Abstract This article addresses a pervasive but undertheorized literacy practice: ghostwriting. Drawing on a five-year interview study with undergraduate students, I describe the many ghostwriting tasks that participants were asked to perform for their co-op jobs and how they perceived those tasks. Overall, students were bewildered by ghostwriting and found it very different from, and in some ways at odds with, their academic writing. Given the ubiquity of ghostwriting and the likelihood that much of it will be offloaded to artificial intelligence in coming years, I call for and begin to outline a critical pedagogical approach to ghostwriting grounded in critical language awareness.

Preview this article: What Need Not Be Said: Transnational Policy Regimes and England's Technical Proficiency in Writing Policy, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/86/4/collegeenglish864326-1.gif

Drawing on a five-year study of 20 student writers, this study advances a concept related to but distinct from writing transfer. Integration contextualizes and complicates transfer episodes and encourages us to take a long view of writing development. Like transfer, integration can be facilitated by connectionsand disconnectionswriters perceive between writing contexts.

This article offers a fuller account than we currently have of the complex, uneasy relationship between behaviorism and writing studies in order both to complicate our disciplinary historiography and to encourage writing scholars, teachers, and program administrators to articulate productive and unproductive understandings of writing behaviors.

Writing Assessment in the 21st Century: Essays in Honor of Edward M. White Norbert Elliot and Les Perelman, eds. Race and Writing Assessment Asao B. Inoue and Mya Poe, eds. Writing Assessment and the Revolution in Digital Texts and Technologies Michael R. Neal Digital Writing: Assessment and Evaluation Heidi A. McKee and Danielle Nicole DeVoss, eds.

Although outcomes assessment (OA) has become “common sense” in higher education, this article shows that the concept of outcomes tends to limit and compromise teaching and learning while serving the interests of institutional management. By contrast, the pragmatic concept of consequences tends to expand our view of teaching and learning, and contests the technical rationality of the managerial university. Though I challenge outcomes assessment, I recognize that OA is the coin of the educational realm. Therefore, this article outlines ways to frame and use educational aims to minimize the negative tendencies of outcomes assessment and to maximize the positive tendencies of “consequential assessment.”

I use Burkean analysis to show how neoliberalism undermines faculty assessment expertise and underwrites testing industry expertise in the current assessment scene. Contending that we cannot extricate ourselves from our limited agency in this scene until we abandon the familiar “stakeholder” theory of power, I propose a rewriting of the assessment scene that asserts faculty and student agency and leadership for writing assessment.

In facing policymakers who are pressuring us for objective assessment of our programs, we should not assume that a narrow set of traditional scientific methods and conventions will guarantee acceptance of our knowledge claims. Nor should we assume that our methods and methodologies that fall outside those tight boundaries will be unfairly treated. Rather, we need to have at our disposal the full range of what we know and how we know it as we engage with such policymakers, who—like the rest of us—are sometimes moved in mysterious ways.

Research Article| October 01 2003 Graduate Education As Education: The Pedagogical Arts of Institutional Critique Virginia Crisco; Virginia Crisco Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Chris W. Gallagher; Chris W. Gallagher Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Deborah Minter; Deborah Minter Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Katie Hupp Stahlnecker; Katie Hupp Stahlnecker Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google John Talbird John Talbird Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2003) 3 (3): 359–376. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3-3-359 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Virginia Crisco, Chris W. Gallagher, Deborah Minter, Katie Hupp Stahlnecker, John Talbird; Graduate Education As Education: The Pedagogical Arts of Institutional Critique. Pedagogy 1 October 2003; 3 (3): 359–376. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-3-3-359 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. © 2003 Duke University Press2003 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Preview this article: REVIEW: Re-modeling English Studies, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/63/6/collegeenglish1233-1.gif