In this article, we present a method for analyzing the communication of people who exchange dynamic and complex information to come to a shared understanding of situations and of the actions planned and monitored by one party, but executed remotely by another. To examine this situation, we analyzed dispatchers working in police dispatch center in a large city in the Netherlands and their communication behavior in three different settings. The results of our analyses answer the question of how collaborative parties should assess an emergency situation in order to decide how to handle the incident in accordance with the procedures. Our results indicate which information must be communicated in order to deal with the current problem during the course of an incident. We will also demonstrate the proposed way of analyzing the communication used here is needed to understand how information is collaboratively handled in complex tasks.

Complexity leadership theory provides a perspective on leadership that values, rather than avoids, the realities of a complex environment. As we are now fully part of an age of networks, facilitating leadership toward collective action means embracing a distributed model reliant on multiple modes of communication distributed over multiple nodes in complex networks. A complexity theory of leadership that is practiced within the context of multimodal authorship favors collective action over individual action, collaboration over centralization, and connectivity over isolation. It is in the power of multiple networks interacting and becoming a complex adaptive system that collective action leads to positive change.

Review Article| April 01 2017 Composing at the Threshold: Collaborative Composition and Innovative Form Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies. Edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Wardle, Elizabeth. Utah State University Press, 2016. 232 pages. Rebecca C. Conklin Rebecca C. Conklin Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2017) 17 (2): 359–365. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3770261 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Rebecca C. Conklin; Composing at the Threshold: Collaborative Composition and Innovative Form. Pedagogy 1 April 2017; 17 (2): 359–365. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3770261 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.

Professional practices in technical communication are increasingly being challenged by the emergence of collaborative media that enable users to access technical information created by non-professionals. At the same time, these technologies also allow technical communicators to provide a continually expanding audience with knowledge and skills needed now more than ever. Through a co-design case study, researchers developed a new and innovative platform for producing and distributing technical information including user-generated content. Moreover, the events of the case included market strategies in which a professional organization moved from a reactive to a more proactive position on collaborative media. In so doing, they outlined a set of new professional roles for technical communicators including editors, curators, facilitators, and community managers.

It has been suggested that oral languaging (e.g., collaborative dialogue, private speech) plays a crucial role in learning a second language (L2). Many studies have shown a positive relation between oral languaging during problem solving tasks and subsequent performance on various post-test measures. The paucity of empirical research on written languaging (e.g., written reflection) prompted this study. The effect of the quality of written languaging by 24 Japanese learners of English was assessed by subsequent text revisions. Both written languaging at the level of noticing only and written languaging at the level of noticing with reasons were associated with accuracy improvement. These findings appear to support Swain’s (2006, 2010) claim that providing learners with the opportunity to language about or reflect on their developing linguistic knowledge in the course of L2 learning mediates L2 learning and development. The pedagogical implications of the study may suggest that L2 teachers should ask their students to reflect, in diaries, journals, and portfolios, on the linguistic problems they have encountered during their classroom activities.

The introduction and tracking of discourse referents is a central feature of discourse coherence, alongside considerations for temporal, spatial and causal features. However, while much attention is usually paid to the management of temporal, spatial and causal language in L2 writing course materials and curricula, it is apparent that the appropriate management of reference in L2 writing is often overlooked. Typically associated with the label of cohesion (Halliday & Hasan, 1976), current research from pragmatics (notably Ariel, 1991, 2008, 2010) suggests that writers and readers are sensitive to the accessibility of referents in extended discourse, which is dependent on a variety of cues including salience, parallelism, number and type of competing referents, etc. The writer’s choice of referring expressions (i.e. full NP, pronoun, zero) at any given time thus reflects their belief regarding a referent’s accessibility to their intended reader. In L1 discourse, accessibility-mediated marking of reference is considered a pragmatic universal, despite different L1s marking accessibility in different ways. Recent research into L2 discourse, particularly Asian L2 discourse (e.g. Kang, 2009; AUTHOR, 2014a; Ryan, accepted, in press) has suggested that the appropriate introduction and maintenance of reference by L2 learners is problematic - despite the universal distribution of form/function found in L1 discourse – with learners often under or over-explicit in their reference management, or frequently miscommunicating entirely. This has serious implications for the overall coherence of the L2 discourse produced. The proposed paper explores the root causes of the failure of Asian EFL students to manage reference coherently in L2 writing, then focuses on how such management can be improved pedagogically. The paper proposes additions to L2 writing materials and in-class activities that would help improve L2 reference maintenance, including picture sequence descriptions, silent film retellings and collaborative writing projects designed to maximise the potential tracking of reference over extended discourse sequences.

Advertisement, IEEE. IEEE Collabratec is a new, integrated online community where IEEE members, researchers, authors, and technology professionals with similar fields of interest can network and collaborate, as well as create and manage content. Featuring a suite of powerful online networking and collaboration tools, IEEE Collabratec allows you to connect according to geographic location, technical interests, or career pursuits. You can also create and share a professional identity that showcases key accomplishments and participate in groups focused around mutual interests, actively learning from and contributing to knowledgeable communities. All in one place! Learn about IEEE Collabratec at ieeecollabratec.org.

Background: Patient-centered care emphasizes care coordination and communication through active involvement of patients, their families, physicians, and other professionals to improve decision making. Smart telecommunication technology and the Internet of Things, such as wireless-sensor-network-based smart home healthcare systems (WSN-SHHS) facilitate communication and collaboration among these different roles. Research problem: Despite the great potential of such systems to improve the quality and experience, and lower the cost of health care, the technology has not been widely adopted partly due to an inadequate understanding of user expectations, needs, and preferences. This study addresses facilitators and barriers with regard to WSN-SHHS adoption by identifying important sociotechnical, cognitive, affective, and contextual factors. Research questions: What are the main facilitators and barriers of patients' adoption of WSN-SHHS? How can we contextualize a generic technology adoption model for WSN-SHHS that takes into account unique characteristics of the domain? Literature review: We surveyed the literature in WSN-SHHS research and application, technology adoption theories, and the pleasure-arousal-dominance emotional state model. We discovered that WSN-SHHS research has focused on technology development but has given little attention to the issue of patients' adoption. Methodology: We used a mixed method design that combined an interview and survey over two studies. Participants were recruited from home healthcare agencies in the eastern US. In semistructured interviews, we collected data from 15 home healthcare patients and medical professionals, and analyzed the data using Kvale's approach. In our online- and paper-based surveys, we analyzed the data from 140 respondents using partial least square. Results and conclusions: We identified several new constructs in relation to WSN-SHHS adoption, including human detachment concerns, privacy concerns, life-quality expectancy and cost concerns. In addition, we confirmed the constructs from the general adoption model. Based on the findings of the qualitative study, the researchers created a research model. The quantitative study provided empirical support for the model, which has substantial predictive power accounting for more than half of the variance in WSN-SHHS adoption. In particular, our findings reveal that human detachment concerns rather than performance expectancy is the strongest predictor of patients' adoption of WSN-SHHS.

Research problem: The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of the cultural intelligence of a dyad (a team of two persons) on its global virtual collaboration processes and outcomes. Research question: Does a dyad's cultural intelligence have an effect on global virtual collaboration processes and outcomes? If yes, which effects does that cultural intelligence have? Literature review: We review literature on the management of cultural diversity in global virtual collaboration and cultural intelligence. The literature suggests that cultural diversity in global virtual teams is mainly managed with rigid approaches, which are ineffective in many situations. Leveraging cultural intelligence has the potential to improve global virtual collaboration. However, its effects at the team level or in a virtual setting are not yet clear. Methodology: We used a collaboration simulation with 70 participants recruited from two public universities in China and Germany to study the effects of cultural intelligence. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through questionnaires, voice recorders, and computer logs. Bale's interaction process analysis was used to code the voice recordings, and ordinary least-squares regression was used to test the hypotheses. Results and conclusions: The results indicate that cultural intelligence has an effect on global virtual collaboration; the lower cultural intelligence and the higher cultural intelligence in a dyad exert different effects on global virtual collaboration. Specifically, the lower cultural intelligence significantly influences the frequency of collaborative behaviors, which further influence group satisfaction. In contrast, the higher cultural intelligence significantly influences the deliverable quality. The findings advance the understanding of the effects of cultural intelligence at a dyad level and on proximal behavioral outcomes. The study has practical implications for global virtual collaboration practitioners and collaborative virtual environment designers. The study is limited by using student subjects and a self-report measure of cultural intelligence, as well as by examining global virtual teams in their simplest form. Future studies are suggested to examine contingency factors on the relationships between cultural intelligence and global virtual collaboration processes and outcomes.

This article argues for an engaged rhetoric of science, technology, engineering and medicine (RSTEM) that collaborates with science in the development and execution of research projects. It traces the emergence of an engaged RSTEM through recent disciplinary history and identifies Bruno Latour and Harry Collins and Robert Evans’ work as watershed moments that influence this commitment to collaboration. In reviewing the history of critique in the discipline, it argues that we have practical and political common ground with science that can supersede the necessity of critique. Finally, it addresses the difficult questions of why we as a discipline and as individual scholars would engage with science, what we have to contribute to scientific projects and where engaged scholars fit into interdisciplinary projects and into the credit cycle of the research university.

Kathy Short’s presidential address as delivered at the NCTE Annual Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on November 22, 2015.

The review of work on ancient Roman rhetoric that follows below is the first of what I hope will become a regular feature in Advances in the History of Rhetoric—comprehensive reviews of scholarship in a given area. Subjects for these reviews and author-reviewers can be proposed to the editor or invited by the editor. Proposals from senior scholars working in collaboration with graduate students are especially welcome.

This is an article about student mentor-ship in University Writing Centers.

This article examines archival research as a generative community literacy practice. Through the example of a community-based project centered on archival research, I examine the increased possibility the archives hold as a site for rhetorical invention based on collaboration that includes contemporary community members and the recovered rhetoric of historical figures. I argue that archival research as community literacy practice creates conditions for a communal form of literacy sponsorship and offer a framework for approaching the archives.

Collaborative Imagination: Earning Activism Through Literacy Education, which makes a hopeful yet nuanced case for how networked efforts within institutions might create change. The book combines deep illustrations from the civil rights era with contemporary efforts in community literacy, layering perspectives as it moves forward and backward in time, to explore how different practices of literacy education shape notions of citizenship and how activists in literacy education go about pursuing social change. Laying out a parable to ground a key idea in his book, Feigenbaum retells the traditional story of the starfish savior: a man walking along a beach notices thousands of starfish washed up on the shore, and he sees another man throwing the starfish back into the sea, one by one. He tells the man throwing the starfish that this is a waste of time, as there are thousands of starfish-he cannot make a difference. The man throws another starfish into the sea and replies, "I made a difference to that one. " This story is meant to be inspirational, but Feigenbaum, drawing on Buzz Alexander's Freirean interpretation of the parable, points out that this story is an individualistic myth that limits the potential for activism: rather than running into to town to gather others to help, or researching the cause for why the starfish are being washed up along the shore, the man exemplifies the idea that good citizens act alone. As Feigenbaum writes, "The starfish savior's willingness to sacrifice time and energy toward a good cause makes him appear to be morally righteous, but in failing to enlist aid in resolving the macroproblem, he ensures that the vast majority of starfish will perish" (9). Acting out of a starfish savior mentality-or, as my students termed it, starfishing-means blending romantic naivet and individualism in ways that are ultimately ineffective in forwarding activism.

Delivery has often been treated as an afterthought of the “real work” of writing. This article demonstrates how writers in some contexts must think very carefully about delivery from the very beginning of their process. Tracking collaborative writers’ talk, this article demonstrates how a group of writers works to anticipate delivery by repeatedly constructing delivery narratives—that is, stories about the future handoff of their document to audiences. In a complex case of LGBT policy advocacy, the writers weave together multiple delivery narratives in order to achieve consensus, revealing the influence of discursive voices, perspectives, personal and institutional histories, and disciplinary training on the group’s rhetorical strategies. This article also considers how an experienced administrative lawyer constructs delivery narratives, revealing an expert’s strategy to try to get a legitimate hearing for a novel legal interpretation.

Writing center scholars and tutor-training manuals historically emphasize the importance of tutors and writers collaboratively negotiating consultation agendas to maintain writers’ ownership over their writing. However, when tutors encounter advanced student writers, writers from unfamiliar fields, or writers with complex linguistic repertoires, they may struggle to read student writing, identify writing issues, and negotiate effective, mutual agendas. One tool for navigating these challenges is the “read-ahead method”—in which tutors read student writing in advance and prepare for consultations (Scrocco 10). While this method offers potential advantages, a brief survey reveals that some writing center administrators worry that tutors who read student writing in advance may hijack consultation agendas. This exploratory mixed-methods study examines thirteen tutor-supervisor planning conversations and subsequent consultations to assess the correspondence between tutors’ plans and consultations and to consider what factors may support or undermine writers’ agendas. Results suggest that tutors who use the read/plan-ahead method do not fervently push their planned agendas over writers’ agendas. However, very detailed or particularly vague pre-consultation planning may set tutors up for sessions that fail to negotiate and carry out cohesive, well-prioritized shared agendas. The most collaborative, coherent consultations in this study balance tutor and writer agendas. They begin with writers’ submitted concerns, identify high-priority global writing issues, engage in substantive agenda-setting with writers, explicitly link tutors’ plans with writers’ agendas, and abandon tutors’ plans when needed. The read/plan-ahead model works best when tutors remember to place writers at the heart of building, revising, and enacting consultation agendas.

The Burkean parlor has been integrated into the lore of writing centers, showcasing how writing centers have both conversational and collaborative elements. However, the ease for students to enter into the academic conversation is not as simple as this metaphor suggests. To rethink this concept, kairos, or the opportune moment, must be considered. This article will investigate kairos as spatial and how that conceptualization can deepen the Burkean parlor and the conversations within it. Breaking down the Burkean parlor into three stages—questions, metacognition, and choices—can benefit the practicality of the tutoring session. Kairos complicates each of these three points of the student writer’s integration into the conversation. The creation of kairos depends upon the student and tutor being mindful of these conscious and unconscious interactions and understanding how to most effectively disrupt the spatial boundaries of the tutoring session. Connecting kairos into the Burkean parlor metaphor differentiates the perspective of the tutoring session, encouraging both student and tutor to become more aware of the spatiality of tutoring and to redefine these boundaries.

Working in writing centers is a great gig. We get to lead units committed to making collaborative learning happen in a host of ways: students gaining access to or refining disciplinary literacies, faculty and administration discovering more effective ways for writing to demonstrate learning and transfer, and tutors becoming conscious of their voices as mentors of communities of practice, both disciplinary and sociocultural. Many of us "graduate" from being students who have been tutored in writing centers to serving as writing tutors ourselves; some of us inspired by all of that labor decide to pursue graduate education in and become directors of these amazing units, charged with sustaining and growing these amazing units and all those who teach and learn within While our field has plenty of resources for educating tutors, for coaching faculty across the disciplines on using writing for teaching

Although compositionists recognize that student talk plays an important role in learning to write, there is limited understanding of how students use conversational moves to collaboratively build knowledge about writing across contexts. This article reports on a study of focus group conversations involving first-year students in a cohort program. Our analysis identified two patterns of group conversation among students: “co-telling” and “co-constructing,” with the latter leading to more complex writing knowledge. We also used Beaufort’s domains of writing knowledge to examine how co-constructing conversations supported students in abstracting knowledge beyond a single classroom context and in negotiating local constraints. Our findings suggest that co-constructing is a valuable process that invites students to do the necessary work of remaking their knowledge for local use. Ultimately, our analysis of the role of student conversation in the construction of writing knowledge contributes to our understanding of the myriad activities that surround transfer of learning.

The policy brief assignment in my capstone course in professional writing was designed as a community-engaged project in partnership with a nonprofit organization whose mission is to grow Reading, Pennsylvania's economy. The assignment was intended to do real work in the world: the nonprofit's director, a city council member, and an outreach manager for the city of Reading plan to use the policy briefs to convince Reading's City Council to adopt the recommended policies to enhance citizen participation and representation in local governance and to address deficiencies identified through the STAR Community Rating System(r) (STAR), the nation's leading sustainability framework and certification program (STAR 2016). I welcomed the collaboration and designed the assignment with the goal that students would experience what writing faculty always tell them: fundamental concepts in composition and rhetoric/writing studies are operational in the workplace, and understanding writing and communication rhetorically opens up possibilities for them to enter diverse and unfamiliar writing contexts. Students successfully researched, synthesized, organized, and clearly communicated information in a content area and genre new to them. They presented their policy briefs in written and electronic form to the community partners and explained their work in oral presentations. It was an exciting, nerve-wracking, and challenging endeavor, and, as I will describe, the periods of dissonance led to the best learning experiences--for students and for me.

This essay describes a digital, collaboratively designed and interconnected series of essays that were the final project for a first-year class in media and anthropology. These essays were composed using a digital, publically accessible, scholarly publishing platform that allows students to experiment architecturally with arguing related ideas through non-linear text. The result is an intricate, flexible pathway of pages. The assignment is informed by, and attempts to experimentally enact, Fèlix Guattari's concept of the assemblage, emphasizing movement and process of argument and evidence over static, reified trajectories of traditional essay composition. By examining the periphery of their own ideas, students encounter the interpretations of their classmates and discover alternate readings of key themes, which they can then fold into their own writing networks, ultimately creating a textual flow which challenges the singularity of the author and the boundaries of disciplinary thinking.

Advertisement, IEEE. IEEE Collabratec is a new, integrated online community where IEEE members, researchers, authors, and technology professionals with similar fields of interest can network and collaborate, as well as create and manage content. Featuring a suite of powerful online networking and collaboration tools, IEEE Collabratec allows you to connect according to geographic location, technical interests, or career pursuits. You can also create and share a professional identity that showcases key accomplishments and participate in groups focused around mutual interests, actively learning from and contributing to knowledgeable communities. All in one place! Learn about IEEE Collabratec at ieeecollabratec.org.

Improving postgraduate student writing in English is an ongoing concern in the increasingly internationalised UK Higher Education context. Although the importance of feedback for developing academic writing skills is well-established (Hyland and Hyland 2006), there is still much debate about the components of effective feedback. In response to the call for research investigating teachers’ real-world practices in giving feedback in specific contexts (Lee 2014 and 2012), this article presents an initiative to develop students’ abilities to tackle written postgraduate writing (essays and dissertations) through collaborative on-line academic writing courses. The Grounded Theory-inspired study explores student perceptions of the effectiveness of online formative feedback on postgraduate academic writing in order to identify best practices which can contribute to developing skills in providing feedback. The study analyses tutor feedback on student texts and student responses to feedback. We applied categories which emerged from this data and concluded that the students we investigated had responded most positively when a combination of confidence-developing feedback practices were employed. These included both principled corrective language feedback and positive, personalised feedback on academic conventions and practices. This collaboration between academic writing and content specialists continues to provide further opportunities for embedding practices that encourage the development of academic writing skills on one year postgraduate programmes at the University of Edinburgh.

Research-based learning is an approach that lets students conduct research to develop content knowledge. This article gives insights into a seminar that followed this approach. It was a collaboration between the writing center and the linguistics department at European University Viadrina in Germany with the aim to explore new ways of combining the learning of content knowledge and writing. In accordance with the stance of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL), this collaboration was meant to be a pilot to generate experiences and knowledge about this approach and its potential for combining discipline-specific learning and writing.

Smith, J. and Wrigley, S. (2016) Introducing Teachers’ Writing Groups: Exploring the Theory and Practice. Abingdon: Routledge, pp.150, £95.00, 9781138797420
\n
\n
\nIntroducing Teachers' Writing Groups: Exploring the Theory and Practice, by Jenifer Smith and Simon Wrigley, is co-published by Routledge and the National Association for the Teaching of English (NATE) as the latest offering in a collaborative series. The Association is the professional body in the UK for all teachers of English in primary and post-primary schools and their series with Routledge is intended to promote ‘standards of excellence in the teaching of English’ by disseminating ‘innovative and original ideas that have practical classroom outcomes’, as well as supporting teachers’ own professional development. In this latest addition to the series, Smith and Wrigley address a key underlying question – indeed challenge – for English teachers: how can you teach students to write if, as a teacher, you can’t, or don’t, or won’t, write yourself? The authors introduce us to teachers’ writing groups as one compelling way to meet this challenge; such groups, the book demonstrates, encourage and support teachers as writers. Similarly, writing groups can also be of value in higher education settings for colleagues (Grant 2006, Badenhorst et al. 2013 and Geller and Eodice 2013), and for students (Aitchinson 2009), and it is the application of the book’s theory and practices in these contexts that may prove most useful for readers of the Journal of Academic Writing.

Use of a wiki tool as a space for collaborative writing may be an effective way to expand the practice of academic writing, where working in groups to produce a collective text is a common occurrence in higher education. Evidence suggests wikis to be flexible tools which may improve collaboration and provide students with new skills. However, some research has shown that collaboration in wikis may be superficial and that their use may lead to increased workload for students and instructors. Because a great deal of academic writing is accomplished in groups, helping students build their collaborative writing skills is an important academic writing endeavor. This article provides evidence revealing both the potential of wikis to foster collaborative writing and important factors to consider before incorporating a wiki into an academic writing course. Scaffolding tasks to build up to cooperative group writing and introducing new ideas regarding text ownership can make wikis an effective space to practice academic writing. Weighing the evidence provided in this article may help instructors determine whether incorporating a wiki in their own context could constitute an additional space for students to develop their academic writing skills.

Despite the growing evidence of the language and literacy benefits of collaborative discussions for English language learners, the factors contributing to productive discussions that promote ELLs’ positive language outcomes are less understood. This study examined the influence of teacher talk, students’ initial language and literacy skills, and home language backgrounds on the discussion proficiency of four groups participating in eight peer-led literature discussions, called collaborative reasoning (CR), in two 5th-grade classrooms serving mainly Spanish-speaking ELLs. Levels of discussion proficiency were determined using a holistic rating approach and utterance-by utterance coding of discourse features. Teachers’ scaffolding moves were coded. Students’ pre- and post-intervention language and literacy skills and home language backgrounds were assessed. Results showed greater group variation in discussion proficiency in the mainstream class than in the bilingual class. The two teachers differed in their ways of facilitating CR discussions. Group discussion proficiency was associated with oral English skills (sentence grammar) and reading comprehension, as well as student English language use at home and parental assistance with homework. The talk volume and indicators of high-level comprehension such as articulating and responding to alternative perspectives, elaborations, extratextual connections, and uses of textual evidence were associated with post-intervention language and literacy outcomes. These findings contribute to the understanding of sources of variations in discussion proficiency among groups composed predominantly of ELLs and provide implications for teacher scaffolding strategies to facilitate ELLs’ learning and participation in classroom discussions.

This qualitative study investigates an approach to mentoring that offers guided practice in authentic disciplinary activities prior to the dissertation stage. The mentoring project under investigation was unique in that it was designed to double as an authentic collaborative research study and as an opportunity for professional development. Starting from the assumption that writing is a function of the activities that underlie it, this article examines the embedded practices out of which writing emerges—namely, the forms of participation taken up by the doctoral student participants during their research and writing, as well as the mentoring practices enacted alongside. Findings show that participants devoted considerable attention to negotiating individual roles and responsibilities throughout the project and to negotiating emerging research objectives in response to a variety of unexpected obstacles posed by the research environment. Additionally, participants encountered significant difficulties constructing claims in the collaborative setting, owing in part to their status as disciplinary newcomers. Findings also show that the design of the collaborative project helped facilitate and distribute mentoring across the diverse research team in productive ways.

This paper introduces a special issue on forms of collaboration in writing. The four contributions in the issue present a range of perspectives on collaborating to produce and construct text. The studies are outcome-driven and/or process-oriented and use a range of research methodologies. Taken together, the papers in the issue confirm the complexity of collaboration in writing and show that many questions remain and much more research is needed. However, the papers also illustrate that the future research focus in collaborative writing might focus on the interactions of variables on the individual, collaborative and contextual level that count rather than the variables separately. Only an all-encompassing picture of the complex interplay between the different variables may allow us to grasp and exploit the full potential of collaborative writing both as an instructional or working method and as a research methodology.

This study investigated how struggling adult writers solve a writing task and what they know about writing and themselves as writers. The writing process of the adult writers was examined by combining three elements: the observation of collaborative writing tasks, analyses of their written texts, and structured individual interviews that included both retrospective and prospective parts. This methodical approach provides productive tools to assess writing processes and writing knowledge of struggling adult writers. The triangulation of data from the different sources is visualized in a case study. Findings from the case study suggest both similarities and differences between struggling adult and younger writers. Concerning the writing process of both groups, planning and revision play a limited role. However, alongside these similar limitations in their writing process, struggling adult writers distinguish themselves from their young counterparts through their relatively extensive knowledge about themselves as writers.

In this study, university students are faced with the task of collaboratively writing an argumentative synthesis from multiple sources. Specifically, in writing, they must integrate conflicting information on a particular issue obtained from reading two texts that present different perspectives. As research in this field has shown, university students’ transactional beliefs about writing have a bearing on the quality of the texts that they write. In addition, studies on collaborative learning have demonstrated the role of constructive strategies in addressing controversy. Constructive strategies require an epistemic approach, which implies understanding and integrating opposing positions and rationales. Therefore, the specific aims of the study are to analyze the relationships between the following: (a) writing beliefs and the joint written synthesis, b) writing beliefs and the strategies used to address the controversies that emerge during collaborative writing, and (c) how students resolve controversies and the quality of their joint syntheses. The participants were 52 fourth-year psychology students at a state-run university in Madrid. The results show that transactional writing beliefs are associated with both the controversy strategies employed by members of student dyads and the quality of the joint syntheses. Furthermore, the strategies for addressing controversy are associated with the quality of the joint syntheses.

This article examines the inter-relational role of genre and narrative in a social justice organization. Employing an interdisciplinary approach, this test presents a process-centered approach using genre ecology modeling and narrative maps. This approach can help scholars understand how genre and narrative dialectically promote collaboration and coordination while simultaneously promoting the process of consubstantiality and rhetorical identification in networked organizations.

Background: Teams are a basic way of organizing work in many professional and personal settings. However, misunderstandings among team members can lead to poor performance, hurt feelings, and lack of motivation to attack subsequent tasks. A common source of such misunderstandings is miscommunication caused by differences in how people interpret everyday words and phrases. Team members might interpret these differences as a natural occurrence of group work, if they notice them at all. Research questions: We seek to answer two research questions regarding miscommunication within teams: (1) Can a communication exercise create awareness among team members of the danger of miscommunication? (2) What benefits do team members gain from the exercise? Situating the case: We describe a classroom exercise that relies on an integrative model for improving communication within teams. We also present evidence of the exercise's effectiveness in raising awareness and fostering accommodation and social learning among team members. Our approach is similar to that used in other cases. How this case was studied: We used 13 teams from three classes during the course of a regular semester. A communication exercise we have used for many years was conducted as part of team formation activities early in the semester. Team discussions regarding exercise results formed the basis for team members to analyze their communication during the semester. About the case: A significant variance of understanding among people as to the meaning of several of the focal terms can lead to suboptimal outcomes for any given work the team is tasked to achieve. In this case, we describe a study designed to improve communication among team members and, thus, lessen the likelihood of such a negative outcome. Results: Team members reported better awareness of communication issues and improved team functioning as a result of having completed the exercise. Conclusion: We find that a shared understanding of terminology is an important part of training leaders and managers to help teams reduce common miscommunication problems in the workplace.

Advertisement, IEEE. IEEE Collabratec is a new, integrated online community where IEEE members, researchers, authors, and technology professionals with similar fields of interest can network and collaborate, as well as create and manage content. Featuring a suite of powerful online networking and collaboration tools, IEEE Collabratec allows you to connect according to geographic location, technical interests, or career pursuits. You can also create and share a professional identity that showcases key accomplishments and participate in groups focused around mutual interests, actively learning from and contributing to knowledgeable communities. All in one place! Learn about IEEE Collabratec at ieeecollabratec.org.

Research problem: Web 2.0 applications, such as instant messengers and other social media platforms, are fast becoming ubiquitous in organizations, yet their impact on work performance is poorly understood. Research question: What is the relationship between Web 2.0 use, and work-based communication processes and outcomes in China? Literature review: Literature in the fields of information systems and media and communication research supports the value of Web 2.0 for organizations. However, how Web 2.0 can facilitate the organizational communication process and subsequently improve performance is under-investigated. By adapting and extending the communicative ecology framework and previously published work, we developed and tested a theoretical model to investigate these impacts in the Chinese workplace. Methodology: We conducted a quantitative study using the survey method, with participants randomly selected from a panel database in China. Results and conclusions: We analyzed survey data from 179 organizational employees and found that vertical and horizontal communication contribute significantly to individual and teamwork performance, with high levels of variance explained. In this study, we provide empirical evidence of how Web 2.0 applications enable employees to reach out to collaborators and business partners, thereby boosting individual productivity and team collaboration. The study also highlights the fit between Web 2.0 and the need for organizational horizontal communication in this era of knowledge, information, and creativity. Future researchers should verify the research model in different countries, including local contextual characteristics as either independent variables or moderators.

This study investigates cooperativeness, assertiveness, group satisfaction, leader grade, and leadership negotiation in a collaborative assignment conducted in a small group. Researchers manipulated the assignment of team members who reported on measures of group satisfaction and original scales of assertiveness and cooperativeness. Respondents also responded to open-ended questions regarding active leadership, leadership traits, and leadership negotiation, which resulted in the emergence of multiple themes. Assertiveness, cooperativeness, and group satisfaction were found to predict the grade given to the leader.

This article describes the use of problem forums in undergraduate professional writing courses as a technique for facilitating and sustaining learning from increasingly complex, messy, and wicked problems that are characteristic of 21st-century work. Problem forums are designed to scaffold project team discussions of rhetorical, technical, or collaborative difficulties that have unexpectedly slowed or halted their work. Problem forums are thus intended to facilitate and sustain continual learning on project teams.

In the previous issue of Business and Professional Communication, we focused on flipped classrooms and discovery learning. We continue that broad stream of research with our articles in this issue, most of which engage students in projects designed to facilitate learning in business and professional communication. Implementing projectbased learning can be challenging, and case studies can reveal issues that may be unanticipated in textbooks. Our lead article reports on the role of a commissioned research project in bridging the gap between theory and practice. At the authors’ research site, organizations representing different sectors of the corporate and nonprofit workplace commission teams of students in business and professional communication to act as their communication experts. The specific case discussed in this article is based on a study carried out by a team of five master’s-level students to promote corporate social responsibility in a professional association of a pharmaceutical industry. The authors analyze the student researchers’ perspectives, as well as the practitioners’ view of the collaboration, and the pitfalls involved in helping put theory into practice in a real-world situation. Our second article presents the results of an actual employee program evaluation as a case study of soft skills training at a large hospital. The authors posit four hypotheses, that greater reported willingness to learn will result in both a higher degree of course comprehension and a higher degree of behavioral change and that the method of delivery will affect trainees’ degree of comprehension and degree of behavioral change. The authors conclude that face-to-face or blended instruction is likely to be more effective than a purely online format. The authors of our third article examine the factors needed for success in group assignments. In a study of cooperativeness, assertiveness, group satisfaction, leader grade, and leadership negotiation, the authors find that group satisfaction is positively related to both leader assertiveness and leader cooperativeness. This research emphasizes the importance of the leader’s role to group outcomes and suggests that assertiveness is a critical component to success. 651428 BCQXXX10.1177/2329490616651428Business and Professional Communication QuarterlyKnight editorial2016

This article explores textual curation as a conceptualization of authorship and composition within large information structures that is heavily based on the canon of arrangement. This work is often undertaken through distributed collaboration, thus complicating traditional conceptions of authorial attribution and agency. Central curatorial processes include critical recomposition of prior texts along with the development of small and often invisible textual elements such as architecture, metadata, and strategic links. I offer a grounded definition of textual curation that draws from traditional curatorial fields such as Museum Studies and Library Science as well as Writing Studies’ own subfield of Technical Communication, which focuses heavily on recomposed, collaboratively produced texts. Selected Wikipedia articles serve as case studies for examining live curatorial work in open, collaborative environments.

Geocomposition engages students in writing on the move in order to explore how such writing composes the multiple layers of public places. This article describes a collaborative, location-based composition project designed for students to rhetorically engage a responsive public through locative media: media that work in and through specific sites. View a brief video abstract: Geocomposition in Public Rhetoric and Writing Pedagogy

Writing in a second language, especially using new technologies, is fraught with difficulties for most students. There are two main challenges, firstly, how can students move from their understanding of the mechanical aspects of texts (good sentence structure and appropriate lexis) to deal with issues of how to construct texts that go beyond the basics, for instance drawing upon multiple modes of expression, and secondly, how can students use their knowledge about new technologies to help them create texts? This paper examines the collaborative processes English for Science students go through when constructing a scientific text for a popular audience, here, a digital video scientific documentary. Undergraduate students had to work in groups to write the text for a digital story based on an experiment they had undertaken. As part of the process these students had to prepare a script which was then recorded, either speaking directly to the camera, or as a voice over onto the video to complement their video images. Based on examples from the students’ generated data: Facebook, WhatsApp posts and scripts, we see that the end product was rich and informative. It is maintained that a collaborative approach using new technologies to writing such popular scientific texts engages the students with their work and that, when given the opportunity, they learn from each other as much as from their teacher.

When I first learned of Dave Tell’s project, I expected his book to be dominated by religious exegesis. I suspect I am hardly alone in this assumption. Nowhere is confession a more preeminent and slavish requirement than in religious practice, specifically in the Judeo-Christian idioms that dominate the American psyche, and our blind(ing) faith in religion’s standard of confession affects the public’s consumption of media. Consider American Crime Story (FX) portraying the O.J. Simpson trial, Confirmation (HBO) about the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, Making a Murderer (Netflix), a documentary series on the trials of Steven Avery, or Serial, a podcast series—the fastest to garner 5 million downloads—covering the murder of Hae Min Lee for which Adnan Syed was convicted. The popularity of these shows manifests the ubiquity of what Tell calls “confessional hermeneutics,” the “collaborative but always contested activity of deciding which texts do, and which texts do not, qualify as confessions” (3). In Confessional Crises and Cultural Politics in Twentieth-Century America, Tell outlines various forms of confessional hermeneutics to foreground the cultural significance of confession.The point Tell drives home repeatedly is that confession matters; it is a critical cog in the machinery of American social life. In the twentieth-century, Tell finds that confessional hermeneutics “concretely shaped the public understanding of six intractable issues: sexuality, class, race, violence, religion, and democracy” (4). Understanding confession’s role relative to these six crucial cultural topoi requires “those of us invested in public discourse to understand the confession, not as a stable, ahistorical form, but as a practice informed by competing traditions” (144). Failing to do so risks ignoring the “genre politics” (183) that make confession “a powerful but volatile political resource” (187), an “important, if often overlooked form of cultural intervention” (184). To support this argument, Confessional Crises rehearses six key confessional crises spanning the twentieth-century: Bernarr Macfadden’s 1919 launch and subsequent transformation of True Story; William Huie’s 1956 publication of the confessions of Emmett Till’s murderers; the publication in 1967 of William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner; and the confession controversies sparked by Jimmy Swaggart and Bill Clinton. For Tell, cultural politics trump generic constraints: each case illustrates that “the rhetorical function of a confession is determined more by the political needs of the confessant than by the formal features of the text” (124).Take, for example, chapter one on the subjective sexual moralism in Macfadden’s launch of True Story magazine. As Tell recounts, Macfadden reasoned that the best way to inoculate the public against sexual malaise was by presenting them with the unvarnished truth about sex. For Americans to avoid the sexual pitfalls Macfadden adduced to ignorance and scripted silences around the body, “the American people needed a moral reeducation” on matters of sexuality and “just as insistently that they needed a rhetorical reeducation” (28). Why the rhetorical reeducation? Because Macfadden needed real-life stories to advance his moral-political agenda. Through sidebars and editorials, Macfadden coached readers on how to read the stories he published as authentic accounts of ordinary people. The arrangement was straightforward: the “unvarnished prose guarantee[d] the authenticity of the tales, and the authenticity of the tales guarantee[d] the propagation of moral virtue” (41). Frank testimony about bodily fantasies and functions was Macfadden’s antidote to ignorance about sexual matters.In the 1930s, Tell finds that Macfadden pivoted from sexual politics to class politics, changing the import of confession. This is the story of chapter two. As millions battled the scourge of the depression, True Story began to foreground “a well-remunerated working class, the desires of which True Story perfectly expressed” (47). Why would as staunch a moralist as Macfadden engage in such a mendacity? Herein lies the re-conscription, Tell holds, of confession, except this time with capitalism not moralism as the telos. Macfadden needed to transform his readership into a consumer class so he could sell access to advertisers. Just as he had instructed the public in the appreciation of plain speech, Macfadden directed his rhetorical pedagogy at America’s captains of industry: “he told executives that if they squinted just right, if they learned to read True Story properly, they could see between the lines of his true stories millions of affluent, docile and eager, consumers” (55). Using Macfadden’s example, Tell articulates confession to both sexual and class politics.Or take the controversies about William Styron’s Confessions of Nat Turner, the subject of chapter four, which Tell uses to connect confession to the politics of violence. Two arguments about the reception of Styron’s Confessions form the vectors of this connection. First is that whether one deemed Styron’s book an expression of Turner’s admission turned less on the fidelity of Styron’s content to Turner than it did on the politics of the different respondents. At stake was how one understood the nature of slavery and the status of the African-American within it: “was the American slave a ‘Sambo,’ a happy-go-lucky, bumbling fool, given to petty thievery but fundamentally docile” owing either to racial inferiority (as Ulrich Phillips believed) or to slavery’s brutality (as Stanley Elkins and Styron held), “or was the slave a seething embodiment of resentment, incensed by the brutality of the ruling class and prone to rebellion” as Herbert Aptheker argued? (99). Differences of opinion on these matters framed the contested reception of Confessions. Second is that differences of opinion between White defenders of Styron and his Black critics were based in competing ideologies about “the legibility of violence” (112). For many White reviewers of Confessions, violence was simply beyond understanding. They wondered, “what could have prompted someone to lead a rebellion so violent?” (106). Enter confession: “only confession—an insider’s account—could possibly redress so profound a mystery” (106). “For Styron’s black critics,” however, “Turner’s rebellion was perfectly legible” (112). The formerly colonized and enslaved required no special erudition, no fancy literary conceit, to understand the rebellion. Confessions, to these critics, read instead as Styron’s confession to imbibing “the fantasies of the southern tradition” (115) that sanitized the violence of slavery while exaggerating that of slaves like Turner. Confessional Crises thus associates confession, through a postcolonial hermeneutic, to violence.Readers of AHR will appreciate the theoretical history Tell brings to bear in his analyses of Jimmy Swaggart and Bill Clinton, the subjects of chapters five and six. Yes, argues Tell, Swaggart fashioned, with the aid of the leadership of the Assemblies of God, a confession he and his allies presented as a Christian confession. The imbroglio he found himself in demanded that. Yet despite appearances, Swaggart’s, Tell insists, was no Christian confession. Instead, Swaggart’s apology bore the blueprint of a distinctly modern secular confession. Specifically, “his emphasis on the inadequacy of speech, his devaluation of grammatical sensibilities and logical coherence, and his emphasis on his humanity” (136) constituted Swaggart’s rhetoric as a modern secular confession. To prove this point, Tell contrasts the genealogies of classical-Christian confession (123-4; 129-30) and modern secular confession (130-36). By retracing to Periclean Athens those tenets of classical confession that were eventually appropriated by Christianity, this discussion carefully historicizes confession in religion and politics. But this retracing also exposes the Athenian-Augustinian model of confession Tell endorses to criticisms first raised by feminist and critical race scholars. If Augustine’s Roman Empire and contemporary America attest that confession can function as “a means of reversing the political currents of pridefulness” (130), both societies also evince the limits of that power. What confession, whose confession, could have challenged the pride that drove slavery and genocide in the Roman Empire, or “shock-and-awe,” the “New Jim Crow,” and the FISA court in the American?In chapter six, which focuses on the crisis ignited by the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky scandal, Tell isolates confession’s function in democracy. Re-contextualizing Clinton’s rhetorical performances of 1998 in light of statements Clinton made during the Gennifer Flowers controversy in 1991-92, Tell credits the president with showcasing the ideal of democratic public confession, a “belief that public confession must hold in equipoise the competing needs of contrition and legal argument” (162). Prosecutor Kenneth Star and the many critics of Clinton’s vexatious semantics upheld an established tradition of confession, one in which, “only an unlimited admission of guilt counted as a confession” (162). Confession, the reader learns, influences how the public understands politics.By the end of Confessional Crises, the reader has gathered an expansive vocabulary for understanding the power of confessional practices. But how to assess a project so expansive, so revisionist, and transdisciplinary? Let me end by returning to the beginning. The introduction of Confessional Crises advertises the book as “the first reception history of confession,” (6) acknowledging the influence of Steven Mailloux. This hat-tip points us to Mailloux’s ambitious project for criteria by which to judge Confessional Crises. Since Mailloux explains that “Reception history is rhetorical hermeneutics” (ix), readers can thus pose Mailloux’s famous definition of rhetorical hermeneutics as a question of Confessional Crises: does it use “rhetoric to practice theory by doing history” (ix)? Anyone who reads Confessional Crises will find that in it, Tell fulfills this tripartite obligation elegantly. He relies on discourse, develops fresh ideas about confession, and generates a record of the past.

In rhetoric and composition, much of the research on Black college students of the 1960’s and 1970’s has uncomplicatedly tied these students to basic writing historiography and left under-challenged the representational politics that positioned them as the products of open admissions and marked them as politically militant but underprepared and/or remedial in their literacy practices. Extending our purview beyond open admissions and basic writing, this article applies pressure to these disciplinary trends by turning to the extracurriculum and recovering the political literacies of the student-activists of the Black Liberation Front International (BLFI), a Black student organization at Michigan State University from 1968 to 1975. For Black students such as the BLFI activists, there were nonacademic political spaces that provided them with opportunities to learn and practice literacy for political aims. This article focuses on one of these sites of literacy education—a place the BLFI activists called The People’s House. Drawing upon archival research and oral history, the author recounts how the BLFI activists’ relationship with the Trinidadian intellectual C.L.R. James created the contexts for them to organize reading groups at The People’s House, where they developed a form of critical reading praxis that enhanced their abilities to engage reading as a political, rhetorical, and epistemic act. The collaborative writing the BLFI activists composed at The People’s House is also constructed as a site for translingual production, where they practiced how to use the linguistic and discursive resources they had available to them to attend to the rhetorical and material aspects of writing.

This article merges feminist methods with cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) in order to present a systems-theory method that can account for power and difference. After an explication of Feminist CHAT, the article applies the method to the archives of three women’s clubs in order to analyze their collaborations, theorize collaboration, and illustrate the use of Feminist CHAT. By weaving the stories of these three clubs together with Feminist CHAT, this article mediates two often conflicting contemporary approaches to English studies: those that emphasize objects of discourse and those that emphasize bodies and difference.