Subfields in Rhetoric and Composition?

[Two Espressos]

Hello, grad cafe! Many of you may remember an earlier topic of mine in which I received very helpful advice concerning literary theory, especially towards aesthetics.

I'm still an undergraduate (a junior). I've vacillated ridiculously over the past year as to what subfields in English interest me most. I'm pretty sure that I want to attend graduate school, but I'm totally clueless as to what subfield (I've switched back-and-forth between rhetoric and composition, literature [especially aesthetics], and philosophy more times than I'd like to count.)!

An acquaintance of mine (more like a friend-of-a-friend) received her PhD in rhetoric and composition last year. She now has a tenure-track job at a respectable university. When I asked her about graduate school, she strongly encouraged me to consider a degree in composition and rhetoric rather than literature. She said that all of her friends in composition/rhetoric found great jobs (she had multiple TT offers), whereas many of her friends in literature struggled to find positions.

Sorry for this rambling post... I mean to ask: what sort of subfields exist in composition and rhetoric? I wouldn't attend a composition/rhetoric program simply for the better job prospects. But perhaps my interests, if framed correctly, could fit certain composition/rhetoric programs? I know that writing program administration does not interest me, but what other subfields exist out there? Would composition/rhetoric programs be open to interdisciplinary work that incorporated philosophy and aesthetics (if framed in the right rhetorical light)?

Any advice is greatly appreciated. Also, if any of you could point me to introductory books, websites, etc. for the discipline, I'd be most grateful.

Thanks in advance, oh wise grad cafe.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Two Espressos

[runonsentence]

Hello, grad cafe! Many of you may remember an earlier topic of mine in which I received very helpful advice concerning literary theory, especially towards aesthetics.

I'm still an undergraduate (a junior). I've vacillated ridiculously over the past year as to what subfields in English interest me most. I'm pretty sure that I want to attend graduate school, but I'm totally clueless as to what subfield (I've switched back-and-forth between rhetoric and composition, literature [especially aesthetics], and philosophy more times than I'd like to count.)!

An acquaintance of mine (more like a friend-of-a-friend) received her PhD in rhetoric and composition last year. She now has a tenure-track job at a respectable university. When I asked her about graduate school, she strongly encouraged me to consider a degree in composition and rhetoric rather than literature. She said that all of her friends in composition/rhetoric found great jobs (she had multiple TT offers), whereas many of her friends in literature struggled to find positions.

Sorry for this rambling post... I mean to ask: what sort of subfields exist in composition and rhetoric? I wouldn't attend a composition/rhetoric program simply for the better job prospects. But perhaps my interests, if framed correctly, could fit certain composition/rhetoric programs? I know that writing program administration does not interest me, but what other subfields exist out there? Would composition/rhetoric programs be open to interdisciplinary work that incorporated philosophy and aesthetics (if framed in the right rhetorical light)?

Any advice is greatly appreciated. Also, if any of you could point me to introductory books, websites, etc. for the discipline, I'd be most grateful.

Thanks in advance, oh wise grad cafe.

Hi there Two Espressos,

I think I remember suggesting you take a look at rhet/comp in your first thread, actually. You mentioned that you were more interested in what theories do, and this is very much the work of rhetorical studies. It seems like it could potentially fit some of your existing interests. There's probably room for crossover with philosophy, though note that sometimes the two fields take different approaches to similar areas of research. (For instance, a friend of mine took a philosophy of emotions class because her dissertation will involve emotion/affect studies, and she told me that they approached affect theory in a different way than we did in English.) Aesthetics is what I'm less sure about; rhetoric is very much about what texts do, not necessarily aesthetic concerns. But if anyone can contradict this, please jump in.

Focuses within rhet/comp can vary widely. Some people focus more on rhetorical studies, others on the writing pedagogy and writing theories aspect; there have been lively arguments even (referenced within some of the sources I recommend at the end of my post) as to whether or not rhetoric and composition can be separated from each other. Most commonly, people incorporate at least a bit of both into their research and thinking; I for one believe that both inform the other. In general, in fact, I'd characterize the field as truly committed to critical, scholarly approaches to pedagogy, which is one of the reasons I fell in love with it during my master's degree.

Research interests can range from classical rhetoric (Aristotle, Cicero, Plato, Quintillian, etc.) to modern rhetorics, which can involve embodiment, materiality, affect, and cultural lenses. Public rhetorics are also something I've found really rewarding (some of the theorists I read in a class on publics include Michael Warner, Nancy Fraser, Jurgen Habermas, Lauren Berlant, Hannah Arendt...). Some people take digital approaches, some people work in archives with an historical approach, and some take up feminist, gender studies, or queer studies lenses. Cultural rhetorics still seems to be fairly popular. It's also common to study writing program administration, writing center studies, or the history of composition pedagogy.

You might try reading over the program from previous CCCCs (Conference on College Composition and Communication), aka "4 Cs," the flagship conference of the field. They're available online, and it's a good snapshot of how varied different focuses within rhet/comp can get. The sponsoring organization of the conference, CCC, also produces one of the most prominent journals in rhet/comp, with some good book reviews. Reading through the reviews in CCCs might be a less overwhelming way to dive into the journal.

Also, if you really get into it, here is a list of four texts my mentor suggested I read last summer in preparation for my PhD applications, to give me a clearer sense of the field's identity and trajectory:

• The Politics of Writing Instruction: Postsecondary, eds. Bullock, Trimbur, and Schuster
• Rhetoric and Composition as Intellectual Work, ed. Gary A. Olson
• The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook (4th ed.), eds. Corbett, Myers, and Tate
• Composition Studies in the New Millennium: Rereading the Past, Rewriting the Future, eds. Bloom, Daiker, and White

Hope this helps. There's a lot that I find truly satisfying and rewarding about this field!

Edited July 14, 2011 by runonsentence

[Tybalt]

I'm not a rhet-comp guy, but I do have a bit of advice. DON'T make a decision based upon what the job prospects are right now. First of all, just because your friend got a TT job this year, you have no idea what the Rhet/Comp job market will look like 6 or 7 years from now. Further, after securing that TT job, you need to spend 30+ years teaching and researching in that field. You want to eventually pick the subfield that you truly love (which may well be Rhet/Comp).

If you still have sub-field confusion into your senior year, I would recommend taking a year or two, putting off grad school applications and living the life. Teach in a foreign country. Audition for a play. You are still VERY young, and you have the time. You might be surprised to see how much your time out of the classroom will help to clarify your interests in the classroom.

Good luck!

[Two Espressos]

Hi there Two Espressos,

I think I remember suggesting you take a look at rhet/comp in your first thread, actually. You mentioned that you were more interested in what theories do, and this is very much the work of rhetorical studies. It seems like it could potentially fit some of your existing interests. There's probably room for crossover with philosophy, though note that sometimes the two fields take different approaches to similar areas of research. (For instance, a friend of mine took a philosophy of emotions class because her dissertation will involve emotion/affect studies, and she told me that they approached affect theory in a different way than we did in English.) Aesthetics is what I'm less sure about; rhetoric is very much about what texts do, not necessarily aesthetic concerns. But if anyone can contradict this, please jump in.

Yes, you did suggest rhet/comp before! I shot down that recommendation too hastily. I apologize! Truth be told, I have no idea what I should commit myself to for 7+ years.

I am interested in what theories do. Literary theory is very interesting, but I dislike the approach in which one uses an author outside of literary studies as a "lens" for reading a text (I realize that this approach is extremely prevalent in literary studies. It just doesn't seem right to me...). If rhetorical studies are concerned with what theories do rather than using theoretical lens, then it may very well be up my alley. I may be entirely wrong with the way I'm characterizing things here; feel free to correct me!

I'm extremely interested in taking relevant courses outside of my main concentration. If I did take a rhet/comp route, I would want to take some supplementary courses in, say, the philosophy of language, linguistics (wholly relevant, at least I would assume so. Plus linguistics fascinates me.), etc. I realize that most graduate programs in English (whether lit or rhet/comp) allow this, but I would want to attend a program that strongly encourages this kind of interdisciplinary approach.

Focuses within rhet/comp can vary widely. Some people focus more on rhetorical studies, others on the writing pedagogy and writing theories aspect; there have been lively arguments even (referenced within some of the sources I recommend at the end of my post) as to whether or not rhetoric and composition can be separated from each other. Most commonly, people incorporate at least a bit of both into their research and thinking; I for one believe that both inform the other. In general, in fact, I'd characterize the field as truly committed to critical, scholarly approaches to pedagogy, which is one of the reasons I fell in love with it during my master's degree.

I have always been interested in pedagogy. I've thought about ways in which English studies could become more formal, perhaps drawing more from philosophy. I'm not naive enough to think that I'll change the discipline or anything, but I'd love to study/theorize possible approaches to changing the discipline, even if they only get applied in my own classroom.

Research interests can range from classical rhetoric (Aristotle, Cicero, Plato, Quintillian, etc.) to modern rhetorics, which can involve embodiment, materiality, affect, and cultural lenses. Public rhetorics are also something I've found really rewarding (some of the theorists I read in a class on publics include Michael Warner, Nancy Fraser, Jurgen Habermas, Lauren Berlant, Hannah Arendt...). Some people take digital approaches, some people work in archives with an historical approach, and some take up feminist, gender studies, or queer studies lenses. Cultural rhetorics still seems to be fairly popular. It's also common to study writing program administration, writing center studies, or the history of composition pedagogy.

All those research interests sound fascinating! I personally wouldn't be interested in concentrating in writing program administration, writing center studies, or cultural rhetorics. I don't really know anything about rhet/comp, but rhetorical theory/pedagogy/intersections with linguistics and philosophy seem interesting at this point.

You might try reading over the program from previous CCCCs (Conference on College Composition and Communication), aka "4 Cs," the flagship conference of the field. They're available online, and it's a good snapshot of how varied different focuses within rhet/comp can get. The sponsoring organization of the conference, CCC, also produces one of the most prominent journals in rhet/comp, with some good book reviews. Reading through the reviews in CCCs might be a less overwhelming way to dive into the journal.

Also, if you really get into it, here is a list of four texts my mentor suggested I read last summer in preparation for my PhD applications, to give me a clearer sense of the field's identity and trajectory:

• The Politics of Writing Instruction: Postsecondary, eds. Bullock, Trimbur, and Schuster
• Rhetoric and Composition as Intellectual Work, ed. Gary A. Olson
• The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook (4th ed.), eds. Corbett, Myers, and Tate
• Composition Studies in the New Millennium: Rereading the Past, Rewriting the Future, eds. Bloom, Daiker, and White

Hope this helps. There's a lot that I find truly satisfying and rewarding about this field!

Everything that you've said has been enormously helpful: it's exactly what I had been anticipating! Thank you.

I'll definitely check out the four texts you mentioned (along with the aesthetics/cultural studies texts from the other thread).

If anyone else has additional information or advice, I'd appreciate it!

[Two Espressos]

I'm not a rhet-comp guy, but I do have a bit of advice. DON'T make a decision based upon what the job prospects are right now. First of all, just because your friend got a TT job this year, you have no idea what the Rhet/Comp job market will look like 6 or 7 years from now. Further, after securing that TT job, you need to spend 30+ years teaching and researching in that field. You want to eventually pick the subfield that you truly love (which may well be Rhet/Comp).

I agree completely, hence why I stated earlier that I wouldn't take the rhet/comp route "simply for the better job prospects." As much as I love literature/literary studies, I have issues with the way they are approached in literary theory (partially--though incompletely--explicated above); if rhet/comp could facilitate my research interests, I'd be very interested in pursuing it. I definitely will not spend 7+ years "pretending" that I like a certain sub-field--I don't think I'd be able to pull it off.

If you still have sub-field confusion into your senior year, I would recommend taking a year or two, putting off grad school applications and living the life. Teach in a foreign country. Audition for a play. You are still VERY young, and you have the time. You might be surprised to see how much your time out of the classroom will help to clarify your interests in the classroom.

Good luck!

This is very solid advice. I stated earlier that I was "pretty sure" I wanted to attend graduate school. Let me revise that: I'm positive that I want to attend grad school and obtain a PhD, but I'm unsure which route I should take and when I should take it. I think teaching outside of the United States would be very interesting! I plan on studying abroad next summer. If I enjoy the experience as much as I think I will, then teaching English overseas would be a great alternative to prematurely jumping into graduate school.

Anyways, thanks for your input!

[Two Espressos]

I'm going to post another question in this thread so I don't have to create another one:

Does anyone know of any funded MA programs in composition/rhetoric? In perusing comp/rhet PhD programs, I noticed that several of them require a masters for admission. Plus as time passes, I'm increasingly convinced that I should weigh my applications more heavily towards MA programs. I'm starting to parse my interests out, but I don't think I'll have a tight enough focus come fall of 2012 for strong PhD programs.

The only funded MA program in composition/rhetoric that I know of is Purdue.

C'mon, grad cafe members! I know you are a source of great wisdom.

Edited July 30, 2011 by Two Espressos

[runonsentence]

Off the top of my head, Ohio State (top tier) and Penn State?? (top tier) are both programs that are, more or less, MA > PhD programs. They offer funding to master's students.

Miami University of Ohio might also offer master's funding for comp/rhet, though you'd have to check on that.

If you're still sort of unsure about subfields at this point, you could also find a more generalist master's degree in lit at a school that offers PhDs in rhet comp and take rhet comp courses here and there as electives while you decide whether or not rhet comp is for you. It's honestly not super uncommon for rhet comp applicants for PhD spots to come in from a literature background, so I don't think such a move would hurt your PhD applications. If you get to teach comp and take some sort of teaching college writing course (fairly standard at most schools) you'd get some kind of introduction to the field. (My university, U Cincinnati, is this sort of program.)

[Two Espressos]

Off the top of my head, Ohio State (top tier) and Penn State?? (top tier) are both programs that are, more or less, MA > PhD programs. They offer funding to master's students.

Miami University of Ohio might also offer master's funding for comp/rhet, though you'd have to check on that.

If you're still sort of unsure about subfields at this point, you could also find a more generalist master's degree in lit at a school that offers PhDs in rhet comp and take rhet comp courses here and there as electives while you decide whether or not rhet comp is for you. It's honestly not super uncommon for rhet comp applicants for PhD spots to come in from a literature background, so I don't think such a move would hurt your PhD applications. If you get to teach comp and take some sort of teaching college writing course (fairly standard at most schools) you'd get some kind of introduction to the field. (My university, U Cincinnati, is this sort of program.)

Ah, runonsentence, I was hoping you'd reply! You seem like the go-to guy/gal for rhetoric and composition on these boards.

Thanks for the MA suggestions! I think a generalist MA would be a possible option as well; I'm assuming such programs wouldn't expect their applicants to have everything figured out as far as subfield goes.

Do you know of any other funded MA programs? Or, alternately, strong rhet/comp PhD programs that *don't* require a MA for admission? I have found PhD programs that don't, but I know little about composition/rhetoric so I'm unsure as to which programs are strong, not-so-strong, etc.

[runonsentence]

Ah, runonsentence, I was hoping you'd reply! You seem like the go-to guy/gal for rhetoric and composition on these boards.

Ha, well I hope some others show up as well to give you more than just my perspective on things, once we get into the full swing of app season!

Thanks for the MA suggestions! I think a generalist MA would be a possible option as well; I'm assuming such programs wouldn't expect their applicants to have everything figured out as far as subfield goes.

Do you know of any other funded MA programs? Or, alternately, strong rhet/comp PhD programs that *don't* require a MA for admission? I have found PhD programs that don't, but I know little about composition/rhetoric so I'm unsure as to which programs are strong, not-so-strong, etc.

Right. I mean, if you decide that rhet/comp was definitely the subfield for you, by all means pursue the master's—but I know that for myself, the broad background and chance to take some electives in a more generalist MA program in lit was really helpful.

My institution, the University of Cincinnati, funds master's students, though that funding is dwindling somewhat and we're not able to fund as many MA lines as before. But PM me if you'd like more info on UC.

I don't know of any BA-applicant friendly PhD programs off the top of my head, since I was applying with an MA this past season and not paying attention to that. But if you list some programs that were BA-applicant friendly, I (or some other R/C people) can possibly tell you a little about some of them.

[Guimauvaise]

Your interests may not be mutually exclusive. My school offers a secondary emphasis for MA, MFA and PhD students who are not in the rhet/comp program. The requirements include teaching five different courses, taking two advanced rhet/comp courses (I'm taking a seminar this fall called "theoretical approaches to teaching writing"), an introductory "TA bootcamp" course called "composition pedagogy," and a one-hour oral exam/presentation on a rhet/comp topic. My adviser told me that if I complete this secondary emphasis (which is my plan...I already have half of the requirements), I would be "extremely hire-able" for a TT position in literature. I don't know how unique my school is in offering this opportunity, but it might be something to keep in mind.

[Two Espressos]

Your interests may not be mutually exclusive. My school offers a secondary emphasis for MA, MFA and PhD students who are not in the rhet/comp program. The requirements include teaching five different courses, taking two advanced rhet/comp courses (I'm taking a seminar this fall called "theoretical approaches to teaching writing"), an introductory "TA bootcamp" course called "composition pedagogy," and a one-hour oral exam/presentation on a rhet/comp topic. My adviser told me that if I complete this secondary emphasis (which is my plan...I already have half of the requirements), I would be "extremely hire-able" for a TT position in literature. I don't know how unique my school is in offering this opportunity, but it might be something to keep in mind.

Yeah, that sounds like a good plan of action! I'm thinking that composition/rhetoric could be a great fit, as I could possibly bridge my interests in philosophy (ethics) with English--I've seen professors with listed interests such as "ethics and rhetoric," etc. But if I do end up going the standard literature route, I think that having a secondary emphasis in comp/rhet would be very beneficial. It's nice to know that such a route is possible!

Thanks for you input!

[runonsentence]

This just came to my attention: http://www.mastersinwritingprograms.com/

This consortium is in the process of assembling a comprehensive index of MA and MS programs associated with rhetoric, composition, writing studies, and technical and professional writing. I'm not sure whether they'll be indexing more than just the names (so they may not list which programs have MA funding and which don't), but it'd be a good place to start nonetheless.

[Two Espressos]

This just came to my attention: http://www.mastersin...ngprograms.com/

This consortium is in the process of assembling a comprehensive index of MA and MS programs associated with rhetoric, composition, writing studies, and technical and professional writing. I'm not sure whether they'll be indexing more than just the names (so they may not list which programs have MA funding and which don't), but it'd be a good place to start nonetheless.

This is a great place to start! Thanks again.

[lcampb]

I've posted this in other places on gradcafe before, but it was a life-saver for me when I was applying to rhet/comp programs 2 years ago so I like to share it whenever someone is looking for more information

This is a 2007 review of Rhet/Comp programs in the US: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~enos/ . It offers information on funding, the types of dissertations people are writing, etc. etc. Enormously useful.

Also, I'm at the University of Washington and based on your interests (and I'll admit I only skimmed this thread) you might want to check out their "Language and Rhetoric" track. They only fund a certain number of incoming MA's (4/10 my year) but some of those are lang/rhet people. Like Penn State and Ohio its MA -> PhD.

Happy hunting!

[runonsentence]

Ah thank you for posting, I'd completely forgotten about the RSA review! (Which, incidentally, they need to update soon!)

[Two Espressos]

I've posted this in other places on gradcafe before, but it was a life-saver for me when I was applying to rhet/comp programs 2 years ago so I like to share it whenever someone is looking for more information

This is a 2007 review of Rhet/Comp programs in the US: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~enos/ . It offers information on funding, the types of dissertations people are writing, etc. etc. Enormously useful.

Also, I'm at the University of Washington and based on your interests (and I'll admit I only skimmed this thread) you might want to check out their "Language and Rhetoric" track. They only fund a certain number of incoming MA's (4/10 my year) but some of those are lang/rhet people. Like Penn State and Ohio its MA -> PhD.

Happy hunting!

Wow, this is great information! I'll have to look into the University of Washington as well. I'm no longer interested in pursuing aesthetics/aesthetic theory *professionally* (though I'm still interested in it personally); my subject-to-change interests are in my signature.

I'm having trouble finding professors with interests in the rhetoric of social activism/human rights (I'm found 2 professors so far, lol); does anyone know any professors or schools that are strong in this area?

[Two Espressos]

I'm posting this here because it's comp/rhetoric related, and I don't want to make a new thread just for this.

I recently read some of David Bartholomae's Writing on the Margins: Essays on Composition and Teaching (preface, conclusion, and two of the essays in the middle), and I must say that it bored the hell out of me. Some of his observations about error, and how we perceive the causation of error in student writing, were interesting. But for the most part, reading it felt like a chore.

To the comp/rhetoric people: am I perhaps not cut out for comp/rhetoric work, seeing as I couldn't stand this book? Is Dr. Bartholomae a major comp/rhetoric scholar? I know very little about the field (hence why I tried reading that book), so maybe I'm off-base here.

I'm just so damn confused about what I want to study.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Two Espressos

[runonsentence]

Well, on one hand, Bartholomae is pretty influential in discourse, community, and literacy studies (I read his "Inventing the University" in my Teaching College Writing course). On the other hand, remember that he's just one researcher (make an analogy and ask if you can think of any literary scholars that would make or break another entire subfield or school of thought for you).

Maybe it's a sign you won't like the rhet/comp field. Maybe it's a sign you just don't like his work or that portion of the field in particular. In either case, I'd suggest you keep reading, both inside and outside of rhet/comp: knowing what you definitely don't like is still one step closer to finding out what you do like.

And remember, there's no rush to find out, either! Taking a break after undergrad to let ideas simmer and gain some perspective is a really good idea, I think. (A friend of mine who didn't is now burnt out after Year 1 of her PhD and contemplating a leave of absence.) And you might also find some generalist MA programs that have a variety of offerings, or lit programs with options for secondary interests, that would help you solidify a subfield interest.

Don't get discouraged!

Edited August 12, 2011 by runonsentence

[Two Espressos]

Well, on one hand, Bartholomae is pretty influential in discourse, community, and literacy studies (I read his "Inventing the University" in my Teaching College Writing course). On the other hand, remember that he's just one researcher (make an analogy and ask if you can think of any literary scholars that would make or break another entire subfield or school of thought for you).

Maybe it's a sign you won't like the rhet/comp field. Maybe it's a sign you just don't like his work or that portion of the field in particular. In either case, I'd suggest you keep reading, both inside and outside of rhet/comp: knowing what you definitely don't like is still one step closer to finding out what you do like.

And remember, there's no rush to find out, either! Taking a break after undergrad to let ideas simmer and gain some perspective is a really good idea, I think. (A friend of mine who didn't is now burnt out after Year 1 of her PhD and contemplating a leave of absence.) And you might also find some generalist MA programs that have a variety of offerings, or lit programs with options for secondary interests, that would help you solidify a subfield interest.

Don't get discouraged!

Yeah, you're probably right. I think that my dislike of that book just exacerbated my anxiety about the whole grad school thing.

Bartholomae would be more of a composition scholar rather than a rhetoric scholar, correct? When I've thought about comp/rhetoric, I've always been more interested in the rhetoric side.

I'm also considering the possibility of doing interdisciplinary work between comp/rhetoric and literary studies. That's one thing that Dr. Bartholomae mentions in the book that I liked and agreed with. He feels that comp/rhetoric should work within the context of English as a whole; it shouldn't try to sever itself completely from literature.

I wonder whether work between comp/rhetoric and literary studies is possible? And if so, would it best be served by a comp/rhetoric focus within a literature department, a literature focus within a comp/rhetoric department, or something else?

Gah, it's so complicated! lol

[Historiogaffe]

Yeah, you're probably right. I think that my dislike of that book just exacerbated my anxiety about the whole grad school thing.

Bartholomae would be more of a composition scholar rather than a rhetoric scholar, correct? When I've thought about comp/rhetoric, I've always been more interested in the rhetoric side.

I thought the same thing about rhetoric, and then I started finding out more about the composition side. Give it a chance! Turns out they're the same field for quite a good reason.

You can get a sense of your worries about Bart by pretending it's some other area of study. If a medievalist reads a work by an influential medievalist and hates it, does that mean they shouldn't actually be in medieval studies? No. Just look at the academic debates that happen in journals -- mind-boggling passive agressive as they are -- which most often involve two people in the same field ragging on each other professionally. It's a noble tradition that's been alive and kicking ever since St Augustine and St Jerome engaged in their faux-friendly debate about Galatians.

As for actually finding stuff hate-worthy due to sheer dullness, you might A. try a couple more approaches to the same topic by different influential scholars, or B. comfort yourself by reading some scholarly reviews of works that feature a lot of "I'm not sure why the author did this because it does nothing for his argument and it should go away." Boredom is also, occasionally, part of the game

Edited August 13, 2011 by speakwrite_

[Two Espressos]

I thought the same thing about rhetoric, and then I started finding out more about the composition side. Give it a chance! Turns out they're the same field for quite a good reason.

You can get a sense of your worries about Bart by pretending it's some other area of study. If a medievalist reads a work by an influential medievalist and hates it, does that mean they shouldn't actually be in medieval studies? No. Just look at the academic debates that happen in journals -- mind-boggling passive agressive as they are -- which most often involve two people in the same field ragging on each other professionally. It's a noble tradition that's been alive and kicking ever since St Augustine and St Jerome engaged in their faux-friendly debate about Galatians.

As for actually finding stuff hate-worthy due to sheer dullness, you might A. try a couple more approaches to the same topic by different influential scholars, or B. comfort yourself by reading some scholarly reviews of works that feature a lot of "I'm not sure why the author did this because it does nothing for his argument and it should go away." Boredom is also, occasionally, part of the game

You raise very good points! I guess I shouldn't worry about it. I'll need to read more widely before I can make any kind of assumption.

[runonsentence]

Two Espressos: don't know if you're still thinking about activism rhetoric, but the most recent issue of Rhetoric Society Quarterly was apparently a special issue on activism rhetorics: http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/rrsq20/current

[Two Espressos]

Two Espressos: don't know if you're still thinking about activism rhetoric, but the most recent issue of Rhetoric Society Quarterly was apparently a special issue on activism rhetorics: http://www.tandfonli.../rrsq20/current

Runonsentence, you are an endless source of great information! I'm still exploring my options (still vacillating, but oh well), and this is a great resource.

Thanks again.

[ComeBackZinc]

Just a couple of quick points on what are probably stale questions:

I agree with the above that you shouldn't draw too much from any individual article. I do think, however, that you should understand that any rhet/comp program is likely to require you to read a lot of pedagogical and composition theory that some find quite dry. Note too that our discipline straddles the boundary of the humanities and the social sciences, and as institutional and political pressures exert themselves, you may find yourself in a specialty that is moving more and more towards empirical research. I'm biased-- my own methodological interests are quantitative and pedagogical. But it seems hard to argue against the idea that quantitative methodologies, or at least more conventionally empirical ones, are making a comeback after being quite out of fashion. Rhetoric and composition is flourishing in part because administrators see our field as being able to provide a certain degree of validity and reliability in asserting our value. There are probably lots of political and intellectual assumptions in the thinking of those administrators that I would reject, but the fact is that they are the people who keep the lights on. At the very least, expect to read a lot of composition theory, and be prepared to read many articles that are similar in tone and content to Bartholomae. Also understand that the pressure to understand things like standard deviation and p-values is likely to grow. (Although, again, I'm biased.)

That said, this is indeed a dappled discipline. Runonsentence seems to me to be much more rhetoric-aligned than I am; I am heavily tilted towards composition pedagogy. That itself is rhetorical, of course, as the rhetorical axiology is the dominant intellectual framework in our field. I don't know if Runonsentence's interests speak more to the scholars working at the (outstanding) program at Cincinnati or the individual poster's interests. There are many, many ways to approach this field.

As for the original question, at my institution we are required to take at least two subfields in which we will invest significant coursework. These include but aren't limited to subfields in WPA, ESL, linguistics, technical writing, professional writing, literature, feminist approaches, theory and cultural studies, digital writing and rhetoric, multimodality, history of rhetoric or composition, and others.

[Two Espressos]

Just a couple of quick points on what are probably stale questions:

I agree with the above that you shouldn't draw too much from any individual article. I do think, however, that you should understand that any rhet/comp program is likely to require you to read a lot of pedagogical and composition theory that some find quite dry. Note too that our discipline straddles the boundary of the humanities and the social sciences, and as institutional and political pressures exert themselves, you may find yourself in a specialty that is moving more and more towards empirical research. I'm biased-- my own methodological interests are quantitative and pedagogical. But it seems hard to argue against the idea that quantitative methodologies, or at least more conventionally empirical ones, are making a comeback after being quite out of fashion. Rhetoric and composition is flourishing in part because administrators see our field as being able to provide a certain degree of validity and reliability in asserting our value. There are probably lots of political and intellectual assumptions in the thinking of those administrators that I would reject, but the fact is that they are the people who keep the lights on. At the very least, expect to read a lot of composition theory, and be prepared to read many articles that are similar in tone and content to Bartholomae. Also understand that the pressure to understand things like standard deviation and p-values is likely to grow. (Although, again, I'm biased.)

That said, this is indeed a dappled discipline. Runonsentence seems to me to be much more rhetoric-aligned than I am; I am heavily tilted towards composition pedagogy. That itself is rhetorical, of course, as the rhetorical axiology is the dominant intellectual framework in our field. I don't know if Runonsentence's interests speak more to the scholars working at the (outstanding) program at Cincinnati or the individual poster's interests. There are many, many ways to approach this field.

As for the original question, at my institution we are required to take at least two subfields in which we will invest significant coursework. These include but aren't limited to subfields in WPA, ESL, linguistics, technical writing, professional writing, literature, feminist approaches, theory and cultural studies, digital writing and rhetoric, multimodality, history of rhetoric or composition, and others.

Thanks for the info!

Over the past year, I've considered philosophy, literature/literary theory, and composition/rhetoric. I keep vacillating, but I'm almost positive that I'll apply to theory-heavy literature and interdisciplinary programs next fall: it's what most interests me (just the mention of Butler or Zizek makes me foam at the mouth, lol), and it's where I fit best. Part (though not all) of my motivation in considering the comp/rhet route was the better job prospects. I realized after reading (and hating) Bartholomae's book that that wouldn't work out for me in graduate school (I realize that Bartholomae's work is merely one aspect of comp/rhet, but I still find my reaction telling).

I'm still struggling to find my academic identity, but I'm nearly positive that I'll end up in a theory/literature program (assuming I get in anywhere ).