Review Article| October 01 2015 Crisis? What Crisis? Defending the Humanities—and Literary Study The Humanities “Crisis” and the Future of Literary Studies. By Jay, Paul. New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2014. Deborah H. Holdstein Deborah H. Holdstein Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2015) 15 (3): 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2917217 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Permissions Search Site Citation Deborah H. Holdstein; Crisis? What Crisis? Defending the Humanities—and Literary Study. Pedagogy 1 October 2015; 15 (3): 577–585. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2917217 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2015 by Duke University Press2015 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal Issue Section: Reviews You do not currently have access to this content.

Holdstein examines the threads that connect three seemingly disparate books in composition studies: Agents of Integration: Understanding Transfer as a Rhetorical Act by Rebecca S. Nowacek, The Materiality of Language: Gender, Politics, and the University by David Bleich, and The Promise of Reason: Studies in The New Rhetoric, edited by John T. Gage.

In this article, Deborah Holdstein exhorts scholars of rhetoric and composition to break new ground by searching for absences — missing topics, little-known but influential scholars, alternative canons — that would enhance the work in the field. Noting that certain topics or scholarly movements take root as original scholarship when in fact others had earlier tilled that scholarly ground, Holdstein uses the specific examples of Wallace W. Douglas and Jewish rhetoric to suggest that there is unique work yet to be done. Holdstein's perspective is shaped by her five-year term as editor of College Composition and Communication and her concern about derivative scholarship rather than work that truly challenges our assumptions.

The editor introduces this issue, the last of her editorial term.

Deborah Holdstein introduces the September issue.

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/60/3/collegecompositionandcommunication6966-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/60/2/collegecompositionandcommunication6866-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/60/1/collegecompositionandcommunication6749-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/59/4/collegecompositionandcommunication6671-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/59/3/collegecompositionandcommunication6402-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/59/2/collegecompositionandcommunication6390-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/57/3/collegecompositionandcommunication5047-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/57/1/collegecompositionandcommunication4009-1.gif

Preview this article: CCC Guidelines for Writers, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/56/4/collegecompositionandcommunication4828-1.gif

Preview this article: From the Editor - CCC, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/56/4/collegecompositionandcommunication4821-1.gif

Research Article| January 01 2001 “Writing Across the Curriculum” and the Paradoxes of Institutional Initiatives Deborah H. Holdstein Deborah H. Holdstein Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Pedagogy (2001) 1 (1): 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1-1-37 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter Email Permissions Search Site Citation Deborah H. Holdstein; “Writing Across the Curriculum” and the Paradoxes of Institutional Initiatives. Pedagogy 1 January 2001; 1 (1): 37–52. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1-1-37 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search nav search search input Search input auto suggest search filter Books & JournalsAll JournalsPedagogy Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. © 2001 Duke University Press2001 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Preview this article: Review: Technology, Utility, and Amnesia, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/57/5/collegeenglish9116-1.gif

A review of recent research in the field of technical writing and communication indicated that although the methodologies employed were sound, they were not fully articulated. An attempt to use a double-blind research design in the writing classroom by dividing the students into competing teams that reviewed each other's work led to some interesting reactions by the students as well as to some the need to introduce more open-ended assignments in our classrooms. Asking our students to come up with competing solutions to the same problem and requiring them to design means of testing their effectiveness can develop their abilities in critical thinking and group dynamics. At the same time this approach will allow teachers to pursue their own research on various problems in technical communication. The result is a unit which has pedagogical effectiveness and suggests new directions for writing research.