[CBW_Exec] Answers to Your Questions About BW

Sun Apr 10 08:40:53 CDT 2011

Thanks, Liz!

Serena: what Liz said!

She's replacing me. I was chair 2008 thru thus year's CCCC and led the  
workshop that ended with working session and resolution Bill drafted.

The idea of a cbw resolution has been a goal of ours for some time,  
and another member (BArbara Gleason) did quite a lot of research to  
suggest to group to pursue the same.

Major movement forward would not have been possible without Bill's  
crafting of language and drive that took it forward and, to a great  
extent, Liz's organization and extremely smart use of social media and  
consensus building, enabling everyone a voice in this process.

The signatures and support offered online were so extensive they  
crashed the listserve. Several individuals from listserv conversation  
said they had not been coming to cccc in recent years because they saw  
so little attention paid to BW.

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 10, 2011, at 8:46 AM, "J. Elizabeth Clark"  
<lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu> wrote:

> Hi Serena,
>
>
> I hope some of these answers will help you. I'm J. Elizabeth Clark,  
> the incoming co-chair of CBW with Hannah Ashley. I wasn't there on  
> Saturday, but was at the conference prior to Saturday morning's  
> events. Shannon Carter forwarded me your note, since I'm at home  
> with Internet access. I'm going to answer your questions here  
> quickly. I am also available by phone today: 347.860.1963.
>
>
> Was basic writing ever its own conference cluster?
>
>
> Yes. Historically, basic writing has always been a conference  
> cluster (a thread/strand). It stopped having its own strand a few  
> years ago.
>
> What changes have you seen in the treatment of and focus on basic  
> writing at CCCCs over the years?
>
>
> Basic Writing has moved from one of the central places in the  
> discipline to an increasingly marginalized place as other sub-genres  
> have moved in: digital rhetoric, creative writing, etc. This has  
> happened at the same time public support for Basic Writing programs  
> has waned significantly.
>
>
> What distinguishes a featured session from the others? Is it simply  
> prominence in the conference's program, or are there other   
> advantages?
>
>
> A featured session has a prominent place in the program & that means  
> that 1.) people pay attention to it and 2.)
>
>
> How did the movement behind proposing a sense-of-the-house motion  
> get started? Who began it, and when?
>
>
> Each year, the CBW has a preconference workshop at CCCC. It has done  
> so since 1980. This year's workshop included keynote presentations  
> from Mary Soliday, Rebecca Mlynarczyk, and Kelly Ritter. It also  
> featured presentations from a number of Basic Writing faculty  
> presenting on their programs and pedagogy.
>
>
> A central component of this year's workshop was also a "working  
> session" to deal with current issues in Basic Writing and in BW's  
> presence at CCCC. We have  list of 21 recommendations from the  
> group. We are moving ahead with several of these, one of which  
> involves increasing the presence of BW at CCCC.
>
>
> During that discussion and brainstorming session, William Lalicker  
> suggested the Sense of the House motion. He drafted it and read it  
> to the group. The group decided to approve the motion unanimously,  
> but asked the Executive Board to tinker with the language at its  
> meeting that night. We had about 50 people in the room (it was  
> unanimous so we didn't do a head count).
>
>
> That evening, the Executive Board worked on the resolution further.  
> Then, I copied it and we collected signatures at the Special  
> Interest Group on Thursday night. We also distributed it via our  
> blog and our listserv in order to get to people who were not in  
> attendance. We collected signatures at CCCC and virtually, as people  
> send their names and in some cases statements of support for this  
> issue.
>
>
> What's next?
>
>
> We have a busy year ahead of us moving ahead with the 21  
> recommendations from the larger group. We are writing a more  
> specific mission statement for our group. Because financial issues  
> (travel money) is a huge issue for many of our group, we are  
> exploring ways to augment CCCC with some regional meetings/ 
> conferences. We will be working to approach the CCCC leadership to  
> enhance the position of Basic Writing at the conference and in the  
> mission of CCCC's work. We are also going to work to create  
> opportunities to support people who want to publish in the area of  
> Basic Writing. As Mike Hill said in his note to you, we will also be  
> working on policy issues. We believe that it's important for us to  
> begin shaping the discussion rather than having it shaped for us by  
> policy makers. These are a few of the things in the works.
>
>
> We will also continue with 2 important awards the group offers  
> annually, a fellowship to travel to CCCC and the Innovations Award  
> to recognize excellence in Basic Writing programs.
>
>
> Is there any particular reason why Prof. Lalicker was designated to  
> propose the motion?
>
>
> It was originally his idea.
>
>
> And finally, an easy one -- how many members does the CBW have?   
> (And how do you count them -- simply by listserv signups, or... ?)
>
>
> Listserv signup; CBW preconference workshop attendance. It's an open  
> coalition of teacher-scholars. If someone is interested in Basic  
> Writing, they are welcome to join us. That said, there are a number  
> of members and previous chairs of the group who consistently guide  
> its work: Greg Glau, Peter Adams, Karen Uehling, Rebecca Mlynarczyk,  
> Shannon Carter, William Lalicker, Susan Naomi Bernstein, Kelly  
> Ritter, Deborah Mutnick, Hannah Ashley, Sonya Armstrong, Lynn  
> Quitman Troyka, Kathleen Baca, Sugie Goen-Salter, Sarah Kirk, Alan  
> Meyers, Barbara Gleason, and myself. Our membership and leadership  
> changes over time (as is expected of a group that goes back to 1980).
>
>
> Here's more about the history of CBW (the organization):
>
>
> http://cbwblog.wordpress.com/about/
> A longer history is in the introduction to the Bedford Basic Writing  
> book. The history was written by Karen Uehling.
>
>
>
> This is a nice history of basic writing (the field) by George Otte  
> and Rebecca Mlynarczyk:
> http://wac.colostate.edu/books/basicwriting/introduction.pdf
>
>
> I hope this answers many of your questions.
>
>
> Best,
> J. Elizabeth Clark
>
>
>
> J. Elizabeth Clark, Ph.D.
> Professor of English
> LaGuardia Community College--CUNY
> e-mail:  lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu
> Phone:  718.482.5665
> www.jelizabethclark.com
>>>> "Shannon Carter"  04/10/11 8:18 AM >>>
> Hi, Serena--
>
> Thanks again for your wonderful help in getting this story out there
> and thanks, Muchael, for responding to Serena's questions:
>
> Serena, I can't get  online right now nor will I be able to until
> evening when I'm back home--well, other than via phone and tying on
> this is slow, slow, slow.
>
> I'm cc-ing the exec board so they can weigh in and I also welcome your
> phone call at 9033661767
>
> Thanks!
> Shannon
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 9, 2011, at 8:44 PM, "Michael Hill"  wrote:
>
>> Hi Serena,
>> I hope either Shannon or Bill have responded or will respond to
>> you.  They know the history of the group far better than I do.  I
>> can tell you that Basic Writing had its own cluster in 2006, but has
>> since disappeared as a cluster.  I cannot tell you why that is the
>> case--this is based only on my own very short review of past  
>> programs.
>>
>> As for the generation of the statement, I believe William Lalicker
>> had the original idea, but it arose during a discussion wherein many
>> others were voicing discontent over the relative absence of Basic
>> Writing from this year's conference proceedings.  William Lalicker
>> is also the one who came up with the original wording of the motion
>> and then it was parsed by the group--both in meetings here at the
>> conference and online with people who are not here--during the next
>> couple of days.  Because of Bill's passion and original wording, he
>> was the obvious choice of spokesperson for the motion.
>>
>> I am not sure of the number of members of CBW.  There is not an
>> official membership roll and no dues, pledge, or fancy membership
>> card.  We have a listserv that has a great deal of members, but I do
>> not know how many people are on that list.  As far as I can tell,
>> our membership is fluid with an open door policy.  If one teaches,
>> researches, or cares about basic writing issues, one can be a
>> member.  Shannon can probably give you a rough idea about how many
>> people are on the listserv or how many people come to the workshop
>> and/or SIG.
>>
>> As for the future of the CBW, Shannon or Bill, as exec board
>> members, are probably better suited to speak to that.  I can say
>> that my hope is that we become a more vibrant force within the
>> study, the teaching, the research, and the policy of basic writing.
>> My belief is that we are on our way to doing this through planning
>> on having a more vocal presence--in terms of presentations--at next
>> year's CCCC.  We are also attempting to develop some group
>> structures that will allow us to build a stronger sense for our
>> members, our field, and our publics about who we are and what we
>> work for.
>>
>> Thanks again for working at this.  Your efforts are much appreciated.
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> Michael D. Hill
>> English Division
>> Henry Ford Community College
>> (313) 845-6368
>>
>>>>> Serena Golden 04/09/11 6:49 PM >>>
>> Dear Professors Carter, Adams, and Hill:
>>
>> Thanks very much to all of you for the time you took to speak with
>> me about the CBW's sense-of-the-house motion this morning. I'm
>> working on a brief story about it for Inside Higher Ed, and I just
>> have a couple of followup/background questions; answers from any one
>> of you would be just fine (although more is always good), but I
>> figured with the conference wrapping up and a lot of people in
>> transit, it'd be best to contact all of you and hope that at least
>> one person will have ten minutes and an internet connection between
>> now and, let's say, tomorrow morning at the latest. (I'm very
>> conscious of my basic writing in this email, and I'm sorry for that
>> run-on sentence.)
>>
>> Here's what I'm looking for:
>>
>> --Was basic writing ever its own conference cluster? Or, if the CBW
>> is successful in making it a cluster at future CCCCs, will that be
>> the first time?
>>
>> --What changes have you seen in the treatment of and focus on basic
>> writing at CCCCs over the years?
>>
>> --What distinguishes a featured session from the others? Is it
>> simply prominence in the conference's program, or are there other
>> advantages?
>>
>> --How did the movement behind proposing a sense-of-the-house motion
>> get started? Who began it, and when?
>>
>> --What's next?
>>
>> --Is there any particular reason why Prof. Lalicker was designated
>> to propose the motion?
>>
>> --And finally, an easy one -- how many members does the CBW have?
>> (And how do you count them -- simply by listserv signups, or... ?)
>>
>> Thanks again for your time and assistance; I hope to hear back from
>> one or more of you!
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>>
>> Serena
>>
>> ---
>> Serena Golden
>> Copy Editor
>> Inside Higher Ed
>> http://www.insidehighered.com
>> (202) 448-6113
>>
>
>