RockDenali

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any programs that "do" history of rhetoric. Maybe some other posters can point you in a better direction than I. From what I've seen, each program will have one specialist in that subject; it's just a matter of finding a scholar you like. For example, Edward Schiappa is in Minnesota's Communication Studies Department. In no way is that department a "history of rhet" department, but Schiappa is a leading authority on the Sophists. Susan Jarratt, who has done much lauded work on the Sophists (though I disagree with a lot of what she says), is at UC Irvine, but obviously Irvine isn't "known" for Sophistic studies! So I think it's going to come down (as it always does, eh?!) to an individual with whom you want to work. If you're interested in medieval or Renaissance rhetorics, check out Catholic schools. Walter Ong, S.J., did great work in that arena at St. Louis U, and there may be people there doing similar work.

Hey Grifter. I think I snabbed your RCTE spot They emailed me yesterday with a fully-funded offer . . . about 4 weeks after I accepted at Syracuse. Oh well. I'll sleep on it for a few days . . . I'd look like a total ass backing out of Syracuse at this point. Have fun studying with Gage! In the Arresting Eye is still one of my favorite books on rhetoric and poetics.

I'd put Sedaris somewhere in the "non-fiction" category. He's definitely not whom I had in mind when I warned against literature. But you're right: some students will always balk regardless of the readings. Also, as far as readings go, I had decent success telling students, for on assignment, to find texts related to their major or intended major, then asking them to do presentations about their field to the class, a non-specialist audience: a pseudo tech writing assignment. It worked okay, but it definitely precluded any bitching about readings.

If the MA situation is anything like the PhD situation, then it's a money issue. They're probably waiting for Arizona's state legislature to pass a damn budget or something. Arizona typically accepts 15 incoming PhD students. This year, they are only admitting half-a-dozen or so. I was one of the 15 "admitted," but they emailed me several weeks ago saying they are waiting for funding to finalize the admission. I've emailed several times for updates . . . nada. My guess is that they're too embarrased or frustrated to admit that, no, they can't accept as many as they would like this year because the State of Arizona is going bankrupt. Jump the public ship, my friends. Go private!

Oh, and don't introduce too much (or, ideally, any) literature. This will just alienate half of your students. Use non-fiction, business writing, technical writing, scientific articles, public documents, political tracts, et cetera.

They Say/I Say is awesome. Student's Book of College English is great for grammar and basic organizational skills. If you want to challenge your students, check out Corbett's Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student. It would probably need to be supplemented with newer readings, but it's a great resource for teaching writing the way the ancient Greeks and Romans taught public speaking and debate. I used it for a year, with good feedback. Good luck!

Yes. Great book. Wonderful discussions of the cultural and ethical dimensions of rhetoric. My favorite word comes from here: rhetrickery!

Yep! Grammar. Description of syntax. Labelling language, written and spoken. Discourse analysis. All that. One of the most basic ways to quantify writing is through its grammar. For example, when departments decide whether to place students into ESL or "foundational" (i.e., remdial) writing classes, they read student essays and look for "ESL markers," which are syntactic mistakes that no native speaker would make. It's also much easier to discuss a piece of writing if you can say "this participial phrase should begin the sentence so that it modifies the proper noun" rather than "move this thing here because it sounds better." Mind, some programs are not heavy on methodology. However, most programs will have at least one professor who stresses it. And it's great to hear that you're coming from a science background. That will be very beneficial. Most of us come from an English or writing background and are trying to catch up on our technical and science skills!

I definitely agree with the post above. Purdue, Illinois-UC, Syracuse, Wisconsin-Madison, and Penn State would be in most people's top 5. If you want to get into technical writing, also add University of Minnesota, NC State, and Iowa State. Louisville has a good program, too, and one hell of a stipend. Most rhet/comp programs have stellar placement. Fewer PhDs, higher demand. Now, many PhD programs require an MA in rhet/comp before you apply. It really doesn't matter where you get the MA. While visiting this year, I met people with MAs from regional state schools and people with MAs from highly ranked national universities. For historical perspective, read anything you can by Kenneth Burke and Richard Weaver, who were writing about writing when it wasn't cool. Almost everything in rhet/comp today can be traced back to something written by one of those guys. Also familiarize yourself with Aristotle's Rhetoric; Corbett's Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student is a good primer for classical Greek rhetoric, which, ultimately, is the fons et origo of everything rhetorical. I second the recommendation of The Rhetorical Tradition. That's probably the best place to start for a general overview. That's what I read in my Intro to Rhetorical Theory class way back when. I'd add Rhetoric Society Quarterly and Journal of Advanced Composition to the earlier list of journal titles. As far as contemporary "big names," it just depends on what sub-field you want to get into. Tech writing, ESL writing, writing program administration, FYW pedagogy, eco-rhetoric, transnational and borderlands rhetoric, rhetoric of science . . . Check out Parlor Press for some good contemporary titles and authors. Lastly: learn your grammar and learn to love statistics. Quantitative research is definitely becoming popular as we seek to defend ourselves against budget cuts! Methodology in general (qualitative, ethnography, historiography) is probably more important in rhet/comp than in literature.

I don't know anyone in the general rhet/comp field who has anything to say about this program. It's not really part of rhet/comp, as far as I understand. I've only met one graduate of the program, and she taught film studies at my undergrad institute's film school. When I asked her, she had no input whatsoever about composition or "rhet/comp" as most of us understand it. For her, it was basically a film studies program. I mean, just look at their dissertation list! It seems like a hodgepodge of Marxism, literature, and the occasional legal or film critique. It's one of those lists that just begs to be targeted for a Fox News report: "Tax-payer money funding students for bizzare research projects such as 'Subjectivity, Ethics and the Question of Survival in the work of Semprun, Levinas and Derrida'". I suppose it's one of those "you're awesome because we accepted you, do whatever you want, and you'll get a job writing about obscure topics at another awesome school for the rest of your life" programs. (Of course, there are some legit rhetoric dissertations on there, too.)

No, only to UCI students. I went to a community college for a year and currently teach at one.

See my other posts. If the quality of UCI undergrads is any indication, UCI is not a good place to go for English studies. I don't know; maybe it's different for PhD students. But I know community college students who are brighter than UCI English undergrads. And to the poster talking about the wonders of UCI English . . . fellowships, travel grants, world-famous guest lecturers . . . These are things any graduate program should offer. I agree that they indicate a finanically healthy program . . . but nothing more. The UCs and Cal States are in a mess at the moment, and it's sure to get worse. My Cal State MA was de-funded at the beginning of year two. Bye, bye tuition-waiver, hello stipend reduction. Why else would I (and many like me) be moving away from this beautiful weather to pursue graduate studies elsewhere? If the OP is legit, he/she is to be lauded for some honesty.

Meh, I do like picking fights with lit folks; no irony here. It's not a personal or vitriolic fight, though. I do this over beers with my literature friendemies all the time! I do see some overlap between the two fields, at least in an ideal situation. But I can count on two fingers the number of literature students I've met who can discuss the most basic concepts of rhetoric, grammar, and linguistics. Hell, I work with a UCLA grad and a UCI grad, and neither of them can explain when to use "who" or "whom." They read plenty of literature, but they've never bothered to figure out what "generative grammar" means or who Kenneth Burke is or, for Christs' sake, why ethos shouldn't rhyme with Cheetohs. But I do agree that, ideally, the fields would complement each other. From the analysis of phonemes to the analysis of poetry, it is a long continuum of language use. The best class I ever took was Rhetoric and Poetics, which was nothing but rhetorical analyses of literature. Great stuff. But I don't know a single program that invites this kind of study at the dissertation level. I'll glandly stand corrected, though! No real animosity here. And anyway, rhet/comp is the underdog, remember? Just trying to keep it scrappy.

Easier to get in through the rhet/comp path to do literary work? Wow. This is why I can't stand you literary types. I'd say about 2% of us have any interest in literature. If the OP takes your advice, she will be sorely disappointed. She should take the rhet/comp path only if she wants to do work that involves more than her, a book, and a computer screen.

I'm surprised at how competitive this school seems to be. It's rather new. I didn't apply because I thought, "Meh, I've already got my back-ups." Seems like I would have been in for a rude awakening! Good luck on the wait-list limbo. All I can offer is to say that I met one MSU admit during a campus visit, and he/she seemed very excited about it.