This essay compares and contrasts the first edition of In Memoriam, Tennyson's elegy for his friend Arthur Henry Hallam published in 1850, with more recent editions that distort the original by dramatically compressing the text to fit it onto fewer pages. In this light, I consider the negative impact that such editorial choices may have on students reading the poem for the first time and the benefits of presenting them with the text in the format first encountered by Victorian readers (accessible today thanks to the British Library). The blank space following many of In Memoriam's 131 lyric sections is an integral part of the mourning process that Tennyson unfolds before us. Relatedly, I describe my multiple attempts to teach the poem to undergraduates, as well as a talk on this topic that I gave on a pedagogy panel at the Northeast Victorian Studies Association's 2000 conference, “Victorian Breakdowns.”

Other| April 01 2017 Contributors Pedagogy (2017) 17 (2): 367–369. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3845948 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 April 2017; 17 (2): 367–369. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3845948 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2017 by Duke University Press2017 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Other| January 01 2017 Contributors Pedagogy (2017) 17 (1): 149–150. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3658638 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 January 2017; 17 (1): 149–150. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3658638 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2017 by Duke University Press2017 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Contributors You do not currently have access to this content.

Suggesting that higher education is at a pivotal time regarding the influx of veteran students on campus, this and the following essays argue that faculty have an ethical obligation to investigate and, if appropriate, respond to the veteran student demographic enrolled in two- and four-year institutions. We hope to encourage language, literature, and writing faculty to rethink their preconceptions of war, warriors, and military culture—to ask hard questions about what we know about the wars, the people who fight them, their families, and the public narratives that have controlled our access to “combat operations.” We encourage faculty to engage the complexities of war, to honor the complicated questions and dilemmas military members face, and to understand how those questions will likely filter into classrooms, social interactions, and broader national discourse. We provide our colleagues with an opportunity to hear veteran voices in the hope that classroom teachers can have some grounds on which to reconsider and engage with the culture of war. We have an opportunity to theorize classroom practices that are in clear contact with veteran experiences and, more important, an opportunity to engage with veterans and service members not simply as objects of study but as colleagues.

Other| October 01 2016 Contributors Pedagogy (2016) 16 (3): 583–586. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3600973 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 October 2016; 16 (3): 583–586. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3600973 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2016 by Duke University Press2016 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Other| October 01 2016 Call for Papers: Special Issue of Pedagogy Pedagogy (2016) 16 (3): 587–589. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3755517 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Call for Papers: Special Issue of Pedagogy. Pedagogy 1 October 2016; 16 (3): 587–589. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3755517 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2016 by Duke University Press2016 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Students in freshman composition classes often assume that the goal of college writing is to sound like someone else, so they struggle to frame their own questions in response to the world around them. This article analyzes the potential for student-driven learning to redress this problem. It focuses on a team-taught freshman composition course that asked students to collaborate in designing a section of their curriculum. The article argues that control over the curriculum inspired many students to push themselves intellectually and adopt the roles of teachers. On the other hand, increased autonomy sometimes disempowered students who had not yet acquired skills to assess their own strengths and weaknesses and who thus reverted to oversimplified ideas or avoided actively taking on responsibilities. If agency constitutes the power to carry out effective action, this course illustrated the capacity of autonomy both to foster and to subvert student agency.

Other| April 01 2016 Contributors Pedagogy (2016) 16 (2): 377–379. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3436044 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 April 2016; 16 (2): 377–379. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3436044 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2016 by Duke University Press2016 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

1986. New Orleans. The Conference on College Composition and Communication. The two of us and Elaine O. Lees are presenting on a panel titled “ReaderResponse Theory and the Teaching of Writing: The Teacher as Responding Reader.” Our titles? Salvatori: “Some Implications of Iser’s Theory of Reading for the Teaching of Writing.” Donahue: “Barthes and the Obtuse Reader.” Lees: “Is There an Error in This Text? What Stanley Fish’s Theory of Reading Implies about the Teaching of English.” There was something special about the Conference on College Composition and Communication that year, especially for anyone concerned about reading. A few books had already been published: Composition and Literature: Bridging the Gap, edited by Winfred Bryan Horner (1983); Writ­ ing and Reading Differently, edited by G. Douglas Atkins and Michael Johnson (1985); Only Connect, edited by Thomas Newkirk (1986); and Conver­ gences: Transactions in Reading and Writing, edited by Bruce T. Peterson (1986). More appeared to be on the way, for instance, Reclaiming Pedagogy: The Rhetoric of the Classroom, edited by Patricia Donahue and Ellen Quandahl (1989). College English and College Composition and Communication were brimming with provocative investigations. Interest in reading was, paradoxically, both bourgeoning and at its apex, which we came to recognize only in retrospect. Over the next few years, while we and a few others (most notably David Bartholomae, Elizabeth Flynn, Joseph Harris, David Jolliffe, Kathleen McCormick, Susan Miller, Thomas Newkirk, and Donna Qualley)

Other| October 01 2015 Index to Volume 15 Pedagogy (2015) 15 (3): 593–596. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3149591 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Index to Volume 15. Pedagogy 1 October 2015; 15 (3): 593–596. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3149591 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. 2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Index to Volume 15 You do not currently have access to this content.

This special issue of Pedagogy , titled “Caring From, Caring Through: Pedagogical Responses to Disability” explores the complex dynamics of disability, pedagogy, and care work and thus augments important scholarship on the personal experiences of disabled teachers, on how mental and physical variation shapes classroom encounters, and on parenting disabled children while inside the academy. Different from these conversations, though, this special issue applies disability theory more explicitly to pedagogical techniques and teaching philosophies. Put another way, the issue outlines pedagogical logics, classroom practices, and ethical considerations that might provoke radical institutional change and that testify to the generative symbiosis of lived disability, disability research/scholarship, and disability content/practices in the classroom. The articles in this issue grow out of authors’ situated, embodied knowledges and experiences of caring from or through disability; contributors contemplate what — and how — caring for/with/through disability has taught them about teaching. At the heart of each of these articles lies the belief that our common humanity is evidenced, paradoxically, through diverse human variation. Questions about how to enact in our lives and classrooms a politics that honors, engages, and conserves that variation — a politics of inclusion, equity, and access — motivate the meditations that follow.

Other| October 01 2015 Contributors Pedagogy (2015) 15 (3): 587–592. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3149575 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 October 2015; 15 (3): 587–592. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3149575 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2015 by Duke University Press2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This article establishes how rhetorical intention is affected by the situation of writing instruction. Intention could be defined as the means through which a writer orients purposeful activity based on the projection of a desired outcome. The role of writing as a vehicle for communication is often taken as a given in instructional activities. Yet writers encounter the classroom primarily as a socially relevant situation, which often results in writing oriented toward compliance or in the service of extrinsic reward. Those within writing studies would recognize this problem as a part of the conversation regarding the acquisition of thinking dispositions and theories of transfer in writing pedagogy. Drawing upon what is known about intention from studies of communication disorder, this article posits that inquiry-based writing becomes procedural in instructional settings through a writer's affective response to perceived exigence: the activation of rhetorically situated communicative intent in response to a question to be answered or a problem to be resolved. As such, this article draws upon theories of cognition and learning in order to explore possible strategies of question generation in relationship to writing pedagogy.

Introduction| April 01 2015 Introduction: Encounter Tradition, Make It New: Essays on New Approaches for Teaching the Harlem Renaissance Fran L. Lassiter Fran L. Lassiter Guest Editor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2015) 15 (2): 353–358. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2845081 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Fran L. Lassiter; Introduction: Encounter Tradition, Make It New: Essays on New Approaches for Teaching the Harlem Renaissance. Pedagogy 1 April 2015; 15 (2): 353–358. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2845081 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2015 by Duke University Press2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This commentary is an afterword and response to a cluster of essays on graduate education edited by Leonard Cassuto. Arguing for reform of the academic job system in which most PhDs will become contingent faculty members, the commentary engages principally with the work of David Downing and Marc Bousquet.

This response to the articles collected in this cluster observes that many analysts have constructed a “survivor” discourse surrounding graduate education, offering solutions at the level of individual choice and agency. The author argues instead for the critical importance of addressing academic employment structurally.

This introduction positions the essays in this special cluster as early entries in a necessary conversation about how to teach graduate school better and more attentively during these straitened and changing times. It is a conversation we need to begin.

Survey responses suggest that students in introductory literature classes perceive a mismatch between what they believe is important to do in assignments and what they learn from comments on their papers. Survey questions focused on the relative importance of key concepts in literary study: accurate understanding, independent insight, and written expression.

Other| October 01 2014 Contributors Pedagogy (2014) 14 (3): 577–579. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2716945 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 October 2014; 14 (3): 577–579. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2716945 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2014 by Duke University Press2014 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Contributors You do not currently have access to this content.

Other| October 01 2013 Contributors Pedagogy (2013) 13 (3): 563–565. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2377700 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Contributors. Pedagogy 1 October 2013; 13 (3): 563–565. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2377700 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2013 by Duke University Press2013 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Contributors You do not currently have access to this content.

In modern usage, living “off the grid” means living totally independently, without the modern conveniences of publicly supplied gas, electricity, and water; it also refers to people who strive to remain unrecorded in governmental, financial, and medical documents. More generally, to live off the grid is to live against the grain of society, ideologically at odds with the mainstream. As we have put the idea to use for this guestedited issue, “Teaching Medieval Literature off the Grid,” instructors who incorporate noncanonical texts into their classrooms resemble the above definitions in several respects. For one thing, to teach “off the grid” is almost always to teach selfsufficiently — to locate the texts you think are important and figure out for yourself why they are important, to provide or create your own introductory notes, glosses, and other relevant contextualizing material for your students. It is to build a lesson literally from the ground up. You are certainly off the beaten path, without much assistance or advice from textbooks, teachers’ manuals, online resources, or other scholars’ work; there is little, if anything, to vouch for or justify your lesson plan. To put it simply, and most generally, to teach off the grid is to teach outside the comfort zone of the canon, without the builtin validations and pedagogies that literary tradition provides. The challenges of teaching off the grid are many, but this issue of Pedagogy argues that the rewards are great. Noncanonical texts can shed light on perspectives different from those represented by the culturally authoritative texts of the canon, often can serve the useful purpose of defamiliarizing traditional readings, and

Editorial| April 01 2013 A Note from the Editors Jennifer L. Holberg; Jennifer L. Holberg Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Marcy Taylor Marcy Taylor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2013) 13 (2): 203–204. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1963195 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Jennifer L. Holberg, Marcy Taylor; A Note from the Editors. Pedagogy 1 April 2013; 13 (2): 203–204. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1963195 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2013 by Duke University Press2013 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Introduction| January 01 2013 Introduction Kirilka Stavreva; Kirilka Stavreva guest editor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Christopher Kleinhenz Christopher Kleinhenz Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2013) 13 (1): 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1814161 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Kirilka Stavreva, Christopher Kleinhenz; Introduction. Pedagogy 1 January 2013; 13 (1): 43–47. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1814161 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2012 by Duke University Press2012 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

In response to the need for additional teacher-research on African American students, this article offers a case study of how one African American student-writer successfully produces expository writing in an Afrocentric first-year writing course at Michigan State University, a large land-grant midwestern research institution.

This article shows how and why one might teach painting as a reading practice in a literature course. Painting in response to a literary text can deepen the impact that the text has on a reader/painter and can develop her or his ability to read well. Such an activity taps into contemplative dynamics such as attentiveness, presence, dialogue, and community, and it contributes to students' appreciation of literature. Painting in response to a text causes students to linger with the text and provides occasion for rereading.

Introduction| January 01 2012 Editors' Introduction Jennifer L. Holberg; Jennifer L. Holberg Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Marcy Taylor Marcy Taylor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2012) 12 (1): 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1416513 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Jennifer L. Holberg, Marcy Taylor; Editors' Introduction. Pedagogy 1 January 2012; 12 (1): 1–3. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1416513 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2011 by Duke University Press2011 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Research Article| October 01 2010 Editors' Introduction Jennifer L. Holberg; Jennifer L. Holberg Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Marcy Taylor Marcy Taylor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2010) 10 (3): 455–456. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2010-001 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Jennifer L. Holberg, Marcy Taylor; Editors' Introduction. Pedagogy 1 October 2010; 10 (3): 455–456. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2010-001 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2010 by Duke University Press2010 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

This essay describes a project in a first-year writing course in which students created video Public Service Announcements. The project resulted from a university-sponsored contest to prevent the spread of the H1N1 virus on campus. Illustrating the process of creating such video compositions allows an examination of the potential for multimedia projects in writing courses, especially projects that respond to a public call or exigence. This project pushes students not only technologically but also rhetorically.

Research Article| April 01 2010 Note from the Editors Jennifer L. Holberg; Jennifer L. Holberg Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Marcy Taylor Marcy Taylor Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2010) 10 (2): 269–270. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2009-037 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Jennifer L. Holberg, Marcy Taylor; Note from the Editors. Pedagogy 1 April 2010; 10 (2): 269–270. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2009-037 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2010 by Duke University Press2010 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.