Scholars in writing studies have positioned numerous critiques of the tacit myth of Standard English (*SE) and its use as an unquestioned communicative norm. While these critiques reflect the overlap of the field’s translingualism and anti-racist writing assessment movements, they also reveal an empirical need surrounding the writing instructors who must actually grapple with the *SE myth in their teaching and grading practices. Following Asao Inoue’s identification of the *SE myth as a slick eel that remains an assessment problem, I conducted a qualitative study using concept clarification interviews and discourse-based interviews (DBIs) at a large, diverse, four-year university in the U.S. to empirically confront the *SE myth and make the potentially tacit presence of *SE in instructors’ rubrics and grading practices explicit. Based on the results of these interviews, I advocate for a shift from seeing and critiquing *SE to performing Synergistic English Work (SEW) in the context of grading rubrics and assessment policies, making the absent presence of *SE visible, open to disruption, and more actively combatted.

This study surveyed and analyzed feminist methodologies in four composition journals across ten years. Our findings offer a number of important checks upon methodological and epistemological conversations in composition research, particularly how the methods we choose demonstrate our attention to social justice, the materialities of research practice, and the situatedness of knowledge claims.

Crossing disciplinary boundaries is a common practice for today’s technical writer. The author offers an insightful look at how neurobiological and multimodal rhetorical concepts can inform instructional document design to improve learning. This book addresses an interdisciplinary audience of academic and industry professionals involved in employee training or instructional training material design. The goal here is to answer the question, “How does one learn new technical concepts?. To answer this, the book bridges theoretical concepts in the seemingly dissimilar fields of cognitive psychology, neurobiology, and rhetoric. While there is still much to be discussed within this vast interdisciplinary conversation, the author's synthesis and his resulting analysis model hold workplace and pedagogical value by providing an entry point through a shared goal: cognitive gain through effective technical instructional materials.