[CBW_Exec] Answers to Your Questions About BW

Sun Apr 10 19:35:56 CDT 2011

All--

I've written a story that is set to run in *Inside Higher Ed *tomorrow
(there is a slight possibility that it will hold a day, but probably not).
I'm very grateful to all of you for your input and assistance.

The article is no doubt far shorter and less thorough than any of you would
have preferred, but I hope you'll balance any disappointment against the
fact that my editor actually asked for 400 words. (He got a lot more than
that.) I included a number of links in the story so that interested readers
can explore in greater depth some of the issues that you all have raised.

Thanks again, very much, for all of your effort.

Best,

Serena

---
Serena Golden
Copy Editor
Inside Higher Ed
http://www.insidehighered.com
(202) 448-6113

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 3:20 PM, <GlsnBarb at aol.com> wrote:

> Hi Serena, Michael, Shannon, Liz and CBW EB Members,
> I just picked up on this email strand after traveling home from Atlanta.
> It's such a pleasure to arrive home from attending CCCC and read through
> these emails. The energy and involvement of CBW  at CCCC has been *
> breathtaking.* Shannon Carter and Liz Clarke provided *great *organization
> and leadership for the pre-conference workshop.  Everything that happened at
> the preconference workshop is truly a credit to their planning and
> organizing of the CBW preconference workshop.  Bill Lalicker's leadership
> role in drafting and reading the Sense of the  House motion can not in any
> way be understated. *Bill's passion and energy have been inspirational. *
> Serena, I want to call your attention to Susan Naomi Bernstein's proposal
> for a social justice initiative *Social Justice Initiative for Basic
> Writing <http://orgs.tamu-commerce.edu/BWE/7.1_Backup/7.1-9.html>* that we
> discussed (but have not voted on or adopted) and to Sugie Goen-Salter's
> very substantive  response, published alongside Susan's proposal in *Basic
> Writing Electronic Journal*: *A Response to “<http://orgs.tamu-commerce.edu/BWE/documents/Finals/SugieGoenSalter.pdf>
> *Toward Social Justice for Students Enrolled in Basic Writing Courses: A
> Conference on Basic Writing Policy Statement<http://orgs.tamu-commerce.edu/BWE/documents/Finals/SugieGoenSalter.pdf>
> ” <http://orgs.tamu-commerce.edu/BWE/documents/Finals/SugieGoenSalter.pdf>
> Just a few minutes ago, I read in *The Nation* ("What Social Network?" p.
> 4, 3/21/11) that unemployment is down to 4.5% for people with four-year
> college degrees--as compared to 9% unemployment for the whole workforce and
> 16.1% underemployment. What we're discussing is high consequential:  the
> majority of adults living in the US (63%) have no college degree at all
> (associates or bachelors). Here's a link to one analysis of state-by-state
> data on educational attainments:
> http://www.cael.org/adultlearninginfocus.htm
>
> Barbara Gleason
> CBW EB Member and incoming  *BWe  *Editor
> City College of New York, CUNY
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 4/10/11 8:46:34 AM, lclark at lagcc.cuny.edu writes:
>
>
> 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
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CBW_Exec mailing list
> CBW_Exec at tamu-commerce.edu
> http://mailman.tamu-commerce.edu/mailman/listinfo/cbw_exec
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.tamuc.edu/pipermail/cbw_exec/attachments/20110410/f407ac11/attachment.htm