1977

Jack Selzer, Brent Henze

Description

A product of extensive archival research and numerous interviews, 1977: A Cultural Moment In Composition examines the local, state, and national forces (economic, political, cultural, and academic) that fostered the development of the first-year composition program at one representative site, Penn State University, in the late 1970s.

Sujets

• EDUCATION
• General officer
• Writing
• Rhetoric
• Higher education
• General
• History
• Composition

Informations

• Publié par: Parlor Press, LLC
• Date de parution: 20 février 2008
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781602357464
• Langue: English

Extrait

Lauer Series in Rhetoric and Composition
Series Editors, Catherine Hobbs and Patricia Sullivan
The Lauer Series in Rhetoric and Composition honors the contributions Janice Lauer Hutton has made to the emergence of Rhetoric and Composition as a disciplinary study. It publishes scholarship that carries on Professor Lauer’s varied work in the history of written rhetoric, disciplinarity in composition studies, contemporary pedagogical theory, and written literacy theory and research.
Other Books in the Series
Untenured Faculty as Writing Program Administrators: Institutional Practices and Politics , edited by Debra Frank Dew and Alice Horning (2007)
The Promise and Perils of Writing Program Administration, edited by Theresa Enos and Shane Borrowman (2007)
Networked Process: Dissolving Boundaries of Process and Post-Process , by Helen Foster (2007)
Composing a Community: A History of Writing Across the Curriculum , edited by Susan H. McLeod and Margot Soven (2006)
Historical Studies of Writing Program Administration: Individuals, Communities, and the Formation of a Discipline, edited by Barbara L’Eplattenier and Lisa Mastrangelo (2004).
Rhetorics, Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring College English Studies (Expanded Edition) by James A. Berlin (2003)


1977
A Cultural Moment in Composition
Brent Henze
Jack Selzer
Wendy Sharer
With
Brian Lehew
Shannon Pennefeather
Martin Schleuse
Parlor Press
West Lafayette, Indiana
www.parlorpress.com


Parlor Press LLC, West Lafayette, Indiana 47906
© 2007 by Parlor Press
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
S A N: 2 5 4 - 8 8 7 9
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Henze, Brent.
1977 : a cultural moment in composition / Brent Henze ...[et al.].
p. cm. -- (Lauer series in rhetoric and compostion.)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-60235-041-0 (alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-1-60235-040-3 (pbk. : alk. paper) -- ISBN 978-1-60235-042-7 (adobe ebook)
1. English language--Rhetoric--Study and teaching--Evaluation. 2. Report writing--Study and teaching--Evaluation. I. Title. II. Title: Cultural moment in composition.
PE1404.H399 2007
808’.0420711--dc22
2007047197
ISBN ePub: 978-1-602354746-4
Cover design by David Blakesley.
Printed on acid-free paper.
Parlor Press, LLC is an independent publisher of scholarly and trade titles in print and multimedia formats. This book is available in paper, cloth and Adobe eBook formats from Parlor Press on the World Wide Web at http://www.parlorpress.com or through online and brick-and-mortar bookstores. For submission information or to find out about Parlor Press publications, write to Parlor Press, 8 1 6 Robinson St., West Lafayette, Indiana, 47906, or e-mail [e-mail].


Preface
Looking back at 1977: A Cultural Moment in Composition, our minds entertained the sticky-soft strains of Debby Boone, the sinister visage of Darth Vader—and a few important questions our readers might have about how we came to and carried out our research for this book. While our “Introduction” provides a scholarly context for this project and explains its position within the larger field of composition studies, here we wish to explain briefly the project’s genesis and to reflect a bit on our own positions as researchers and historiographers.
Why Penn State?
This text originated in a graduate seminar that we shared on the history of composition at Penn State University half a dozen years ago. Yet our decision to focus on Penn State’s writing program as a way of deepening our engagement with the history of composition was not merely one of convenience. Our primary aims in the seminar were to expand our knowledge of composition history and to gain experience with research methodologies that pay attention to situated practices within that history. We began with the intention that each of us would study the local history of a particular writing program at a different college or university in Pennsylvania and would then produce a series of fairly traditional, individually authored seminar papers. We quickly discovered, though, that these individual endeavors would inevitably be incomplete and superficial because we lacked institutional and collegial familiarity with the programs and people at other schools; we just could not gain adequate familiarity with the histories of various programs in one short semester. Moreover, few of the many sources we needed in order to tell a recent history of writing program development—interviews, memos, handouts, lesson plans, student papers—were preserved in the various university archives. Program records charting institutional responses to open admissions, the “literacy crisis” of the 1970s, the process movement, and other social and scholarly developments were not readily accessible in department or university archives; they were more likely to be found in faculty offices and memories, two areas we would have difficulty accessing as relative strangers.
At Penn State, however, we not only knew the current curriculum and its recent past, but we had already developed working relationships with many of the people who had participated in that past. This institutional and personal familiarity enabled us to access the “hidden” archives—the old file boxes in the attic; the yellowed, hand-written essays in the bottom drawers; the textbooks thankfully overlooked during the last office cleanings; the records of forgotten meetings; and the indispensable memories of departmental personalities upon which this history could be built. As at the other institutions we had considered studying, we were not able to consult finding aids or engage the help of a university archivist, for the records that we sought were not generally archived. But at Penn State we could draw on the extensive memories of our pack-rat colleagues, and these proved to be invaluable resources. In short, we discovered that we could tell the most complex and richest history about composition by focusing on our local site.
As we read more about the history of Penn State during the 1970s and early 1980s, we came to realize the magnitude of Penn State’s impact during this era in composition history. The sheer number of students who passed through the writing curriculum at Penn State during this period suggests that the program influenced how composition was—and continues to be—viewed both in the state of Pennsylvania and across the nation. Penn State historian Michael Bezilla explains that the influence of the university’s curriculum was far reaching—statewide and nationally—by the mid 1980s:
One Pennsylvanian in eight who chose to enter college immediately after high school in the 1970s enrolled at University Park or one of the Commonwealth Campuses. More than 110,000 baccalaureate degrees were awarded between 1970 and 1983, along with 21,000 associate and 27,000 graduate degrees. By 1982, one in every thousand college graduates in the United States had earned his or her degree from The Pennsylvania State University.
Many people were influenced by the curriculum at Penn State during this time period—a fact that suggested to us that the history of the Penn State curriculum deserved greater attention.
Additionally, each of us wanted to know—indeed we felt ethically obligated to take up the opportunity to know—the historical conditions that influenced the composition program in which we were participating as teachers and administrators. By writing a collaborative history of our local site, we could work together to understand the multivalent strands—scholarship, culture, politics, economics, personalities, and institutional dynamics to name but a few—that entwined to form the complex and conflicted foundation upon which the current writing program at Penn State was built. We also hoped that this historical investigation might even enable us to see where curricular change was needed. In looking for these areas of change, however, we did not simply look for ways that the program “progressed” to its current state from a flawed past. As Ruth Mirtz, drawing on Robert Connors, warns in her work on the history of writing programs, “our downfall as historians [. . .] is assuming that anything that happened in the past was less effective than what we do in the present and viewing the past as the mistake that the present corrects” (122). Thus, we looked for ways in which the current program might usefully incorporate previous administrative and curricular structures. We asked both “which current program and curricular structures were the result of old battles or outworn tradition?” and “what promising administrative and curricular models from the program’s past were lost along the way?”
Our ultimate hope is that the historical details of Penn State’s writing program presented here will help other scholars, teachers, and administrators understand the recent past of their own writing curricula. Many of the struggles we recount here have been enacted at many other sites: budgetary constraints, institutional pressure, and personality conflicts are common sources of distress and motivators of change in almost every English department. We therefore offer this study as a point of comparison and contrast for those who are working at other institutions to historicize the development of their local writing programs.
The Challenges of Doing Research at “Home̶