We enter this review as collaborators from the same institution, a four-year medium-sized private university. Additionally, some of us bring our collective experiences as teachers from small, liberal arts colleges, community colleges, and large research universities across the U.S. Our levels of teaching experience range from first-year PhD students to an associate professor, with scholarly interests from Renaissance literature to new media theory.

research interests include disability rhetoric and the role of exigency in the teaching of writing. Her dissertation explores how information about students' beliefs

Writing faculty, tutors, and librarians at West Virginia University took a team-approach to teaching research, reading, and writing as intertwined processes. This collaborative project encouraged each member of the team to re-examine professional and disciplinary boundaries, and resulted in new assignments and activities that successfully engage students in researched writing.

This essay examines the disappearance of the study of style from rhetoric’s disciplinary research agenda and from contemporary writing classrooms, linking the decline of disciplinary interest in style to contemporary writing handbooks, which tend to treat style in reductive ways. Also pointing out the disappearance of “sentence-based” style rhetorics, the essay argues for a disciplinary re-commitment to the study and teaching of style, one of the original canons of classical rhetoric. The essay ends with several pedagogical examples of how to re-introduce style to writing classroom, as well as an invitation to other scholars to share their approaches to teaching writing style.

This article discusses the rise of conservation writing as a new field of technical communication, and it offers pedagogical strategies for teaching conservation writing and building curricula. Conservation writing is an umbrella term for a range of writing about ecology, biology, the outdoors, and environmental policies and ethics. It places the natural world at the center of readers' attention, often viewing sustainability as a core value. A course or curriculum in this kind of writing would likely need to help students master a variety of genres, while providing a working knowledge in environmental law, ethics, and politics.

Teaching rhetorical production in a digital age calls for us to rethink our discipline’s current distaste for writing mechanics. Yet, the digital mechanics of writing are much broader than grammatical concerns. They include production tools that allow for the invention and circulation of audio, visual, and Multigenre writing.

Reviewed: Changing the Way We Teach: Writing and Resistance in the Training of Teaching Assistants Sally Barr Ebest Don’t Call It That: The Composition Practicum Sidney I. Dobrin, editor Concepts in Composition: Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Writing Irene Clark, with Betty Bamberg, Darsie Bowden, John R. Edlund, Lisa Gerrard, Sharon Klein, Julie Neff Lippman, and James D. Williams

Teachers who have participated in Summer Institutes of the National Writing Project (NWP) have often claimed “it changed my life.” What do teachers mean when they say this? What does it mean to “transform” in a professional development setting, and what might researchers and professional development providers gain from an understanding of teacher transformation as a kind of teacher learning?

Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English Richard Beach, Martha Bigelow, Martine Braaksma, Deborah Dillon, Jessie Dockter, Lee Galda, Lori Helman, Tanja Janssen, Karen Jorgensen, Julie Kalnin, Lauren Liang, Bic Ngo, David O’Brien, Mistilina Sato, and Cassandra Scharber; Richard Beach et al. reviews important research publications in the teaching of English.

This article explores similarities in literacy learning across various life-span stages and considers what actions must be taken to improve literacy attainment and achievement, whether the delivery site is prekindergarten, elementary, secondary, adult, family, workplace, volunteer, or community literacy. The emphasis here is on what it takes to successfully teach individuals to read and write well separate from any adjustments that must be made for context or learner characteristics. Research is examined for five essential variables in literacy learning, including (1) amount of teaching; (2) content of instruction; (3) quality of instruction; (4) student motivation; and (5) alignment and support.

The first-year writing program at Kennesaw State University has found its in-house conference (IHC) to be an important venue for faculty development. Based on the assumption that teachers actually know what they are doing, the IHC invites teachers of all ranks to propose a presentation on a selected topic and then to present those papers at conference sessions that other teachers attend. The IHC invites part-time faculty into the community, generates intellectual conversation about teaching across the lines of rank and hierarchy, allows the conversation to continue long after the conference since participants can see each other daily, and invites reflection on and modification of teaching. The success of the IHC serves as a reminder that some faculty development should be discipline-specific and local. In addition, the IHC asks teachers of writing to actually write themselves and allows them the opportunity for scholarship. The professional development that the IHC offers is not, however, limited to a writing program but can be used to stimulate intellectual engagement across the English department and, beyond that, to other departments across the university.

The books under review here envision models of professional development not as episodes of developing skills or training faculty to conform to changing laws, rules, and pet projects of administrators, but rather as collaborative processes of education and reflection that encourage faculty to rethink their practices. They draw on research in composition theory and pedagogy, suggesting that more effective learning takes place when teachers trust learners to consider their own need for knowledge, invite learners to devise variations and applications of received knowledge, and resist keeping things simple to be sure they are correct. Applying different focuses, these books consider how to put teacher-learners at the center of the process of their own professional development. Jeffrey Jablonski argues that the expertise developed in composition studies needs to be recognized and respected in initiatives to implement Cross-Curricular Literacy programs. The writers of The Everyday Writing Center consider how, in the midst of increased professionalization, to maintain the serendipitous—even carnivalesque, at times—learning and teaching that the intimate and nonhierarchical space of a writing center can foster. And the collective wisdom in The Writing Center Director's Resource Book surveys the current state of writing center theory and practice, providing a reflective guide for developing the expertise of writing center administrators, who are (or could be) leaders in campus faculty development efforts.

The author considers faculty development and its potential relationship to the ethos of collaborative practice modeled both by critical (Freirean) pedagogy and by interdisciplinary research. As a primary concern for any academic administrator, faculty development is not only a teaching moment but also an opportunity for reciprocal exchange, learning, and knowledge production, allowing participants to challenge the received wisdom of their fields and to come to a more rhetorical understanding of their identities. The collaborative construction of new knowledge and an emerging understanding of identities are examined in the context of two professional development and administrative contexts: the assessment by faculty of the writing of entering, first-year students and a collegewide, first-year experience (learning-community) initiative.

This article considers why, in the wake of Ernest Boyer's work, the promise of a transformation of university teaching has not been broadly realized and what that implies for faculty development projects. It discusses the assumptions that place the professional development of teaching outside of disciplinary boundaries, both literally and figuratively, and considers the consequences of that placement. It then turns to the scholarship of teaching and learning, considering what it offers to and implies about the disciplinary practices it proposes to transform. In response to this examination, the essay proposes that the Boyer Report attempted to alter teaching by arguing that teachers and the systems that support them needed to change, an argument that failed to convince college faculty to change. The article concludes with the proposal that the real exigence facing college faculty is that the way students raised in a culture saturated in electronic media learn is dramatically different than the way people learned a generation ago. That shift in learning is the exigence that requires a transformation of teaching.

This essay explores the underlying dynamics that inform postsecondary English teacher development efforts. In particular, it argues for a more expansive understanding of “context” in order to emphasize the inevitability of conflict and the productive potential of surfacing the meaningful contextual differences of our teaching lives. Such differences include varying philosophies of teaching and learning, competing motivations and expectations for participation in teacher development, and differing institutional teaching contexts where very different values might inhere. The essay offers strategies for engaging such differences with a view toward discerning collective (as well as individual) commitments. Such an orientation toward teacher development is crucial in the current climate, where plans for reform increasingly locate the work of remaking higher education outside of postsecondary classrooms. The kind of postsecondary teacher development work this essay calls for, then, seeks to support teachers' growth as agents of educational change.

This essay describes and critiques the creation and evolution of Teaching Circles, small groups of teachers meeting regularly to discuss curriculum and pedagogy, as a vehicle for teacher development in the composition program at the University of Miami. Included in the essay are comments from several of the full-time lecturers who participated in these discussion groups as both members and leaders. The essay makes visible the competing tensions inherent in fostering professional development through such a structure, especially the complications involved in turning lecturers into teacher educators as they take on responsibility for mentoring beginning teachers. The essay and the comments from the lecturers note the challenges inherent in making such an institutional structure productive over time and suggest that sustained critical reflection, willingness to revise, and attention to the scholarship of teaching teachers are important components of keeping any structure of professional development relevant.

It has become increasingly clear that U.S. faculty cannot afford to remain insular about global issues in teaching and the forces that are shaping them. At the same time, our desire to address or resist those issues, to join in or to find alternatives, needs to be contextualized. The three edited collections reviewed here address globalization of higher education in Australia, writing instruction in higher education in the United Kingdom, and interdisciplinary collaboration in U.S. higher education. The three bring different perspectives to current U.S. discussions of internationalization and interdisciplinary work in higher education and allow us to better understand issues in other cultures and disciplines while critically examining our own through new lenses.

This article explores, through the lens of a WAC faculty developer, how it is difficult to maintain disciplinary neutrality when developing any program; both teaching and learning can easily become codified through the lens of one person, field, or group. By using the work of, among others, Krista Ratcliffe, Mikhail Bakhtin, and David Bartholomae, I make a case for working differently with stakeholders: collaborating within a discipline and including students in faculty development plansas both learners and mentors. If we mutually examine our definitions (“teaching,” “learning,” “writing,” “students”) and engage in rhetorical and reflective listening, we can move away from a model of teaching as rules, templates, and regulations; we can begin to engage our own assumptions along with those of our students, changing together the very definitions that constrain the evolution of our own mutual development.

This overview of resources for faculty development initiatives in Englishstudies proposes a specific framework and sequence for faculty development work and identifies and annotates key resources. It proposes that the sequence for should take place within the theoretical framework of the learning paradigm, introduces faculty to the science of learning and teaching for significant learning, engages faculty in the scholarship of teaching and learning, and focuses on ways to create and maintain communities of practice and knowledge. Work on this overview initiated the development of an interactive Web-based clearinghouse devoted to the ongoing gathering and sharing of faculty development resources.

This research article reports the results of an online survey distributed among technical writing instructors in 2006. The survey aimed to examine how we teach intercultural communication in basic technical writing courses: our current practices and methods. The article discusses three major challenges that instructors may face when teaching about intercultural communication. These challenges concern teacher preparation, time and proposed goals and objectives, and teaching materials and methods. This article provides some suggestions for addressing the challenges and enriching a technical writing curriculum.

Although considerable previous research has focused on Chinese students' expectations and experiences while studying in English-speaking cultures, little research to date has focused on how the instructor's cultural background affects the learning process within a managerial communication classroom Using qualitative and quantitative approaches, this exploratory case study involves two U.S. instructors teaching a managerial communication course to 106 Chinese students in Hong Kong. The findings from this study provide implications for managerial communication pedagogy and further research.

The authors' goal was to model the role played by the relationship between a writing teacher and her students in the feedback and revision cycle they experienced in an English-as-a-foreign-language context. Participants included a nonnative teacher of English and 14 students enrolled in her English writing class in a Korean university. Data came from formal, informal, and text-based interviews; semester-long classroom observations; and students' drafts with teacher comments. Findings showed that caring was enacted in complex and reciprocal ways, influenced by interwoven factors from the greater society, the course, the teacher, and the student. Students' level of trust in the teacher's English ability, teaching practices, and written feedback, as much as the teacher's trust in particular students based on how they revised their drafts, played a great role in the development of a caring relationship between them.

The study uses Foucault's framework of governmentality to understand the impact of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) on teachers' writing instruction and attitudes toward writing in high- and low-income schools. Using interviews and observations of 18 teachers, the study identified four themes: emphasis on testing, curricular effects, awareness of lower-achieving students, and concerns for English language learners. While teachers shared concerns in those areas, there were differences in how teachers from high- and low-income schools experienced the impact of NCLB on their writing instruction. The study suggests that NCLB has affected teacher morale as well as the nature and amount of writing instruction, but that school contexts figure into teachers' instruction. The example of one teacher from a low-income school demonstrates the potential for teachers to resist the coercive aspects of NCLB through their writing instruction.

This paper highlights the largely unacknowledged theoretical and pedagogical contributions of Austin Phelps, the accomplished nineteenth-century preacher and teacher of rhetoric, in two ways: First, it demonstrates that Phelps's methods of instruction depart from the documented trends in rhetorical education at American colleges during the mid-nineteenth century in that he endeavors to teach the sermon as a form of civic engagement. Second, it shows how Phelps's discussions of the unconscious in the process of composing and his insights into the role of emotion in the writing process anticipate aspects of the process movement in Composition Studies.

Pedagogical materials from the early twentieth-century Americanization movement functioned rhetorically as responses to public discourse, which was highly critical of immigrants' language practices. In teachers' journals and language textbooks, educators engaged in a dialogue with the public, seeking to establish themselves as proponents of social progress and cultural stability. They framed English instruction as a tool for a refashioning of the nation and embraced monolingualism as a unifying force within that nation. As educators sought to engage native-born Americans and immigrants alike in the creation of this ideal nation, assumptions about national identity became embedded into pedagogical practices.

Pedagogical and scholarly discussions of the process of usability tend to focus more on methods than on practices, or specific, tactical performances of and adjustments to these methods. Yet such practices shape students' learning and determine the success of their usability efforts. A teacher research study tracking students' understanding and enactment of usability and user-centered design over the course of a service-learning project illustrates the importance of practice-level struggles—and the thoughtful preparation for and facilitation of these struggles—to the development of students' flexible intelligence (metis) and rhetorical translation skills. © 2008 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

As is true for engineering communication programs nationwide, at MIT curricular and pedagogical reforms have been driven by changes in the kinds of problems that engineers solve and the associated skill sets that engineers must now have in communication and teamwork. This article presents three case studies from communication-intensive classes at MIT that intend to help students develop the advanced communication skills required of professional engineers today. Highlighting classes in biological engineering, aeronautics/astronautics engineering, and biomedical engineering, we explore the following questions: What does it mean for educational practice if professional communication competencies and tasks are the goals? How can students and technical faculty best create the conditions for students to learn to be skilled team members? How can engineering students move from mere display of data to making skilled visual arguments based on those data? The importance of helping students meet the target competencies of professional practice, of teaching effective teamwork and collaboration, and of teaching students to understand and argue with visual data are recognized as widespread needs, and these case studies attest to the possibilities and challenges in meeting those needs.

The responsibility of a writing teacher is, finally, to teach his or her students to pay attention—to their own lives and to the world in which they live.

“When Readers Disagree”, Kip Strasma, Review Editor; “Teaching Writing with Latino/a Students: Lessons Learned at Hispanic-Serving Institutions” by Cristina Kirklighter, Diana Cardenas, and Susan Wolff Murphy, Reviewed by Kip Strasma; “Engaging Grammar: Practical Advice for Real Classrooms” by Amy Benjamin with Tom Oliva, Reviewed by Kimme Nuckles; “Educating English Language Learners: A Synthesis of Research Evidence” by Fred Genesee, Kathryn Lindholm-Leary, William M. Saunders, and Donna Christian, Reviewed by Mercè Pujol.

C. D. Albin is professor of English at Missouri State University–West Plains and has contributed poems to several journals, including Big Muddy, Cape Rock, and Teaching English in the Two-Year College.

Author Sue Monk Kidd, who is white, employs stereotypes of African Americans and problematically appropriates features of black writing in her novel “The Secret Life of Bees”. Nevertheless, this book is worth teaching, not only because it has acquired much cultural capital but also because it offers students a way to examine relationships between whites and blacks in American literature and culture.

The author calls for incorporating into English classes what he calls museum-based pedagogy, arguing that it enables the teaching of multiple literacies: verbal, visual, technological, social, and critical. In part, this pedagogy consists of classroom instruction that enables students to understand the persuasive nature of museum displays—the ways in which digital technology mediates, powerful interests influence, social agents negotiate, and multimodal texts communicate meaning.

Writing about Writing as the Heart of a Writing Studies Approach to FYC: Response to Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle, “Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions” and to Libby Miles et al., “Thinking Vertically” by Barbara Bird; “Response to Miles et al.” by Douglas Downs; “Continuing the Dialogue: Follow-Up Comments on “Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions”” by Elizabeth Wardle.

Trickster tales, with their teachings on how to behave in the world, are a powerful means for transmitting social knowledge and cultural mores to children. In this study we compared two approaches to teaching fourth-grade students to write trickster tales. Although both instructional methods incorporated aspects of the writing process approach, only the developmentally based method took into account students’ expected developmental growth patterns in narrative composition.

Kenneth Burke claimed in 1952 that he viewed his rhetorical theory and critical method as a "Bennington Project," a sign that he attributed a measure of his intellectual success to teaching at pragmatist-inspired Bennington College. Studying Burke's teaching at Bennington can help scholars to better understand his theory and method because Burke taught undergraduates his own critical reading practices, ones that he believed heightened students' awareness of terministic screens and deepened their appreciation for the consequences of human symbol-use. Burke's teaching practices and his comments on student essays reveal that he taught indexing and charting to his undergraduates because he believed everyone can and should use them throughout their lives to examine—and, when necessary, revise—the often unexpressed assumptions that propel so much human activity toward competition and, ultimately, physical and social destruction.

To teach students how to write for the workplace and other professional contexts, technical writing teachers often assign writing tasks that reflect real-life communication contexts, a teaching approach that is grounded in the field's contextualized understanding of genre. This article argues to fully embrace contextualized literacy and better teach workplace writing, technical writing teachers also need to contextualize how they assess student writing. To this end, this article examines some of workplaces' best assessment practices and critically integrates them into an introductory technical writing classroom through a method called student-centered assessment instruments. This method engages students, as workplaces engage employees, in the assessment process to identify local requirements for writing tasks. Aligned with theory and practice, this method is not only an effective classroom assessment method, but becomes an integrated part of students' genre-learning process within and beyond the classroom.

Teaching postcolonial literature to American college students involves taking them through a dialectical process of thinking about identification. In the first stage, students are encouraged to note similarities between their own lives and those of the work’s characters. With the second step, students examine how the work’s cultural and historical context makes the characters different from them in key ways. Finally, students use the differences that they have found in order to reflect on aspects of their own situations from a new angle. The author demonstrates this process through a discussion of her experiences teaching Tsitsi Dangarembga’s 1988 novel Nervous Conditions.

Traditionally, we English faculty have warned our students against simply identifying with a literary work’s characters. For us, such attachments constitute “reading badly.” But we engage in identifications, too, including ones with the work’s author. A consideration of critical responses to “Benito Cereno” and Uncle Tom’s Cabin enables us to see how our own identifications often operate. In our teaching of reading, we should openly acknowledge our own commitments and help our students negotiate them.

This article describes the Student Tutor Education Program (STEP) at Westchester Community College, which identifies and recruits potential future college English teachers at the community college level while they serve as peer writing tutors, with benefits to the entire college community as well as the teaching profession in general.

This final essay in the series evaluates TYCA’s achievements since its inception, in particular its research and scholarship agenda.

This article explores a third-grade teacher’s use of critical writing pedagogy to encourage students’ exploration of issues that were important in their lives from personal as well as social perspectives.

Troilus and Criseyde is a work of magnificent scope and intimidating breadth. A strategy that I have found effective for addressing the potentially overwhelming pedagogical task of teaching this masterpiece is to ask students to analyze the relationships between genre and character. Through this process, I encourage students to engage in vectored analysis, which I describe as the examination of a text from at least two converging yet separate perspectives. Encouraging students to examine literature from complementary and vectoring perspectives enables them to make the cognitive leap from a static analysis of one issue to a more vibrant exploration of textual interplay. Vectored analysis provides a pedagogical foundation for students of all abilities to approach multigeneric texts and to reach deeper insights about them. In this essay, I demonstrate this approach with Chaucer's Troilus and Criseyde, but it could be readily reformulated for a range of multigeneric texts.

After creating a taxonomy of classroom approaches to the teaching of creative writing, the authors discuss a current practice they have employed, the writing community. The authors detail its success, place it within current pedagogical research into small-group and team-based learning, and suggest possible applications to allied fields.