The Blogora: The Rhetoric Society of America
profession

 

Feminisms and Rhetorics 2013


Submitted by John W. Pell on September 26, 2013 - 11:29am


Yesterday the 2013 Feminisms and Rhetorics began on the campus of Stanford University. This conference is one of the events I look forward to each, uh, every other year. And, as in years past, this conference is filled with incredible speakers, and thoughtful panels, which work together to create an inviting and stimulating intellectual environment. I will post next week on some of the sessions I attended and point to the work of scholars that are making an impact in the field of rhetoric and feminist studies.

If you are interested in the conference, I have included the link below.

 

The MLA Recategorizes Member Groups


Submitted by syntaxfactory on September 15, 2013 - 9:23am


The MLS has recategorized member groups: http://groupsdiscussion.commons.mla.org/draft-proposal/. Many rhet-comp scholars are frustrated. Some are chill: http://ydog.net/?p=1852

For myself, I say: "Fretting about the MLA is like worrying that your grand-aunt, the one who lives in Fiji and who sends Christmas cards to your mom and hasn't been in the continental US since 1968, long before you were born, doesn't really love you. Of course they do, and of course they don't." --David

 

CCCC, MOOCs, LMS....WTF?!


Submitted by John W. Pell on March 26, 2013 - 1:27pm


As usual, the 4Cs was one of the highlights of my academic year. Brilliant panels, thoughtful conversations in smoke-filled hallways—each brilliant idea punctuated with the chime of slot machines celebrating the interest paid on a five-cent wager. What struck me this year, though, were the myriad of discussions concerning MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) and LMS (Learning Management Systems). Panel after panel seemed to touch on these issues in some way and the conversation continues on many of our professional listservs and discussion boards.

 

A 4Cs Reflection


Submitted by John W. Pell on April 6, 2012 - 12:24pm


Most of the panels on which I present work very hard to leave ample room for discussion. At this year’s 4Cs it was no different. My collaborators and I each presented our work and then Hephzibah Roskelly and Kate Ronald offered their responses—and all of this with plenty of time to discuss ideas with the audience. What I did not anticipate, however, was the “location” from which the first question would emerge during our time of discussion.

“Yeah, I have a question from Twitter.”

Huh?

 

"Top Ten"


Submitted by syntaxfactory on June 25, 2010 - 6:25pm


From RSA Press Release:
Top Ten Downloaded RSQ Articles in 2009

Taylor & Francis, publisher of Rhetoric Society Quarterly, now provides RSA with data from its Informaworld™ online platform, which offers RSQ in electronic form to institutional and individual subscribers. Data collected on Informaworld includes uses from certain other gateways, such as Ingenta (but not EBSCO).

 

Rhetoricians in the Mass Media


Submitted by syntaxfactory on May 20, 2010 - 9:48am


Rhetor Shaun Treat was on the radio last weekend, CNN radio to be exact, talking about super-heroes. Audio is downloadable here: blog.culturaldistortion.com

I've been on Wisconsin Public Radio as part of a panel to talk about the importance and challenges in addressing the history of lynching in the language arts classroom (http://kuws.fm/Final Edition/Final Edition Feb. 8, 2008.mp3). [End shameless self-promotion.]

 

Bruce Horner and Min-Zhan Lu's Questions for Rhetoricians in English


Submitted by syntaxfactory on May 12, 2010 - 2:52pm


In the CE listed to the left, Bruce Horner and Min-Zhan Lu ask questions of scholars in rhet/comp that could be asked of scholars in rhet/comm:

1. How do people in the “rhetoric” strand of “rhetoric and composition” distinguish their work from others in “rhetoric” housed in departments and disciplines of speech and communication, media studies, journalism, and literature? Why?

 

Conference on Peer Review (in the sciences, mostly)


Submitted by syntaxfactory on April 25, 2010 - 3:53pm


One of the CFPs to the left starts with the following citations:

As you know, only 8% members of the Scientific Research Society agreed that 'peer review works well as it is.' (Chubin and Hackett, 1990; p.192)

"A recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and an analysis of the peer review system substantiate complaints about this fundamental aspect of scientific research." (Horrobin, 2001)

Horrobin concludes that peer review "is a non-validated charade whose processes generate results little better than does chance." (Horrobin, 2001) This has been statistically proven and reported by an increasing number of journal editors.

 

Numbers I don't know what to do with...


Submitted by syntaxfactory on April 8, 2010 - 11:58am


From Normative Publication Productivity of Communication Scholars at Selected Career Milestones, Timothy Stephen & Renee Geel, Human Communication Research