretary/ Minutes of Meetings -Conversations with Graduate Students Group Assistant Chair (2006-8 Hugh Burns) -Liaison with MA Programs -Newcomers’ Table (CCCC) -Liaison to Graduate Students (Canon Visibility Project ) Continuing Roles & Duties 1.Membership/ Treasurer (Stuart Brown) -Updating Lists -Dues 2.Website Co-ordinator (Malea Powell) Visibility Efforts (Louise Phelps) -NRC Archivist (Janice Lauer) -Historical records -Current Records -Nomination Process Assessment -Gathering Institutional Data -Job Statistics (Academia, Outside Academia, Our Graduates Ex Officio Role Assistant Chair of CCC (2007-8 Charles Bazerman 76 APPENDIX H CONSORTIUM OF DOCTORAL PROGRAMS IN RHETORIC AND COMPOSITION 2008 University of Alabama University of Arizona Arizona State University Ball State University Bowling Green State University University of California, Santa Barbara University of California, San Diego Carnegie Mellon University Case Western Reserve University University of Central Florida Clemson University University of Connecticut University of Denver East Carolina University Florida State University Georgia State University Illinois State University University of Illinois, Chicago University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Indiana University Indiana University of Pennsylvania Iowa State University University of Kansas Kent State University University of Louisiana, Lafayette Louisiana State University University of Louisville University of Maryland, College Park University of Massachusetts, Amherst Miami University, Ohio University of Michigan Michigan State University Michigan Tech University University of Minnesota University of Mississippi University of Missouri, Columbia University of Nebraska University of Nevada, Reno University of New Hampshire 77 University of New Mexico New Mexico State University City University of New York SUNY, Albany SUNY, Stony Brook University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill University of North Carolina, Greensboro North Carolina State University Northern Illinois University Ohio State University Ohio University Old Dominion University University of Oklahoma Oklahoma State University Penn State University University of Pittsburgh Purdue University Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute University of Rhode Island Rowan University University of South Carolina University of South Florida Southern Illinois University Syracuse University University of Tennessee Texas A & M University, College Station Texas A & M University, Commerce Texas Christian University University of Texas, Austin University of Texas, El Paso Texas Tech University Texas Woman’s University University of Utah Virginia Tech University of Washington Washington State University Wayne State University University of Wisconsin, Madison University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee Total institutions: 78 LISTSERV: consortium@dwc.wide.msu.edu HOME PAGE: http://www.rhetoric.msu.edu/rc_consortium/ 78 APPENDIX I Checklist for a Survey of Doctoral Exam Practices in Rhet/Comp Consortium Aim of Exam Include here any statements about the aim or purpose of the doctoral exam, especially statements that are made available to students in your program Timing When in your program students take doctoral exams? Why? Format Do you administer exams or test by some other method (i.e., papers, demonstrations, other) Take-home and open book? Set sitting with no materials? Is the exam written only? Oral only? Written and oral? Over how many days is it given? How many times a year is it offered? If you examine by way of papers or demonstrations, please describe the format in as much detail as possible Structure/Authorship Who writes the exam? Do students have input into questions on the exam? How is that done? Are students examined on general knowledge and/or on sub-specialties? If so, what are they? Are exams based on reading lists? How are the reading lists constituted? Do students have input into the lists? If there are standard or core reading lists, please send them How often are reading lists updated? How does this occur? If you have written exams, how many questions are students expected to answer? 79 Preparation How are students prepared for the doctoral exams? Do mentors or others assist students in preparing? Do students or faculty organize study groups? What would you say is the relationship between course work and your doctoral exam structure/practices? Graders/Grading Criteria Who grades exams? What grades are given (i.e., fail, pass, high pass) Do you give students an explicit statement about grading criteria? If so, what is it? Exams and Attrition On average, what percentage of students who enter your program go on to take the exam? What is your pass rate on the exam? Do you offer provisional passes or second tries? Please explain Examples of Recent Exams Will you share copies of recent exams? Departmental/Institutional Relationship What is the relationship of your doctoral exam practices to the broader department in which you are situated? To what extent your practices follow or depart from the practices of the larger department (i.e, literature program) or larger graduate unit? Please explain Reforms How would exam reform be precipitated in your program? By whom? What is the date of the last change in the format of your doctoral examination? What precipitated the reform? Anticipated changes Do you anticipate making changes to doctoral exam structure or practices in the near future? If so, how and why? Anything else? Please elaborate on anything you think would help to illuminate doctoral exam practices in your program Thanks! 80 APPENDIX J Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition Survey for National Research Council Recognition 2014 Purpose: The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition (R/C) asks for your immediate participation in a survey of established doctoral programs The consortium’s Visibility Project has the goal to apply for categorical recognition as a discipline by the National Research Council Data from the survey will be used to document and support the Consortium’s argument that Rhetoric and Composition should be added as an “emergent field” in the revised taxonomy of research disciplines that will guide the NRC’s July 2005 national survey of doctoral programs The need for this information is urgent if we are to submit a request to NRC in time for consideration by the taxonomy committee If the request is successful, the impact on the status of the field could be significant Process: Selection Your program was determined by cross-referencing the Consortium member list and the programs listed in a Rhetoric Review (2000) survey of doctoral programs Our goal is 100% inclusion of all doctoral programs in R/C in the U.S and Canada Turnaround Please process this survey in five working days by return mail envelope, (postage enclosed) or by e-mail attachment We contact you both ways to insure completion E-mail to Mail to Questions? jmackerm@kent.edu John Ackerman, Kent State University c/o 1307 Chelton Drive, Kent, Ohio 44240 …about the survey, process John 330/677/9079 [land] 330/221/2320 [cell] jmackerm@kent.edu … about the NRC, Consortium Louise lwphelps@syr.edu Follow-up Dennis Lynch (Michigan Technological University) and John Ackerman (or their assistants) may contact you by phone or email if additional information or clarification are necessary What’s next? John Ackerman will collect the raw data and ship sets to Dennis Lynch and Louise Phelps Dennis Lynch will coordinate the tabulation and graphic presentation of the data Both our process and initial results will be shared with NRC and the Consortium Louise Phelps will report to the Consortium on this effort and other aspects of the Visibility Project at 4Cs, 2005 81 We will continue this process to reach all R/C programs, regardless of size, type, and duration Survey for National Research Council Recognition Directions You should have received both an e-mail attachment and a mailed copy of this survey Choose either medium, although we expect most will choose an electronic response Our questions were written to abide by NRC parameters How is your doctoral program named in recruiting literature? [A program name may differ from university or state designation] _ What is the official university designation of your degree on the transcript or diploma? [We are assuming that there may be state oversight or that your university uses an official name.] 3a Which of these most closely fits your doctoral program’s status? [ Please use one of our descriptions] a minor strand, emphasis, concentration in a broadly defined degree b major concentration with autonomous or distinct requirements within a broadly defined degree c independent degree within a broadly defined department d independent degree within an autonomous unit in writing, rhetoric/composition e interdisciplinary degree that bridges programs or departments f other (describe) 3b What is the name of the unit (department, college, center) that houses your degree program? [Please elaborate on this question, if necessary For example, you may be negotiating a different location at this time or have gone through such negotiations recently.] _ Who is (or can be) your contact person for this survey - name, rank, title, & contact information? [We realize some programs may not have an official coordinator or director This is the person we will call if follow-up is necessary] _ _ _ What is the number, rank, and tenure status of core faculty? [Core faculty is defined by regular teaching of graduate courses, service on program committees, and dissertation direction.] From AY 1999/2000 to 2003/2004 (last five years), please report the number of students enrolled and the number of graduates [We realize enrollments may be difficult to track over time Consider yearly admissions as an indicator The number of graduates is a key number for NRC.] Five-year enrollments: _ Five-year graduates: _ What is the current (2004-05) active student enrollment? [Full-time and Part-time.] Full-time Part-time _ _ 82 What is the founding date of your program and the number of total graduates? Founding Date _ Total Graduates APPENDIX K Mission Statement for The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition The Consortium is a research-oriented coalition of doctoral programs in rhetoric and composition whose purposes are to:  Facilitate the exchange of research by faculty and graduate students through online postings of dissertations and other research projects, including historical, theoretical, interpretive, and empirical studies  Provide mutual support of each other’s programs in terms of ideas, needs, and problem areas, e.g., developing graduate curricula, faculty resources, and library holdings; dealing with course and dissertation loads, promotion and tenure; admitting and supporting graduate students, both financially and academically; guiding students in job placement; building relationships within English departments and with other disciplines)  Create a listserv and a website to enable online exchanges among members  Establish rhetoric and composition categories in the DAI and inclusion of the discipline of Rhetoric and Composition in academic societies The consortium has  Established a listserv and website  Obtained a category in the DAI and a CIP code  Promoted regional networking among doctoral programs  Offered workshops and research sessions at conventions  Conducted surveys of examination practices, course requirements, hiring practices, and graduate placement It is working on:  Creating an archive of documents 83  Creating a list of faculty willing to advise those starting programs Articulating criteria to guide program revision 84 ... office Voting will be done via email message in the Spring following the CCCC and sent to the official representatives of each school in the Doctoral Consortium and members of the Consortium. .. of both the home institution and the larger discipline The gradate student developers of the site are looking for individuals to take over the work of maintaining the project, 43 and there was... using? ?the? ?CDPRC listserv? ?and? ?other forums to invite  participation? ?in? ?this session? ?and? ?to attend? ?the? ?consortium? ? business meeting.? ?The? ?business meeting consists? ?of? ?reports from  the? ?consortium? ?officers, elections? ?of? ?new officers, planning for