On the Future of Writing about Teaching

• Published in: Composition studies Vol. 50; no. 1; pp. 153 - 182
• Main Author: Leverenz, Carrie S
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chicago University of Massachusetts Boston 22.03.2022; University of Cincinnati on behalf of Composition Studies
• Subjects: Classrooms; Course Content; Debates; Dissertations & theses; Doctoral Dissertations; Doctoral Programs; Electronic Publishing; Employment; Ethics; Graduate students; Guidelines; Human subjects; Intellectual Disciplines; Job Applicants; Labor Market; Periodicals; Research Methodology; Rhetoric; Rhetorical Theory; Search Committees (Personnel); Teaching; Teaching Methods; Tenure; Web Sites; Writing (Composition); Writing instruction
• ISSN: 1534-9322

First was the debate sometimes termed the "theory wars" between scholars interested in theorizing about writing beyond the classroom and those who continued focusing within it. Interestingly, Olson's argument for the value of theory did not appear in the lead spot but instead followed James Sledd's "Return to Service," a piece that clearly comes down on the side of teaching over theory: "I make no apologies for undignified concern with maligned Freshman English, a course whose careful teaching is infinitely more important than the further development of 'composition theory'" (11). Few of us would quarrel with the idea that we should ask students for permission to use their work, but the new guidelines did produce some negative effects. Because every IRB is shaped by its local research culture, its response to proposals seeking approval for writing about teaching can vary from refusal to recognize this writing as research to rejection on the grounds that all writing about students is unethical. [...]changes in the job market for Rhetoric and Composition PhDs mean the first job for many will be a teaching-focused position, often nontenure track.