While the IMRAD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) format is common in scientific writing, it may not currently be as ubiquitous as often thought. We undertook a systematic, corpus-based study of primary section headings in research articles across a range of STEM disciplines to investigate adherence to the IMRAD structure in relation to type of study (computational, empirical, or theoretical) and field. We identified four categories of structure: IMRAD, IMRAD+ (IMRAD with additional sections and/or different order), Nested IMRAD (multi-part studies), and Non-IMRAD. Papers in biology mainly used an IMRAD format, while less than half in engineering or social sciences did so. While empirical papers tended to use IMRAD formats, most computational papers did not. Thus, our findings show that IMRAD is a common but not universal structure for contemporary scientific writing. Awareness of these differences should encourage teachers of scientific and technical writing and scholars of writing studies to pay closer attention to the actual structural forms used in different STEM disciplines and with different methodological types of research studies.

Featuring narrative argument in Jewish dissent for Palestinians rights, this article examines identity reconstitution and the attunement to being in relationship with the foreign other. The author promotes a critical rhetoric of first-person narrative for the attunement of identity as an ethical practice in relation to alterity. This rhetoric is exemplified in the work of Sara Roy, Jewish American dissenter, and scholar, who speaks out in support of Palestinian rights as a child of Holocaust survivors. In the process of speaking out, Roy reinvents Jewish self-understanding as an alternative to Zionist identity formations.

Against the backdrop of the passionate and conflicting assessments of Jacques Derrida that followed his 2004 death, this article reviews rhetoric and composition’s scholarly appropriation of deconstruction during the 1980s and early 1990s. Contending that the field primarily used deconstruction in the service of refutation, this article positions deconstruction as a style of inheritance that could allow for a more productive encounter with theory.

Abstract I identify three modern approaches used to theorize epideictic rhetoric and suggest that each approach has difficulty dealing with the category of presence assigned to the genre by Aristotle. Drawing on Thucydides and, through him, Pericles' funeral oration, I suggest that Jacques Derrida's funeral speeches provide a way of rethinking the epideictic genre's presence as rhetorical ethics. More specifically, I argue that the function of presence in epideictic rhetoric is to provide an ethical interruption, and that Derrida, as one of our most accomplished funeral orators, helps us clarify the category of presence as it is described in Aristotle's and Thucydides' discussions of epideictic oratory.

Contends that service learning--community service linked to academic courses--adds a valuable experiential dimension to composition classes. Describes service learning at Raritan Valley Community College where in composition it fits as an optional alternative for the research paper assignment that is the culminating course project. Discusses how projects are developed and implemented.

An Unquiet Pedagogy argues for a new approach to teaching English in the high school and college classroom, one that reconceives the relationship of literacy and the learner. The title is taken from an essay by Paulo Freire in his book with Donaldo Macedo entitled Literacy: Reading the Word and the World. Like Freire, the authors believe that pedagogy must be critical -- that it must examine the assumptions that teachers and students bring to any educational enterprise, that it must take into account the contexts of learners' lives, and that it must question, rather than quietly accept, existing practices. Voices of beginning and experienced teachers are heard often in the book, exploring how such an unquiet pedagogy might come to be. The authors examine the experiences of these teachers, as well as their own, showing how the classroom can become a place of inquiry for both teachers and students and how theory and research that provide an integrated perspective on language, literacy, and culture must inform teaching practice. Their aim is to transform the English classroom into a place where the imagination becomes central and where learners construct knowledge in the development of real literacy.

Preview this article: Town Meetings: A Strategy for Including Speaking in a Writing Classroom, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/44/1/collegecompositioncommunication8848-1.gif

Introduction The Emotions of Established Writers English Education, Linguistic Thought, and the Cognitive Model of Writing The Psychology of Emotion Operational Framework for the Inquiry The Research Program Study 1: College Writers Study 2: Advanced Expository Writers Study 3: Professional Writers Study 4: English Teachers Study 5: Student Poets Conclusion Bibliography Index

Preview this article: Comment and Response, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/52/1/collegeenglish9684-1.gif

Preview this article: Comment and Response, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/50/7/collegeenglish11369-1.gif

Preview this article: Modeling a Writer's Identity: Reading and Imitation in the Writing Classroom, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/39/1/collegecompositionandcommunication11169-1.gif

(especially the reading of literature) has often been justified in the writing classroom because reading gives students something to imitate (see, for example, Miller's Composition and Decomposition and Comley and Scholes's Literature, Composition, and the Structure of English). The text, it is argued, provides a model of effective writing which students can copy, and the process of reading critically, practiced on literature, can become a model of how writers should behave in reading their own work. is thus seen as useful because it models both forms and processes for writers to imitate. But is this kind of imitation how writers really learn to write? Or does imitation in learning actually work some other way? In this article, I'll suggest an alternative understanding of imitation and reading in the writing classroom, and I'll exemplify this alternative using material from a semester-long participant-observation study of a freshman Composition and Reading course. The alternative runs as follows: when a student (or any writer) successfully learns something about writing by imitation, it is by imitating another person, and not a text or a process. Writers learn to write by imitating other writers, by trying to act like writers they respect. The forms, the processes, the texts

Why is it that students seem to improve their texts so often, and desire to improve them more, when they're given nondirective feedback? Why do teacherless writing groups (where the writer gets conflicting responses from readers instead of teacherly direction) lead to more writing? How can Donald Murray (Writer 173) claim to get effective revision from writers in conferences lasting only five minutes? Stereotype of a Donald Murray conference:

Preview this article: Underlife and Writing Instruction, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/38/2/collegecompositionandcommunication11201-1.gif