UW20 News & Notes

Writing in the Disciplines Teaching Awards Announced

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:37:41 PST

The selection committee for the WID teaching award has just announced its 2012 Teaching Award winners. Awards are given for Distinguished Teaching and Best Assignment Design.

The selection committee for the WID teaching award has just announced its 2012 Teaching Award winners. Awards are given for Distinguished Teaching and Best Assignment Design. Prof. Randi Kristensen, Deputy Director of WID observed:

"We had a remarkably strong pool of nominees for the award, from across the university. However, the following dossiers stood out, even among so many other excellent candidates, as manifesting all that we could have hoped to find in the teaching materials and practices being employed in WID classes."

Prof. Joseph P. Dymond, WID Distinguished Teaching Award 2012
Prof. Dymond’s Cultural Geography class creatively and explicitly addresses the disciplinary expectations of writing in the field of geography. As his “Culture Map” assignment notes, “One of the key ways we communicate in ‘writing’ in Geography is with maps and corresponding map discussion.” Students in Prof. Dymond’s class work in groups to create spatial and cultural maps, and use them to examine emerging geographies in contested areas. His students and colleagues rate him highly for his extensive feedback and critiques that enable student writers to see the intrinsic connections between effective critical thinking and effective communication. From a WID perspective, Prof. Dymond’s connection of the theoretical and empirical aspects of the field to projects that engage discipline-specific forms of writing with multiple audiences – professional, peer, and community – demonstrates the best of what writing in a discipline, as an approach to teaching and learning, can achieve.

Prof. Shelley B. Brundage, WID Best Assignment Design Award 2012
Prof. Brundage’s rich Evidence-Based Practice Reviews provide an excellent way for students in the Speech and Hearing Senior Seminar to both consolidate their undergraduate learning and create a platform for their upcoming work in graduate school and as speech-language pathologists. In teams, students evaluate treatments for particular disorders in order to produce two evidence-based practice reviews: one written for a professional audience, the other for non-professionals, such as families, with whom practicing speech-language pathologists will also need to communicate effectively. This assignment is a stellar example of writing to learn in a discipline. It is clear, yet concise, in its purpose, audience, resources, and expectations. The formative activities – peer review and professor’s comments – are models of clarity, challenge, and encouragement to student writers. When the students then present their findings, in teams, to the rest of the class, they have also become teachers in the process, a significant achievement to crown their undergraduate careers.

The Philip J. Amsterdam Graduate Teaching Award 2012 was also awarded to Scott Larson. This teaching award is given to GW Graduate Teaching Assistants who have had at least two years of GTA experience and are nominated by their department. The Teaching and Learning Collaborative selection committee considers evaluations from students and supervising professors, as well as the quality of the GTA’s academic work. Scott's work as a WID GTA in American Studies stood out for his "[i]nnovative use of written materials he’s created to steer students through the process of critical reading, as well as visual formats to chart complex arguments alongside his students," and he was commended for "[h]is clear pedagogical style [which] shows willingness to engage student learning, but also directs attention to helping students work through difficult material."

Scott is an outstanding teacher, and graciously notes, "I've been truly fortunate to have had the guidance and support of both faculty and students in American Studies, and excellent training with GWU's Writing in the Disciplines program."

The University holds its award ceremony for all teaching awards on March 26th from 4-6pm. This will also be an occasion where we hope you can meet and congratulate the award recipients in person.

Writing in the Disciplines Welcomes Guest Speakers

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 09:25:50 PST

Scott Wible, Director of Professional Writing and Associate Professor of English from the University of Maryland, recently came to GW to have lunch and conversation with first year writing faculty, and to lead a WID workshop for graduate students teaching WID in the Business School.

Scott Wible, Director of Professional Writing and Associate Professor of English from the University of Maryland, recently came to GW to have lunch and conversation with first year writing faculty, and to lead a WID workshop for graduate students teaching WID in the Business School. All of these events, sponsored by the Business School, addressed professional writing and business school curriculum with an emphasis on the genres and best practices of this curriculum. Graduate student Leigha McReynolds summed up her experience of the workshop.

“Scott Wible’s workshop for the graduate teaching assistants who work on the Analysis of Business Issues course was an excellent resource and opportunity to expand our pedagogical arsenal. On the most basic level, it was our first opportunity to be exposed to a specific business writing pedagogy that can expand and develop our collective background in the humanities and composition. While we have all been trained to teach writing, this was our first training opportunity that was business specific. Second, Professor Wible provided us with concepts that will enhance our ability to frame the class effectively in terms of how business writing is unique as a discipline. Being able to articulate this among both those teaching the class and to the students taking it can only enhance the effectiveness of our endeavors. Finally, the workshop suggested ways to expand on and approach the assignments we already have that will help emphasize the disciplinary uniqueness and relevance, create great cohesion across assignments and the semester, and more effectively challenge students to go beyond a quantitative approach to problem solving and decision-making. We will take the concepts introduced and suggestions made in that brief workshop and immediately apply them to assignments and lesson plans in the second half of the semester. They will also shape our approach when we re-evaluate our methods and assignments for next semester and will likely provide a thread that we follow throughout the class.”

University Writing Professor Mark Mullen noted:

“I found the way he talked about making the intellectual content of business writing in particular visible to students to be very useful…[B]oth the formats and the occasions for business writing often seem so different, particularly to the degree that they take on a report structure rather than the explicitly argumentative one that we tend to favor. But Scott … looked behind the report structure, as it were, talking about the different kinds of analysis and intellectual investigation that the writing was often demanding and how these mapped on to more familiar categories.”

Professor Wible’s workshop was the second led by external scholars this year. In August, WID and the UWP welcomed Nicole B. Wallack, Director of the Undergraduate Writing Program at Columbia University.

New Publication from University Writing Program Faculty

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:42:17 PST

University Writing Program Professor Joe Fruscione's new book, Faulkner and Hemingway: Biography of a Literary Rivalry. out this spring from Ohio State Press

Prof. Fruscione's new book "examines how Ernest Hemingway (1899–1961) and William Faulkner (1897–1962) vied for literary supremacy with competing-yet-complementary sensibilities. At times, each voiced a shared literary and professional respect; at others, each thought himself the superior craftsman and spoke of the other accordingly. Their rivalry was rich, nuanced, and vexed, embodying various attitudes—one-upmanship, respect, criticism, and praise. Their intertextual contest—what we might call their Modernist dialectic—was manifested textually through their fiction, nonfiction, letters, Nobel Prize Addresses, and spoken remarks.

Their intertextual relationship was highly significant for both men: it was unusual for the reclusive Faulkner to engage so directly and so often with a contemporary, and for the hyper-competitive Hemingway to admit respect for—and possible inferiority to—a rival writer. Their joint awareness spawned an influential, allusive, and sparring intertext in which each had a psycho-competitive hold on the other. This examination—part analytical study, part literary biography—illustrates how their artistic paths and performed masculinities clashed frequently, as the authors measured themselves against each other and engendered a mutual psychological influence."

Prof. Fruscione will be speaking at the Library of Congress on March 16 at noon. A Q&A and book signing will follow his talk.

University Writing Program Executive Director Derek Malone-France Moderates Debate

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 14:14:24 PST

Gingrich and Dean participate in a debate at GWU. | Photo by Alexis Glenn/POLITICO

On Tuesday, February 1, George Washington University played host to a debate between former DNC Chairman Howard Dean and former GOP senator and House Speaker Newt Gingrich

The debate, sponsored by GW's College Democrats and College Republicans, took place at Lisner Auditorium and was moderated by University Writing Program Director Derek Malone France. The event was broadcast live on C-SPAN and covered by several news organizations, including Politico and the Washington Post. Watch the full debate on C-SPAN's website.

New WID Deputy Director is Keynote Speaker at Writing Conference

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 12:35:34 PST

This month Prof Rachel Riedner assumed her new role as Deputy Director of WID. In December, she was invited to be the keynote speaker at the 4th Annual Locating Writing Conference at the University of Houston.

Rachel Riedner, Associate Professor of Writing and Women’s Studies, was invited to be the keynote speaker at the Locating Writing Conference. recently held at the University of Houston. Prof Riedner's work focuses on the material conditions in which writing is shaped. She describes the larger project from which her talk is extracted.

"[It] explores locations in which a range of vibrant counter-globalizations are shaped, and written by students, teachers, communities, individuals, and in the case I discuss [at the conference] garden growers." Prof Riedner's starting point was a "short news story about women who grow gardens in Cape Town, South Africa." Prof. Riedner uses these small, and often unnoticed bits of texts as her point of entry, researching the contexts and power relationships affecting the subjects of work.

University of Houston professor Dr. Jennifer Wingard, offered this praise of Prof Riedner’s work.

"This kind of writing can allow both scholars and students to become flexible and critical thinkers, as well as ones who are acutely aware of how power works through seemingly short, value-neutral texts."

In December, Prof Derek Malone-France, WID Director and Acting Executive Director of the University Writing Program announced that Prof Riedner, would be taking over for Professor Chris Sten as Deputy Director of the WID program. Prof Malone-France said of the transition:

“Chris has been both the anchor and the sail for WID for most of its existence, and Rachel and I are deeply indebted to him for all of his hard work in building up the program and his great generosity in working with us during this transitional period.... Please join me in welcoming Rachel aboard. She brings great insight and energy to the position, and I know the program will be well served by her involvement."

"From the Borders of History to the Global Imagination"

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 06:27:50 PDT

University Writing Professor Randi Kristensen crosses disciplines and cultures at a conference in Jamaica.

From June 20-23, Prof. Randi Kristensen attended “Meet Me in the Circle: The Second International Maroon Conference,” in the Maroon village of Charles Town, Portland. The conference was hosted by the Charles Town Maroons and featured two days of academic and cultural events, culminating in the annual Quao Day celebration on June 23.

The Charles Town Maroons are descendants of Quao’s band of the Windward Maroons, who waged war against the British from 1655-1739. The British sued for peace in 1739, and the Maroons signed a treaty recognizing their freedom and land rights a hundred years before emancipation in Jamaica. This history of resistance, in Jamaica and throughout the Americas, is slowly entering the academic and popular record. Prof. Kristensen’s paper, “Traveling Maroons: From the Borders of History to the Global Imagination,” traced the migration of the idea of marronage from historical accounts from the era into the disciplines of history, anthropology, linguistics, and psychology, as well as popular media such as literature, drama, poetry, and film.

The conference setting reflected the ambition to align academic findings with the intellectual, cultural, and experiential knowledge of Maroons themselves. Held in the Safa Yard, an enclosed, open-air space with a stage for presentations and performances, the space enabled Maroons to comment critically on the academic research, and also benefit from it.
For example, researchers have been able to offer digital versions of primary documents from the archives for Maroons to use in land disputes with the Jamaican government.

One of the highlights, and near downfall, for Prof. Kristensen, was a three-hour hike up a mountain to see the ruins of an 18th century coffee plantation. Col. Lumsden, the leader of the Charles Town Maroons, led the way, stopping to demonstrate methods of Maroon survival and warfare along the way. Refreshed by a snack of freshly-cut wild sugar cane, the group made it back down the mountain and across the river safely!

Pictured above:
Flying to the conference and Paul Youngquist, University of Colorado - Boulder, giving a paper in Safa Yard.
Pictured to the left: Col. Frank Lumsden, Charles Town Maroons, and Col. Wallace Sterling, Moore Town Maroons.

University Writing Professors Abroad

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:23:49 PDT

Summer is often the time for academics to travel to conferences at home and abroad. This summer, two University Writing program faculty found themselves in England.

Professor Cayo Gamber gave a paper this summer at The Third Global Conference: Forgiveness – Probing the Boundaries, held at Mansfield College, Oxford. Her paper was entitled "Post-Holocaust ‘Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness’: Revisiting Wiesenthal’s The Sunflower".

Prof Gamber describes her experience. "The conference purposefully was kept to fifty participants. The ethos of the ‘Forgiveness’ project emphasizes dialogue with the issues raised by the conference as a whole and engagement with the people attending the conference. The success of the project is indebted to the continual interaction between delegates for the duration of the conference and beyond. Thus, all participants were called upon to be present for the duration of the conference so as to facilitate the exchange of perspectives for which the conference strives."

The collegial nature of the conference was fostered by the time spent together in the college dining hall, where participants gathered for their meals and conversation.
While at Mansfield College, Prof Gamber stayed in a converted Porter's Lodge, where the campus cat, Erasmus, treated her as an old friend (which meant jumping in and out of her window at will).
Prof Gamber's paper, under the title "“Post-Holocaust ‘Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness’: The Tensions between Remembrance and Forgiveness at Sites of National Conscience” has just been accepted for publication. Congratulations Prof Gamber!

While Prof. Gamber was in Oxford, Professor Katherine Larsen was in Liverpool at the Theorizing the Popular Conference held at Liverpool Hope University. The conference's aim "is to demonstrate the intellectual originality, depth and breadth of ‘popular’ disciplines, as well as their academic relationship with and within ‘traditional’ subjects".

Prof. Larsen's paper, "'Why Won't You Tell Me Your LJ Name?': Aca-Fans and Dirty Secrets," examined issues surrounding the study of popular culture. Prof Larsen spent some time in Liverpool examining the Beatles' early venue The Cavern Club. As she said, "It seemed only fitting."

Summer Scholars Go Public With Their Research

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 23 Aug 2010 07:41:03 PDT

Students from the GWU/School Without Walls Early College Program (ECP) presented research papers at a symposium held in Gelman Library on August 16th.

Students from the GWU/School Without Walls Early College Program (ECP) presented research papers at a symposium held in Gelman Library on August 16th. The students, who are rising high school juniors, represent the program's second cohort and will begin taking all of their courses at George Washington beginning this fall. The UW002 summer course, taught again this year by Prof. Robin Marcus, prepares the students for the transition to university level writing. The six week, Washington, DC - themed course emphasized research (developing research questions/lines of inquiry, conducting research and presenting new knowledge) and involved several site visits to conduct field research and interviews. Intensive library instruction and support was provided this summer by Eckles Library instructional librarian Bill Gillis. At the end of the course students produced ten page papers that concluded with either a proposal or an original idea that emerged during the research process. These papers were then presented to the academic community at the Summer Symposium.

Before an invited audience of family members, friends, instructional librarians and UW20 staff members the students, Sam Giagtzoglou, Krisha Paz, Austen Hamilton, Sophie Kerwin, Gabrielle Sawyer and Xiomara Rojas presented papers that examined various cultures in DC. They ranged from preserving "Porch Culture" in the Petworth section, the "Forgotten" community of Anacostia, a Big Bear Cafe inspired investigation into coffee houses, authenticism in the Punk Rock scene, how or whether Hip Hop can affect change in a community reeling from gun violence and the hidden realities of immigrant baby sitters. The film, Ben's Chilli Bowl - Keeping the Soul in the Bowl produced by Sam Giagtzoglou, was shown between panels and will be included in the Ben's Chilli Bowl collection now being curated by Gelman's Special Collections Division.

[Pictured above is Gabrielle Sawyer.]

Colleagues and Community come Together

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:05:04 PDT

Prof. Paula Matthieu's visit on May 11 provided an opportunity for UWP faculty to meet with members of the community

On Tuesday, May 11th, Professor Paula Mathieu, Director of the First-Year Writing Program at Boston College, was on campus as part of the University Writing Program Faculty Lecture Series. Prof Mathieu “specializes in composition and rhetoric, focusing especially on rhetorical studies of public cultures, community-based writing as social action, writing pedagogy, and university-community partnerships.”1

In the morning, Professor Mathieu conducted a workshop entitled "Writing Place and Community" In connection with her work on community partnerships, Professor Mathieu invited Lawless Watson, a representative from Street Sense, to the workshop to speak with her. Street Sense, a bi-weekly newspaper produced by members of the homeless community of Washington D.C. UW Professor Phyllis Ryder’s students have worked with Street Sense in the past in her course titled “Writing for Social Change: Writing with DC Community Organizations” The event provided an opportunity for University Writing Program faculty to discuss attitudes toward writing, creation of community through a shared writing experience, and the dynamics of grassroots publications as a means to give voice to those who lack traditional, official outlets among other issues.

This was followed by an afternoon talk entitled "Mapping the Contents of First-Year Writing" that picked up and extended the morning's discussion and brought the conversation back to how we might use some of the issues raised in the morning workshop in our classrooms.

Notes:
1. "Paula Mathieu" - http://www.bc.edu/schools/cas/english/faculty/facalpha/mathieu.html

Reflections on Teaching

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Tue, 11 May 2010 16:45:42 PDT

Professor Peter Levine reflects back on his experiences partnering with the Smithsonian and looks forward to the fall.

Bancketje (Banquet) by Beth Lipman - American Art Musueum, Washington, D.C.

This semester I partnered with two people at the Smithsonian American Art Museum. Susan Nichols and Woody Dowling worked with me to develop an assignment for my class that would take my course topic, “Morality and Art: The Good and the Not So Good,” beyond the classroom and into their museum. The aim was for students to create a recording in reaction to a work of art that would be posted to the Smithsonian’s website.

It began on a cold pre-spring morning, when they gave me a personal tour through the American Art Museum on I Street (right near the Chinatown Metro). They had been looking to expand their range of students who recorded podcasts (either creative or interpretive) to college students. I was looking for a way to offer my students an opportunity to apply the framework of our course’s conversation to forms of art we didn’t have time to discuss in class. Also, it was a relatively easy way for students to earn extra credit.

As the semester closes and the assignment comes due, I am receiving some very thoughtful recordings which I will forward to my SI partners. Some students wrote poems, others tried to interpret or decipher the aims of their chosen artist.

Though it’s a work in progress, I think the exercise achieves the goal of expanding students’ appreciation and analysis of art, while making clear there are many resources at their GW doorstep.

Marissa Ostroff, a freshman in my class, reflected, “It was interesting to go out of GW to see what DC has to offer. I enjoyed seeing artists that I wouldn’t ordinarily see.”

The one thing I think I will change in the future is that I will transform the assignment from extra credit to a regular course assignment. And I’ll plan to consider ways to leverage this new partnership in different directions. Overall, however, like my students, I learned about another terrific resource at my doorstep.

National Gallery Curator Guest Lectures UW20 Class

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:54:21 PDT

Students from Professor Rachel Pollack’s UW class on Dutch Art at the National Gallery gathered in JBKO on Tuesday evening to chat with Arthur Wheelock, curator of Northern Baroque Art at the National Gallery.

The event, sponsored by GW Housing Programs, was held in Prof. Pollack’s first floor room in JBKO, where she is a Faculty-in-Residence.

As the guest of the hour, Wheelock enthralled the gathered students with tales of his time as a curator, as well as offering behind-the-scenes vignettes on exhibitions that the students have written about and studied for Professor Pollack’s class.

Wheelock talked about his early education at Williams College, and his 35+ years at the National Gallery, which didn’t have much of a Dutch collection, or a full-time curator for the genre, when he was hired.

Emphasizing the importance of good teachers, Wheelock noted how lucky GWU students are to be studying art history in Washington DC, saying that resources such as the National Gallery, Smithsonian, and countless other cultural institutions are at the fingertips of GW students. He noted that DC-area students studying art can go to any of the collections and actually see the works they are researching, a privilege that students at other schools do not have.

Wheelock also took questions from the crowd, ranging from conservation concerns with oil paintings and his own personal favorites. He said that Jan Vermeer’s Girl with a Red Hat, a small oil on panel piece that is one of the National Gallery’s prized possessions, is a favorite due to the years he has spent studying it.

Photos courtesy of Poppy Lynch

Two University Writing Students Publish Their Papers

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 11:49:03 PST

Two past UW students published in Young Scholars in Writing, a peer-review journal for undergradate students in the field of rhetoric and composition

The seventh edition of Young Scholars in Writing, a peer-review journal for undergradate students in the field of rhetoric and composition, has just been published.

Two of Professor Rachel Riedner's students from last year, Andy Erickson and Lindsay Gordon, have their final UW20 papers published in the seventh edition. Both Lindsay and Andy presented their papers at the University Writing and Research Symposium held on March 5th.

Young Scholars is a great opportunity for UW20 students who are inspired to take their writing and research beyond the class. The journal's revision process is the same as a professional journal's; it is intensive but also rewarding. If you have students who are doing work that intersects with rhetoric and composition studies and who would embrace the peer review process (by both alumni of the journal and faculty), direct them to Young Scholars.

University Writing Professor Among those Honored on Faculty Appreciation Day

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 14:07:01 PST

Students value those teachers whom they recognize as being passionate about their work and engaged with their students. That's the message that came through on Faculty Appreciation Day recently. University Writing Professor Caroline Smith was among those teachers honored by Dean's List Student Athletes. Check out the video below.

Creating Community in the Classroom

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 07:24:22 PST

As teachers, we are always on the lookout for effective ways to foster not only a sense of community, but a feeling among our students that they are a community of writers. It’s easy for us to say this, but sometimes more difficult for students to see. Here is one way that UW Prof Peter Levine is trying to bring this about in his classes.

The Golden Ticket

To me, the term “golden ticket” was always affiliated with Willy Wonka. However, watching American Idol for the first time in years, I discovered that for the current generation, it means something entirely different. The golden ticket means an Idol contestant is going to Hollywood. A contestant will dash out of the audition room with the ticket clasped to their chest, family will shout and yell, grandmothers will be phoned—even Ryan Seacrest will shed a tear of joy.

I thought: Why not give out golden tickets in class? Imagine—if students were even a tiny, tiny fraction as excited about receiving one in my UW section, then they’d feel pretty good. I went online to find images of golden tickets and printed it out.

After reading introductory assignments, I handed out the first one (I decided I would do one per section, one per day)—based on the strength and swagger of a great piece of writing (or a particularly smart comment or reaction). The students were a bit bewildered but went along with it. We clapped for the first recipient. The student read her piece of writing. We clapped again. I said: “You’re going to Hollywood.” I felt like Randy Jackson. I didn’t say “I feel you, dog,” or “It was a little pitchy, but good man.”

There are a couple of hopes here. The first is that each day the student given the golden ticket will feel empowered, accomplished. Second, other students might want the golden ticket—recognition for work well-done, and the acknowledgement of their peers. Third, that the hand-off of the ticket will create a connection, so that classmates begin to use each other’s names in conversation, and drop the “I like what he said…” or “I think she can work on….” The foundations of a community, in other words. They are humble steps, sure, but you gotta start somewhere.

UW Professor and WID-Sponsered Lecture Help Kick Off Black History Month Activities

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 11:48:57 PST

Professor Robin Marcus among the panelists at one of the Black History Month events at GW

UW20 professor Robin Marcus was among the panelists at "Working with Race: Black Representations and Black Identity in Society and in the Classroom" on February 2, 2010. Several dozen students and professors attended, and offered a lively discussion of various experiences addressing race issues and racism in the classroom. The event was sponsored by the Multicultural Student Services Center.

The event was followed that evening by the Black History Celebration Keynote Address and Inaugural Writing in the Disciplines Distinguished Lecture given by Professor Tricia Rose, Chair of Africana Studies at Brown University. Prof Rose is also a frequent guest commentator on radio and television shows such as PBS’s The Tavis Smiley Show, MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, NPR’s Talk of the Nation, and CNN’s The Jeff Greenfield Show. Her books include Black Noise: Rap Music and Black Culture in Contemporary America (Wesleyan University Press), which won an American Book Award from the Before Columbus Foundation and was named one of the top 25 books of 1995 by the Village Voice and one of the “Top Books of the Twentieth Century" by Black Issues in Higher Education, and The Hip Hop Wars: What We Talk About When We Talk About Hip Hop—and Why It Matters (Basic Books). In her talk, "Teachable Moments: What We Can Learn from Social and Political Situations that the Media do not Teach," Prof Rose's lecture, in which among other things she encouraged us to be aware of the social contexts surrounding the information we receive through the media and to ask the unasked questions that lay beyond "the facts," was delivered to a standing room only audience in the Marvin Center Betts Auditorium.

New Publications From Our Faculty

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:26:27 PST

New publications from First Year Writing Program faculty members and instructional librarians highlight the diversity of scholarship and creative work being produced by the University Writing Progam.

Writing against the Curriculum has been "a UW20 labor of love," according to Professor Randi Gray Kristensen. "It was born and built out of the series of convivial summer gatherings, the Cultural Studies and Critical Pedagogies Symposia, organized by our own Associate Professor Rachel Riedner and Byron Hawk, Associate Professor of English at George Mason University and editor of Enculturation, a Journal of Cultural and Rhetorical Studies."

Writing Against the Curriculum is co-edited by current faculty Randi Gray Kristensen and UW20 emeritus Ryan Claycomb, now tenure-tracking at West Virginia University. They co-wrote the introduction and separately contributed a chapter each. Chapter one was co-written by Rachel and Ryan, and University Resesarch and Instructional Librarians Cathy Eisenhower and Dolsy Smith co-wrote a chapter that challenges disciplinary conventions in form and content. These UW20 contributions are in conversation with terrific articles by colleagues who work as administrators and faculty at public and private universities around the US. Nationwide, Writing Across the Curriculum and Writing in the Disciplines programs offer significant opportunities for thinking critically about the role of introductory and advanced writing classes in the development of knowledges and writers; our contributors consider and act on these opportunities in the context of the economics of higher education, public discourses, legal challenges, emerging technologies, and shifting disciplinary boundaries.

Praise from GW's own Robert McRuer: "This volume is the guidebook to anti-disciplinary living and teaching that we've been waiting for. Composition and cultural studies come together here to expose the fractures in the corporate university, with its efforts to streamline production, contain difference, and turn out recognizable, disciplined commodities. Writing against such a limited curriculum, the scholar-activists included in this volume collectively seek to unleash all that is excessive and unruly about learning, teaching, and writing. In doing so, they position the writing classroom not as a mere gateway to disciplinarity and professionalization. Instead, the writing classroom becomes a resistant location where new forms of knowledge, new ways of thinking and writing, and unexpected but vital forms of critical conviviality are generated."

More about the book and its authors at Lexington Books and on Facebook

Professor Cayo Gamber’s publications highlight her work in Holocaust studies, writing pedagogy, and their practical points of intersection in a writing classroom. “Designing the Holocaust at the Sites of the Shoah and Museum Stores” (in Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal:3.6 (2009): 1-14) and “Engaging the Art of Peritext: From the Promise of the Index to the Allure of the Footnote” (in The International Journal of the Book 6.4 (2009): 55-66) are out now. “From Photographs to Elegies: Engaging the Holocaust in a Writing Course.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, is forthcoming in March 2010.

Three short pieces of fiction by Professor Peter Levine will appear in the spring. - "La Jolla" in The Southern Review, "Ribbon, Tree, Father, Son" in Mid American Review and "Havasu" in Slice Magazine.

Professor Levine’s short story "How Does Your Garden Grow?" (which originally appeared in The Missouri Review (2008) has also been recognized as a notable story by a new anthology published by The University of Texas Press, titled Best of the West: New Stories From the Wide Side of Missouri.

UW 20 Student is the Focus of Documentary Mario's Story

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:49:25 PST

Former UW student Marios Rocha is the focus of a documentary, Mario’s Story, screening Wednesday November 11 at the GW Law School. The film chronicles his wrongful conviction on murder charges and his struggle, largely through writing about his situation, to have that conviction overturned

Former UW student , Mario Rocha, is the focus of a
documentary, "Mario's Story". The film will be screened on Wednesday, November 11, in Stuart 101
(Law School) from 6:00-8:30. A Q&A will follow.

Professor Robin Marcus has this to say about her former student: “Mario Rocha was my student Spring semester 2009. On the first day of class - by way of introduction - he told us he had done 11 years of a double life sentence in prison having been falsely accused of murder, and had only been released the year before. Everyone was stunned; Mario is such an affable, easy-going guy that his revelation seemed incongruous and it took a few beats before incredulity ("Did he really say that, did I hear that right?") morphed into disbelief and then into wonder. The documentary, "Mario's Story" chronicles the trial, the conviction and the coalition that mounted an extraordinary effort leading to an appeal and the overturning of his conviction. Mario was only sixteen when he was convicted and spent much of his time in prison writing about not only his own ordeal but other cases of injustice in the American criminal justice system. In spite of his ordeal he is an optimistic young man who has a voracious appetite for learning and for social justice; in a few years he'd like to be in law school. Because the focus of the class was on a related subject i.e. African American speech and the rhetorical themes involved including liberation and rebellion, Mario regularly found openings in class discussion to make observations about his fight to be heard, the research he undertook to publish his story in scholarly and prison publications, and the guidance he received from mentoring academics. He also spoke about the difficulties of incarceration, difficulties made even more tragic by his innocence. As a speaker, he is now in great demand by human rights and social justice organizations.”

And Mario has this to say about his University Writing experience: “My UW course was my favorite class last semester because it. made me think critically about a language that I had only experienced as a young Xicano from Los Angeles and as a California prisoner--never as a student. Watching Spike Lee's Bamboozled at Sankofa in Howard at night is still my fondest memory. I remember walking back to GW with my UW peers, discussing the heavy subject matter--the history of racism towards Blacks in American entertainment--and I remember thinking, ‘I am so glad I took this course.’ The same can be said about my path to GW as a whole.”

UW20 Alum Stefanie Fischer reflects on her UW20 Experience

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 11 May 2009 08:49:40 PDT

We have to take University Writing. We do not have a choice. If you give any student a chance, they will not take a four credit course with a lot of work and a small chance of completing the course with an ‘A.’ Most students enter the class thinking that they already know how to write, that they already know how to research, and that University Writing is just one more thing the university does to make our lives difficult.

This article was written by UW20 Alumn, Stefanie Fischer

It's true, the course was a shock at first. It turns out, I quickly learned, students do not really know how to manage their time. Most of us rarely had to exert even the slightest effort in high school and we enter college thinking we can manage it all. Micro-assignments, readings (that originally take us upwards of four hours apiece because we were never really taught how to read anything that does not come easily to us), and three research essays rarely makes for an enthused effort. We stress over completing the assignments in time, and sometimes we don’t. We think about not going to class, and again, sometimes we don’t.

But if you try, just once, just a little bit, you start to realize something: this is interesting, hard and complicated and sometimes above our comprehension, but we want to get it. We want to feel like we can graduate into the real world in three years and publish a book and go to seminars and maybe even be considered a knowledgeable expert. Most of us will not continue into whatever specialized topic our UW20 course focused on, but most of us will find ourselves held to a higher level of academia and knowledge in three years time.

By the time we leave, at least by the time I left my course, we feel a little bit better about it. We have figured out how to read and analyze at least some parts of essays and papers and publications we do not know. We did not just write a research paper composed of research compiled by other scholars and occasionally the inclusion of a critical review of that research. We conducted our own research, we make our own conclusions, we complicated our own theses, and we left feeling semi-confident that we can be scholars.

A funny thing happens then: you start to care about your work. You find yourself in the library until three in the morning, not because you have a paper due, but because you know it is not perfect and that bothers you. Because you know it can be better, that you can do better, and that someday, your work will mean more than a grade. You find yourself in the library at three in the morning writing a paper that you think could actually mean something to the scholarly world, and you want to make a real contribution. That is what University Writing, or a good University Writing, does for a student. It shows us how to be a scholar, and convinces us that we can be one.

University Writing & Research Symposium Held This Week

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:23:50 PDT

Over 600 first-year students slated to exchange insights and advice in the 6th Annual Writing & Research Symposium, a campus-wide capstone event sponsored by the University Writing Program. In addition, the Symposium features a Keystone Lecture by the Hon. Eileen Claussen, President of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change and Strategies for the Global Environment. Ms Claussen's lecture, entitled "Answering the Climate Challenge: Reflections on the Journey," is co-sponsored by the Women's Leadership Program and the University Writing Program.

2009 Symposium Poster Design by Mi Sun Kwon

Where & When
The Foggy Bottom & Mt. Vernon Campuses
of The George Washington University
Thursday-Friday, April 23-4.

The 6th annual University Writing and Research Symposium will take place on Thursday, April 23 through Friday, April 24 on the Foggy Bottom and Mount Vernon campuses of The George Washington University. Over the two-day event 170 student-panelists will be speaking to a combined anticipated audience of over 600 people.

In panels of three of four speakers, in roundtable discussions, in research poster sessions, or even in dramatic readings of original works, students in the first-year writing course (UW20) present their research and writing in a public forum that includes fellow students, faculty, and members of the broader DC community.

The event offers student-researchers the opportunity to present their research in order to see how the concerns they address in their own projects connect with concerns of other researchers and matters of public interest. Since students present their work while it is still in progress, get the opportunity to see what their peers in other first-year writing classes are doing and to get useful feedback on their work. As a result, discussion at the Symposium focuses as much on the uses, values, and processes of research and research-based writing, as it does on the topics of the research projects themselves.

Dean of Freshmen Frederic Siegel describes the Symposium as "one of the year's best programs," noting that "the intellectual engagement of freshmen is one of [the University's] most important priorities and the Symposium works perfectly in this regard."

The 2009 Program includes panels on a wide variety of topics, including "Faith, Doubts, & Suspicions," "Enforcing Moralities," "Personal Transgressions," "Labor Issues," "Rethinking Constitutional Democracy," "Traumatic Events," "Holocaust Studies," "Cold War Comics," and "The Packaging and Promotion of (Post)Mdern Identities" to name just a few.

On Thursday evening at 6:45, at the Eileen Claussen lecture, student Mi Sun Kwon will be recognized as the winner of the 2009 UWRS Poster Design Contest. Congratulations are also due to runner-up Cynthia Figueroa.

The Symposium is co-directed by Professors Kathy Larsen and Michael Svoboda, of the University Writing Program.

The Spring 2009 University Writing and Research Symposium was organized by the First-Year Writing Faculty of the University Writing Program, with sponsorship and support from the UWP, the Elizabeth J Somers Women's Leadership Program, Mount Vernon Campus Life, Gelman Library, the University Bookstore, and the Office of the Dean of Freshmen.

For more information on the Symposium, please visit the Symposium Website at http://www.gwu.edu/~capstone/symposium.htm.

How to Make Key Rhetorical and Intellectual Moves in Expert Writing

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 06:28:00 PDT

In UW20 student-writers are asked to make complex intellectual, analytical, and rhetorical moves in their thinking and writing. Often our everyday language forms are not particularly well suited to such tasks as handling multiple perspectives at once, to forging connections between abstractions and examples, synthesizing ideas from a matrix of sources.

Fortunately, discourse communities (like disciplines, professions, and fields of study) develop specialized traditions of language used to do this complex kind of communicative work. Part of what UW20 students learn is how to recognize, appropriate, and revise these specialized language forms for their own expert writing situations.

The following post provides sample language templates developed by UW20 Professors Eric Drown and Rachel Riedner (inspired by and in dialogue with Graff's and Birkenstein's They Say/I Say) to handle some of the more frequently encountered rhetorical situations that will arise in argumentative writing.

Note: Some instructors may be concerned that such templates might stifle students' originality or do too much of the hard work of thinking for them. We disagree. Professor Drown agrees that "students should think for themselves, but I don't think these templates do the thinking for the students. I'm persuaded by my experience that these templates help students in the ways described by Birkenstein and Graff: which is to help them "bring out aspects of their thought" that they wouldn't have recognized without the templates' prompt. I think these sentence-forms give order to student's ideas, invite students to question their beliefs, and to situate their ideas in relationship to the ideas of others. What the templates do is make key rhetorical moves available to students in way that enables them to develop their ideas in much the same ways more seasoned scholars do."

Professor Riedner uses these templates in her UW20 classes not as formulas but as exercises to begin the writing process. The templates get students to recognize moves of academic writing and to make explicit how they're working with the writing of other authors. Professor Riedner stresses that as students develop their ideas and develop their own language, they should move beyond the templates.

Arguing for an approach to your material and setting up an argument (that will emerge in the paper). These sentences could be worked into an introductory section of a research paper, helping you set up what the paper is doing, what your approach adds to existing knowledge on your subject, and why your approach is important. A strong argument makes a claim that requires analysis to support and evolve and offers some point about the significance of your evidence. It promotes thinking, prompts further questions and draws attention to specifics. It often tends to “push back” against a different view of the topic.

Describing your topic: I am studying __________, in order to learn/explain ___________, which is significant because _________. NOT: I’m “doing” X.

Justifying your approach: I approach [my material/object of study]___ [in this specific way] _______ to support and expand points about the significance of ________. My approach allows us to see evidence __________, prompting further questions about _________ and drawing attention to ________. As a result, my work expands/challenges/argues against _______ view of evidence, and allows us to see ________ [that may have not been considered or understood before].

Developing your ideas and claims: These strategies allow you to produce analysis and develop arguments based on your analysis. These strategies can help you work rigorously with your evidence, help you explain how you’re interpreting it, how you’re adding to existing analysis, how you’re developing key ideas and concepts, how you’re contributing to existing scholarship and knowledge on your subject.

Complication: This explanation gets us __ [only so far] __ as we try to explain [whatever it is we’re explaining]. ___ [Key pieces of evidence] __ don’t fit this explanation in ___ [this particular way] __. Consequently, [Reformulate the argument in light of this]. Repeat.

Complication: Unfortunately, what I have just said is not enough to explain _______. To adequately understand _____, we’ll have to consider ________. Or, The case isn’t so simple, rather _______.

Querying key terms: [These key terms in my argument] __ need to be queried because ___ . Having developed these terms, [reformulate the argument and retest against evidence analyzed in the new terms].

Considering argument as part of something larger: While it may appear that _________ are insignificant, when understood as________, they [significance of new understanding].

Reformulate argument by refusing to go along with the conventional wisdom: Most commentators on ______ tend towards [their understanding] ________. If we consider it in [different] _________ terms, it becomes possible to generate such new insights as _________.

Clarification: Although it might appear that I am saying ________, I really mean ________. Or, Said another way, _________.

Definition/Redefinition: Although this term is usually understood in this [simple] way __________, in the context of my work it means this [more complex, nuanced, specific, specialized thing] __________ . This more subtle meaning is important because ____________.

Introducing and exiting a quote: According to X, a scholar of [source of authority], ________ [paraphrase of the larger argument of the quoted piece]. In “___title___” she writes: _____________. What she means in the context of this paper is _______. If X is right about ______, then __[return to your own ideas considered in light of the quote or as a way to redirect the insights of the quote] ___.

Attributing Sources: According to X, ________. In historian X’s view, ________. In “title of piece,” essayist X argues that “__________.”

Revealing an implication: [Following a discussion of specific details in a writer’s piece] These details add up to the unstated assumption that _________. Or, Although X doesn’t say so explicitly, she appears to mean that ___________.

Revealing a questionable assumption: X’s claim that _____ rests on the questionable assumption that _______.
Contextualizing a specific insight: [This specific thing I’m talking about] is best understood as part of _______ . Or, [This specific thing I’m talking about] is specific example of ___[this larger pattern] ___. By seeing this thing in context, we discover that _______.

Specific insights confirm a more general claim: So as we can see from these aspects of _________, that X more generally tends to ________.

Moving from a general claim to a specific piece of support: [After making the general claim]. For instance, ________. To take a case in point, ________.

Representing the state of dialogue in a field: Such scholars as X and Y have argued recently that ______. This view stands as an important correction to that of Z who classically argued that ______. This shift has enabled the field to ______, producing a better understanding of _______. In light of my own research, ________.

Extending and developing a point of agreement: I agree that _________, and would even add ________. This extension of this idea is productive because ________.
Using summary of someone else’s work to develop a point: In light of what I’ve been arguing, it’s instructive to consider what X has to say about a similar topic: _______. As s/he argues __________. If X is right/wrong about ______, then my ideas __[need to develop; should alter what X thinks…]__.

Allow a counter-argument to develop your point: Some people object that ______. Although I concede __________, I ________[reformulate my point to account for the apt criticism]______.

Conclusion
Getting at the significance of your work [NOT just summarizing what you’ve already said]: At stake in this argument is _______. Or, While most other scholars have argued _______, my work reveals ______. This new insight is significant because _______.

*Developed in response to Gerald Graff’s and Cathy Birkenstein’s work in They Say/I Say: The Moves that Matter in Academic Writing (NY: W. W. Norton, 2006).

UW20 Students Ensure that Children of the Holocaust Are Not Forgotten

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 06:00:27 PDT

In Prof. Cayo Gamber's Legacies of the Holocaust UW20 course, research is more than just an exercise. Working with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, her students seek to learn what happened to the school children of the Lodz Ghetto in Poland.

Prof. Gamber writes: "My UW20 class, Legacies of the Holocaust, has had the good fortune to be able to make use of the resources of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM). Not only do we have access to USHMM’s oral history and photo archives, all the sections I teach have been invited to be part of the beta-testing of the Lodz Ghetto Project.

"The Lodz Ghetto Project is the innovation of David Klevan, Education Manager for Technology and Distance Learning Initiatives, and one of his fellow colleagues at USHMM. The Project was inspired by a single artifact: a list of signatures. The signatures appear in an album of hand-drawn New Year's greetings presented by ghetto schools to the Jewish Council chairman, Chaim Rumkowski, and signed by thousands of Lodz ghetto schoolchildren.

"USHMM is preparing to launch a worldwide collaborative volunteer project to find out what happened to the student signatories in this album. At this point, 1500 (approximately 10%) of the 13,000 names of the signatories are listed on the site. Over time, all of their names will be added to the list.

"My goals in this project are for students to learn how

conducting this research teaches us about the research process, sharing information with others, and the importance of collaboration with fellow researchers,
engaging in this research teaches us about a specific historical situation and advances our understanding of history in general,
rescuing such evidence contributes to the historical record of the Shah, and
preserving the memory of those who suffered is made possible through contributing to this research effort.

"These goals are translated into vital research steps. Once researchers register with the site, they are invited to choose a student signatory and try to find out when the student was born, where the student lived in the Ghetto, whether or not there are hospital records or death records related to the student, if the student was sent to a labor camp, whether or not the student was transported to Auschwitz or another camp, and, sometimes, whether or not the student survived.

"The students in Legacies of the Holocaust initially conduct research on one of the signatories to learn to conduct research into various archives. Their primary role, however, is to become advanced researchers. After a half-day workshop conducted for them at USHMM, they learn to review the research conducted by others in order to see if all the research venues have been exhausted and if the researcher has reached viable conclusions about the possible fate of a given student.

"In the process, they communicate, one-on-one with individual researchers in order to discuss the research process. Moreover, in the process, they ensure that these individuals existed and that their fates mattered. Given that 200,000 people were imprisoned in Lodz, and only 10,000 are believed to have survived, the chances that individual students survived are small, but the effort to discover what happened to them remains meaningful.

"It also is worth noting that this Project expands, and sometimes changes, our understanding of history. In the Central Database of Shoah Victims’ Names in the Yad Vashem archives, the majority of the students from the Ghetto are listed as having perished. Those students whose names are on the list of Lodz ghetto inmates found in “The Lodz Names - List of the ghetto inhabitants 1940-1944” were believed to have “perished in the Shoah” and all were recorded as such when the database was originally constructed; however, the research that is performed by my students, and others, is able to draw from a variety of data sources via the Project and has revealed that this was not always the case.

"The success of this Project is testified to, in part, by the following e-mail in which Maria, a former student, welcomes my current students to the Project.

Dear Lodz Children Project Participants, I want to welcome you to this amazing project!

This will be my second semester participating and I know that if you find it as fascinating as I do, you will continue beyond this semester as well. This project has helped me take my research skills to the next level and has given me the satisfaction of knowing my work has already been recorded in history. I had the opportunity to research and review research done by other students, but this time around I will mostly be reviewing your research.

Throughout the next few weeks you will have many challenges while researching and the wonderful satisfaction of finding survivors. You will also have the privilege of experiencing a research rush and at times giving up will seem like the only answer. Just remember in times like these that you are possibly correcting a person’s legacy.

Best of luck,
Maria V**********
m******@gwmail.gwu.edu

"Like Maria, I hope more of my students will continue this work beyond the current semester. It is projects like these which demonstrate that the research we conduct has ramifications beyond individual classes, beyond classroom walls, beyond the strictures of time and history, for to engage in this work is to bear witness to those whose lives may otherwise be disappeared, to engage in this work is, as Maria has stated, to redress someone’s legacy."

UW20 Prof. Caroline Smith Named "Phenomenal Professor" by Student Organization

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 14:33:46 PDT

According to the GW Hatchet, Prof. Smith received the award from Phenomenal Women of GW, because of "her accessibility to students and her extraordinary teaching style." The Phenomenal Women of GW work to give "voice to the idea of resilience, success and leadership among women." Congratulations to Dr. Smith!

How to Use Sources Effectively in Expert Writing

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:21:13 PDT

Prof. Phil Troutman says, "It's not how many sources you have, but how you USE them that counts!" Read on as Prof. Troutman explains a simple but effective way to think about using sources effectively in expert writing. He also offers sentence templates to help you signal these uses to readers.

Prof. Troutman says: "Having amassed a broad range of sources, emergent research-writers often find themselves a bit confused as to how to use them. I recommend using the I-BEAM (fn1) heuristic of sources to figure out what work you mean each source to do in your piece of writing. I-BEAM stands for Instancing, Background, Exhibit, Argument, & Method."

Instancing is the use of sources to indicate the context and nature of the question, or even its very existence. These might be scholarly articles (e.g., demonstrating an ongoing dispute or consensus you find problematic). Or they might be journalistic or web-based items that simply point to or reflect some specific aspect of the problem. These constitutive sources will probably show up in your introduction, helping define your project in light of what has come before and establishing a context in which your reader can see the importance of your project. (Therefore, if you like, you can substitute the terms Interest or Import here, since these sources are establishing these qualities.)

Background source use is for facts or "objective" information. You expect your reader to simply trust these outright, so they must be widely accepted in your field as credible sources for facts and information. This is the least significant use of sources in a research essay; you might not even cite some of these if the facts are commonly known. But you should cite any kind of specialized encyclopedias or other repositories of knowledge.

Exhibit sources are those you analyze in your essay, ultimately for evidence to help you sustain your claims and deal with counter-claims. Your analysis of these sources—through detailed description, quantitative analysis, or other methods—will likely constitute the bulk of your research essay. These are your most important "primary sources." Their genres will be determined by your central questions.

Argument sources are ones you draw on for key claims, concepts (with stipulated definitions), and theories you are using and responding to in your essay. In many fields, these will be considered your most important "secondary sources." Most of these will be academic sources (academic journal articles, books or book chapters, essays in anthologies, dissertations, master's theses, etc.), though important non-academic theorists may be more relevant to the question or problem you are addressing. Include here any works from which you are borrowing key concepts or theories, including those you are importing from another field or discipline. Your essay might be doing any combination of forwarding (applying, extending, revising) or countering (rebutting, refuting, delineating) these arguments (fn2).

Method sources are those you use for the methods they model, especially in cases where the method itself is unique, innovative, or particularly applicable to your project. For example, you might cite and describe a certain quantitative method, adapting it for your own purposes in your essay. You might also consider as "method" sources those from which you derive your own mode of questioning, way of thinking, or style of writing. Sources influential in these more subtle ways are sometimes noted in acknowledgements or epigraphs rather than citations.

I-BEAM is useful especially in the drafting stage. Ask a peer to mark I, B, E, A, or M next to each source quotation/citation, based on how he or she thinks you are using that source at that moment. See if she or he can tell what you thought you were doing (if you knew yet). Discuss to figure out exactly what role(s) that source is playing in your essay at that moment. This little exercise can help you figure out your own stances as well, e.g., whether you agree or disagree with a particular source's claim.

For example, if you are quoting from an academic article or book, are you are using that source (at that moment) for its Argument (one you plan to extend or respond to)? Or are you using it merely to establish some factual Background information that no one has any reason to question? There is a big difference in how you use the source, and how you signal your usage to readers.

Clearly marking your source uses with rhetorical cues will help your reader see the difference. For example, what differences can you infer about a writer's use of sources framed in these ways?

As Z asserts, "......" [Argument]
Z claims that "......" [Argument]
Z has clearly established that..... [Background fact]
Z's concept of ..... is useful here. [Method]

Exhibit use of sources will be marked by language that signals your own interpretive voice:

If we look closely, we can see .....
While this could mean ....., it seems more likely to mean ....

Instancing is the trickiest. Any time you use a source to help establish the reason for you to write--and this often happens in the introduction--you are instancing. Note that these sources might also be serving another purpose simultaneously, Background fact or Argument, for example.
Along these lines:

Conventional wisdom holds that ..... [quoting/citing, say Wikipedia, or journalistic coverage, or a recent survey], but is this really the case? This essay will address.....
Scholars tend to fall into two camps on the issue of ..... [quoting/citing academic sources representing these two camps]. But what they seem to be missing is ....., which this essay will explore.

The first Instancing template above is also establishing Background, and the second one is an Argument use. But both cases also work as instancing: establishing the reason for this writer to write, to fill some gap in our knowledge or to take an intellectual path overlooked.
Instancing sources are critical to giving your reader a sense of what motivates you to write this essay in the way that you do, and a sense of why they might want to read it.

(fn1)This heuristic was first articulated in Joseph Bizup, "BEAM: A Rhetorical Vocabulary for Teaching Research-Based Writing," Rhetoric Review 27.1 (January 2008): 72-86. Available by searching for Articles on the Gelman Library Website. My colleague Mark Mullen and I have modified it somewhat and added the Instancing category.

(fn2)These moves are explained in Joseph Harris, Rewriting: How To Do Things With Texts (Logan: Utah State Univ. Press, 2006).

Guest Lecturer Abdur-Rahman Muhammad Teaches UW20 Students the Fact and Fiction Behind the Nation of Islam

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:17:03 PDT

Late last month, UW20 Professor Kevin Bryant invited author and lecturer Abdur-Rahman Muhammad to speak in both of his classes, which focus on the life of the legendary Malcolm X.

This article was written by UW20 student, Jared Brenner.

Mr. Muhammad centered his lecture on a topic crucial to any study of Malcolm X: the origins (both factual and mythological) of the Nation of Islam. He described the truths and fallacies behind the organization’s founder, W.D. Fard, and explained how he believed Fard to have manipulated the early 20th century African-American social construct in creating the NOI. His lecture provided a great deal of historical context and insight into an era that Professor Bryant’s students continue to write about frequently as the semester progresses.

Says Professor Bryant: “I continue to invite Abdur-Rahman to participate as a guest lecturer in my Malcolm X course because my students appear to have a profound respect for his vast knowledge not just of Malcolm X in particular, but for his knowledge of African American history, Islam, and other religions. […] Abdur-Rahman is an engaging and eloquent speaker; you can sense [his] enthusiasm [and] he has a way of captivating his audience with fresh interpretations and analyses of the bygone era of Malcolm X.”

Mr. Muhammad describes his interest in the subject as having been primarily drawn from his experiences growing up in the post-Civil Rights Era 1970s, “particularly pertaining to the forced desegregation of public schools.” As a college student, he says he “met students who were part of the NOI, as well as many older Sunni Muslims who were once part of the NOI and educated me on their teachings.” He has been a regular lecturer on college campuses for over 20 years, with the past seven of them spent doing classroom lectures.

In addition to his work as an author (his first book, concerning Black American Islam, will be available this summer) and a blogger (at his website, A Singular Voice), Mr. Muhammad is a participant in an upcoming documentary, entitled Militant Islam and the West. As part of his contribution, the producers of the documentary filmed Mr. Muhammad’s visit to Professor Bryant’s classes.

A producer for the documentary described it in a recent e-mail as “seek[ing] to answer questions about the true nature of political Islam and how it is addressed in American society by Muslim American groups. This piece will particularly focus on the impact that adherents of political Islam and/or members of the Muslim Brotherhood have upon American Muslim organizations and the institutions with whom the groups interact.”

When asked what makes GW students stand out from those to whom he has lectured previously, Mr. Muhammad commented, “What I enjoyed most about lecturing to GW students was their obvious intelligence and genuine interest in the subject. They ask compelling questions which show that they have thought about the material. […] I am motivated by a desire to inspire young people to study the history of our country, and the social movements that contributed to it's greatness. My lectures have always been greatly received by students, for which I am entirely grateful.”

Mr. Muhammad’s website is A Singular Voice. His book, From the Back of the Bus to the Back of the Camel, will be available this summer. For more about the documentary mentioned in this article, please visit http://www.wemakedocs.com/.

DC Activist Nadine Bloch and UW20 Prof. Phyllis Ryder Discuss the Rhetorics of Social Protest

noreply@blogger.com (GW Univ. Writing Program) — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:38:47 PDT

Prof. Abby Wilkerson of the University Writing Program invites the GW Community to attend a dialogue between internationally acclaimed activist Nadine Bloch and rhetorician Phyllis Ryder on the language and rhetoric of social protest. View samples of Nadine Bloch's work and learn how to access Prof. Ryder's writings in the full post.

This event is co-sponsored by the English Department, Women's Studies, and the University Writing Program.

When & Where
Wednesday, April 1
7 - 8:30 PM
Gelman 207
Contact: Prof. Abby Wilkerson

Bloch (wikipedia profile) has led campaigns on issues from nuclear weapons to international trade justice and the environment. She is particularly known for her innovative use of street theater, puppetry, and performance art (and has been known to sport a hand-painted t-shirt proclaiming "Puppetry Is Not A Crime").

Ryder's (profile) scholarship on protest rhetoric explores the use of nontraditional means of communication such as puppetry as a form of democratic participation in international political/policy deliberation.

Together, Bloch and Ryder will explore rhetorical challenges and strategies in the ongoing efforts to foster participation in democratic processes globally.

Prof. Ryder's article,"In(ter)ventions of Global Democracy: An Analysis of the Rhetorics of the A-16 World Bank/IMF Protests in Washington, DC" Rhetoric Review v. 25, iss. 4 (2006): 408-26 is available to members of the GW community by searching "Ryder Phyllis" on the Articles tab of the Gelman Library website.

View pictures of Nadine Bloch's activist work with puppets here and here.

Nadine Bloch's "Global Warming Polar Bears"