Call for Papers

Getting students to write is often hard. It is easier if they have a real audience and purpose. Here is an opportunity for them to write concisely, for real people, with a real-world purpose.

Calling all budding reviewers!

They say the best movie pitches are made in twenty-one words or less.

www.21words.net is the place to put those pitches to the test.

At this new site, you can review not only your favourite – and worst – films, but also albums, TV shows, books and games – all within 21 words or less!

So, do you fancy nailing the nastiest film of the year? Or do you reckon you can blog a blockbuster? Even take on Rent-a-Quote for a pithy put-down?

If so, sign up now and start sharing your creative insights with the world.

We look forward to seeing you on the site!

Welcome to the review-lution!

This announcement was the forwarded email I received with the following text:
We are three English Literature research students at the University of Sheffield who have recently established a new user-generated review site for the creative arts.

The site, www.21words.net, encourages budding writers to post their creative insights into a chosen genre within a strict word limit.

We are interested in building a solid base of concise reviews of films, books, music, television and games. Undergraduate and postgraduate arts students are best placed to provide consistent content as they are at the rockface of emerging and existing creative output.

Call for Papers for Edited Volume, July 15th Deadline,
Exploring the Intersections of Rhetoric and Mass Media Discourse
full name / name of organization:
Dr. Marianne Mason, Georgia State University
contact email:
mmason14@gsu.edu
With the purpose of evaluating, exploring, and focusing on the role of media discourse in evoking social, cultural, and/or ideological viewpoints, we are creating an edited volume that explores the intersections of rhetoric and mass media discourse. We invite contributors who are doing research on media discourse to participate in this volume. Papers dealing with the analysis of either theoretical or practical-applications based rhetoric and linguistics in a wide-range of media discourses (e.g., the press, television discourse, internet discourse, radio discourse, etc.,) are welcome. Some possible topics include:

1. Rhetorical Features of Politics-based Articles in Newspapers in the United States and Abroad
2. The Use of Rhetorical Devices, such as Humor, Figurative Language, or other Forms of Implied Meaning in Mass Media
3. The History of Media Discourse
4. The Stylistics of News Reporting
5. Propagandist Rhetoric in Journalism
6. Style and Register in Internet Discourse
7. Rhetorical and Discursive Devices in the Reporting of Campaigns and Political Speeches/Debates
8. The Use of Figurative Language in the Media
9. Stylistic and Pragmatic Devices in the Reporting of Conflict (e.g., war, protests, international conflicts, etc.)
10. Language Use in the Representation of a Political or Economic Crisis
11. The Rhetoric and Linguistics of Political Blogs and Social Media
12. Stylistic and Discursive Choices in the Reporting of Crime and Violence
13. The Reporting of Medical/Health Campaigns and News
14. Language Use and Ideology in Mass Media
15. Gender-sensitive Discourse in the Media
16. A Critical Discourse Analysis of Media Interviews and/or News Reports
17. The Role of Rhetorical Devices in Social Media to Mobilize and Organize Groups and Political/Social Agendas

The language of the proposed publication is English. Submissions should be typed in double space using MS Word. Submissions should range between 5500 and 8000 words and be sent no later than July 15th as an email attachment to:

mmason14@gsu.edu

The subject line should read ‘Submission to Rhetoric and Mass Media Discourse Edited Volume’.

Each paper should contain a cover page (included in the email attachment containing the document) with the following information: title of paper, name(s) of the author(s), affiliation, contact address (postal and email) and telephone number.

Every paper submitted will be assessed and authors will be contacted through their email addresses by August 30th.

For more information please contact the editors:

Dr. Marianne Mason
Modern and Classical Languages Department
Georgia State University
Email: mmason14@gsu.edu

Dr. Jason Mosser
Associate Professor, English
School of Liberal Arts
Georgia Gwinnett College
Email: jmosser@ggc.edu

Do one thing at a time.
With so much coming at us so relentlessly – emails, texts, people, and information – we assume the only way to get to it all is to juggle multiple tasks at the same time. In fact, moving between tasks creates something called “switching time.” When you shift attention from one focus of attention to another, the average time it takes to finish the first task increases by at least 25%.

from 99%’s A Master Plan

Here are the rules: All work must be done in blocks of at least 30 minutes. If I start editing a paper, for example, I have to spend at least 30 minutes editing. If I need to complete a small task, like handing in a form, I have to spend at least 30 minutes doing small tasks. Crucially, checking email and looking up information online count as small tasks. If I need to check my inbox or grab a quick stat from the web, I have to spend at least 30 minutes dedicated to similarly small diversions.
…
On the flip side, the percentage of time spent in a flow state was as large as I’ve experienced in recent memory. I ended up spending 2.5 hours focused on my writing project and 3.5 hours focused on my research paper. That’s six hours, in one day, of focused work with zero interruptions; not even one quick glance at email.

At the same time, the careful pre-planning required to satisfy my batching rules increased the efficiency of my small task completion. Even though I dedicated 6 hours in one 10 hour work day to uninterrupted focus, another 1.5 hours to exercise and eating, and another 1 hour to a doctors appointment, I still managed to accomplish an impressive collection of logistical tasks both urgent and non-urgent.

from 99%’s A Day Without Distraction

I’ve been crazy busy with school and I now have lots of other things I need to be doing in terms of scholarship.

However, I couldn’t resist looking online and seeing if there was anything interesting out there.

There is.

Here are some of the CFPs that I may try to make room in my life for:

Supernaturally Grimm, Fairy Tales on Television, essay collection. 500 word abstract due by January 15, 2012.

Wormwood Chapbooks, calling for chapbooks manuscripts from poets. They prefer previously unpublished poems. It looks interesting.

Mobile Learning for Tertiary Education

How does one write a paper when there really isn’t time?

I had a chapter due next week that I thought was due next month. Obviously, when I realized that yesterday, I needed to get it in gear. Let me start by saying that I have finished it, but quickly let you know that it was a chapter for a textbook and was limited to approximately 1750 words. (I actually wrote 2500, which I kept as a separate file, and then shortened the chapter for publication.)

All that to say, I know whereof I speak.

1. Write on something you already know well.
This worked for me because the chapter I had contracted to write on was something I teach regularly and have already published work on. It will work for you if it is a topic that you have studied or enjoy or know a lot about, even if you have to stretch what you know for the paper.

It also means I already have entire file folders (both real and virtual) on the topic that I can access for ideas, details, or examples.

2. Write on the computer.
That’s not an easy thing for many people. I know I prefer paper drafts. But when I am in a hurry, I write on the computer.

Writing on the computer allows me to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. What? You didn’t know English was math? It is. Writing on the computer allows me to add information easily, subtract words or sections, multiply the copies of the text (so that if I decide in three hours I needed that paragraph after all, I still have it), and divide paragraphs or sections if they get too unwieldy.

It also allows me to immediately search the web if I’m not sure, for example, how many major digressions there are in Beowulf. (Which, by the way, was a fruitless search because the digressions aren’t categorized into major and minor by anyone I could find easily.) Plus, if I use Google Scholar, then I can find articles which my library has never even heard of and–if they look useful enough–purchase them immediately. (Note: This can get expensive, obviously, but this is for fast work, not cheap work.)

You have to be careful on searches because you can end up chasing a rabbit through Wonderland without getting anywhere useful. I had 179 different websites I looked at online for this chapter. –I didn’t count them at the time, but went back through my history just now to check.– Some of those are still open because the information was very useful for something else but not so much for my chapter. I added two PDFs to my virtual folders while I was searching as well.

Don’t look at too many things (how many that will be depends on how well you know your subject, how long you have to write, and whether you can stay focused). If you are in a hurry, you can’t spend too much time on a scavenger hunt. I abandoned two ideas I really wanted to write on (animals and religion) because I needed to get the work done.

Working on the computer also allows me to make sure that my spelling is correct and that the words mean what I think they mean. (What? You thought English teachers were always sure of those things? Nope. But my spelling was correct, even when the computer didn’t recognize the words, and the words did mean what I thought they meant… this time.)

3. Write an outline and follow it.
In this I was unusually blessed. The chapter came with an outline I had to follow. The outline didn’t say what to write for each section, I had to figure that out, but it did keep me focused on my topics: theme, character, history, context, etc.

Note: I went back to check another work I wrote, just now, and found that it had misspelled a name with spell check (so I have about 30 misspellings of Posthumus from Cymbeline) and I missed a s-v agreement issue when I changed a sentence. OUCH.

4. Don’t try to do everything.
I had a limited number of words I could write and a limited number of hours to write them in. I skipped major topics that I would have liked to have written individual papers on in the interests of getting the work done.

Does that mean I didn’t do the work well?

No, it doesn’t. It means that I concentrated on the aspects of the topic that I could already write a chapter on (with perhaps some access to my notes and a few fact-checking forays into the net). And I chose to not write about what I knew I couldn’t do quickly or that I would be unhappy with if I shortened.

That is one good thing about writing. If I want to write more later, I can. While I won’t be able to publish it in that chapter, I can use it in my classroom or somewhere else. Knowing that helps me to stay focused on getting the paper done.

Having already maxed out my own and the department’s monies, I have also asked for an extension of my college’s and uni’s money. So I don’t think I can really afford to apply to another national conference and figure out how to go to Popular Culture Association/American Culture Association in Boston in April.

If I could though, these are some of the CFPs I would be working on:
Mythology in Contemporary Culture Using a couple of different sci fi and fantasy authors.
Fairy Tales area Using popular fantasy authors’ retellings of various fairy tales.
Civil War Taking advantage of the research I did for my chapter in the Routledge book.
Science Fiction and Fantasy Don’t know what I would do on this. Talk about presentations of Christianity? Class and hierarchies with the werewolf/shapeshifter novels of various fantasy authors? Mythology narratives?
Vampire Different vampire mythos: Sookie, Mercy Thompson, Kate Daniels…

Edited Collection “Because My Story Matters: Struggle and Success on Higher Education’s Frontlines” (Abstracts due 11.30.11)
full name / name of organization:
Susan Bernadzikowski and Jennifer Levi/Cecil College
contact email:
higheredfrontlines@gmail.
We are interested in what it takes for students to succeed in college—what must be balanced, what must be sacrificed, what must be overcome. We think that students, their parents, educators, administrators, and policy makers need this information, too.

In 2009, Obama charged Higher Ed with dramatically increasing its students’ rates of “successful completion,” so 55 % of American citizens will have a college degree or certificate by 2025. This presumably meritorious goal may be misdirected as changes in education ideology and policy are being made absent a clear, shared definition of either “success” or “completion.” Political rhetoric on all levels is rightly acknowledging that many students today have significant and diverse barriers to success; however, the need to secure funding is leading some institutions to rely on historically inflexible gauges of success—like the graduation rates of “first-time full-time” students. This singular statistic often denies students’ complex realities by prioritizing some students’ stories over others.

We believe that for real and meaningful change to occur in higher education, the voices of the real people on the frontlines need to be considered before we institutionalize definitions and policies. We are seeking narratives and interviews that tell the experiences of students–those who achieve despite great obstacles, those who challenge traditional notions of success by forging their own paths, those who struggle to keep one foot in the door, those who don’t manage to do so—and those teachers and advisors who have always invested time and personal energy in those individuals, even without the national incentives.

Specifically, we are interested in narrative essays or interviews, written or co-authored by students, educators, advisors, and other ground-level college employees, that feature specific student experiences that should inform—or even challenge– national discussions of “success” and “completion.” We envision receiving essays or interviews responding but not limited to the following questions:
• What motivates individuals to pursue a college education given their unique life circumstances?
• What kept them on that path as they pursued a degree or certificate?
• Conversely, what made them decide to leave that path?
• How does their experience challenge institutional definitions of “success” that often rely on full-time status or a certain time to degree?
• If they were able to meet the traditional definition of “successful completion” by obtaining a degree or certificate as a full-time student, what did that commitment entail?
• What investment of time, energy, skill, money, etc. did it require of the instructor or advisor to assist one particular student with said challenges?

Send abstracts (250-300 words) and inquiries to Susan Bernadzikowski and Jennifer Levi (Cecil College) at higheredfrontlines@gmail.com by Nov. 30, 2011. Please include contact information and a short bio that is relevant to the project.

Final essays/interviews of 2000 words maximum due Feb. 15, 2012.

Identity and Status in First-Year Writing; Edited Collection; Abstracts due 10/15/2011
full name / name of organization:
Karen Schiler
contact email:
identityandstatus@gmail.com
Proposed Collection: Identity and Status in First-Year Writing

Editors: Elizabeth Kimball, Melissa Nicolas, and Karen Schiler

In the introduction to (E)Merging Identities, Melissa Nicolas suggests that graduate students working in writing centers often have an indeterminate identity, “betwixt and between” that of faculty, student, administrator, and client (1). This shifting between and among identities, sometimes even in the same day (3-4), creates a dynamic and complicated space within which graduate students negotiate their relationships with others in the institution. Likewise, the first-year writing program represents a similar space where first-year writing teachers and program administrators hold many different institutional positions. Both in the classroom and in the administration of the program, faculty and WPAs are constantly negotiating their identities and institutional roles. Further complicating these negotiations on the disciplinary level is the passage of time.

If we understand the contemporary beginning of composition/rhetoric as a field to be the late 1970s early 1980s when writing teachers like Mina Shaugnessy, Linda Flower, John Hays, Peter Elbow, Lisa Ede, and Andrea Lunsford started researching and theorizing their teaching and Stephen North published the foundational _The Making of Knowledge in Composition_ then, as a field, we have moved into a second (and perhaps third) generation of teachers and scholars. As a
consequence, not only are teachers and WPAs reading their identities with and through their local institutional contexts but they are also responding and reacting to some of the foundational stories in the field (see Nicolas “Why” 3-4).

This collection, _Identity and Status in the First-Year Writing Program_, explores the complex ways identity and status are negotiated, challenged and enacted in first-year writing programs. We are especially interested in how these complexities may reflect an awareness of one’s
generation, or wave, within the history of the field. By asking
teachers and administrators to reflect on their positionality, this volume situates the first-year writing classroom and program as a meaningful site of inquiry into the ways in which personal and professional identity issues are in constant negotiation both locally and disciplinarily.

We seek essays that expand on any of the following:
• What is it like to graduate with a Bachelor’s degree in May and 3 months later be in charge of a college classroom? What role does age play in the writing classroom? How are authority and identity negotiated? What role(s) does sex/gender/race/ability play in shaping your identity?
• In what ways is a postdoctoral position different from a
teaching assistant position or an adjunct position? In what ways does the post doctoral status—as “in between” graduate student and faculty—affect identity in the writing classroom? In what ways does being a post-doc affect your identity as an administrator?
• What is it like to move from graduate student to adjunct
faculty? Does this move affect your authority in the classroom? Your identity?
• If you are adjunct faculty at several different schools with
different student populations, different missions, and different
first-year curriculums, how do you adjust your classroom teaching style to reflect the changes? How does the constant switching affect your professional identity?
• As you moved from graduate student to assistant professor, what were some of the identity issues that you faced in the classroom? What role(s) does sex/gender/race/ability play in shaping your identity?
• If you are a non-tenured or non-tenure track WPA, how does not having tenure shape your identity as an administrator? In what ways does your institutional status affect your professional personae?
• As you moved from non-tenured assistant professor to tenured
associate professor, what were some of the identity issues you faced in the classroom? What role(s) does sex/gender/race/ability play in shaping your identity? Once your received tenure, did your classroom identity change? Did your identity as an administrator change? Why or why not?
• As you moved from associate professor to full professor, what
were some of the identity issues that you faced in the classroom? As an administrator? What role(s) does sex/gender/race/ability play in shaping your identity?
• Since the first-year writing classroom is one of the only
spaces on campus filled with first-year students who are also
negotiating new identities, in what ways do their negotiations of self impact your negotiations of self?
• If you are a graduate student whose explicit goal is not to
become a writing teacher or a WPA, yet you find yourself in either (or both) of those roles, how do you reconcile these competing interests?
• How might the ways in which we cultivate our identities as WPAs and writing teachers influence/impact/affect those not inside composition and rhetoric?
• In what ways has the evolution of composition/rhetoric as a
field affected your understanding of yourself as a teacher and/or
administrator?
• Are there ways in which new ideas or realities about teaching in or administering composition programs place you in conflict/debate with some of the foundational knowledge of the field?

Projected timeline:
Requests for full manuscripts sent out by Jan. 2012
Full manuscripts needed by July 2012

Please send abstracts of no more than 500 words by October 15, 2011 to identityandstatus@gmail.com . Questions can also be sent to the same address.

Composing Ourselves [UPDATE]

Lillie Craton and C. Renee Love / Lander University
contact email:
lcraton@lander.edu or creneelove@gmail.com
CFP, edited collection
Composing Ourselves: Writing Pathways to Student Success
(Deadline Oct. 15, 2011)

Dr. Lillian Craton and Dr. Renee Love
contact email: lcraton@lander.edu or creneelove@gmail.com

We invite submissions for a proposed collection that explores how English coursework—particularly college freshman composition—might lead to students’ personal and professional development. This development may grow from the familiar activities of writing instructors: mentoring and advising students, cultivating their civic engagement, or coaching them in the arts of communication, negotiation, and self-presentation.

Given the intensity of student-teacher interaction within composition studies, writing instructors have a unique opportunity to guide first-year college students towards life skills like managing time, coping with stress, and building productive peer relationships. We are positioned to cultivate the mindsets and behaviors that lead students to success throughout their college educations and professional careers. On the other hand, we must balance our desire to help students grow as individuals with the goals of our discipline and the ethical limitations of our outreach. This collection calls for pedagogical strategies designed to enhance students’ writing skills while also promoting students’ success outside the academy.

How might the composition course provide value for students in terms of professional, personal, and confidence development? How can writing teachers help students hone strategies that promote success across the disciplines and beyond the academy? We invite discussion about the opportunities and risks that come from viewing writing instruction as a form of mentoring that has broad applications for student success.

Proposals for both research-based essays and reflective essays are welcome. Essays that extend the topic to college preparatory high school coursework, writing-intensive literature coursework, writing centers, and writing across the curriculum will also be considered. For those interested in submitting a proposal for this collection, please send 500-word abstracts for consideration to lcraton@lander.edu or creneelove@gmail.com by October 15, 2011.

This collection hopes to open discussion of the intersections between writing instruction and the development of skills that lead students to long-term success. We welcome proposals on all related topics, particularly those that respond to one or more of these questions:

• How do mentoring and promoting students’ professional development fit within the framework of writing instruction, and what role should “life coaching” play in our classrooms? What can and can’t we teach our students?

• What role should writing instructors play in identifying and responding to students in personal or academic crisis? What ethical or legal principles govern these responses?

• Can attention to students’ personal and professional development help writing faculty articulate the value of their work in a time of shrinking university budgets?

• What specific assignments or classroom activities promote good writing while developing other skills for success? For instance:
o What does plagiarism prevention teach students about professional ethics?
o Do technology-driven writing assignments build important skills?
o Should social media play a role in writing instruction?
o How do deadlines and attendance policies shape professionalism?
o Which activities best prepare students for workplace collaboration?
o Does draft conferencing prepare students to learn from criticism?
o Can the study of rhetoric promote civic engagement?
o Do certain writing topics encourage self-evaluation, confidence, and growth?
o Can writing classes better prepare students for particular careers? (For example, do research projects teach students about information management? Can peer editing create better teachers?)