<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>thanks and request for reviewers </TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Hi, all--<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
FIRST: Thanks again for all the great assistance in preparing the CBW Workshop proposal for the next CCCC! You guys are GREAT!<BR>
<BR>
SECOND: We are busily preparing the next issue of BWe and hope you can help by reviewing a variation of that social justice policy that sparked so much discussion (fascinating, insightful, and productive conversation!)--among our group and, as seems likely, the next CCCC! I can't WAIT for that important roundtable discussion in SF!<BR>
<BR>
In that spirit of collaboration and inquiry, we were hoping to extend the conversation to include those basic writing professionals who can't make it to SF for this f2f discussion. But how? No matter where we have it, the discussion will likely be heated. How can we make that heat productive? Just submitting it to the CBW-L seems unlikely to yield the most productive conversation, not because list members don't have important stuff to say (quite the opposite! what a smart group!) but because the context won't be set for that productive conversation. We could do it in the post that requests such feedback, but it might get buried amongst all the other conversations going on on that list (not to mention the complexity of bringing those relevant posts together for a more nuanced picture of what the basic writing community wants/needs from such a document.<BR>
<BR>
We also don't want to post the Social Justice Policy as written as representative of the CBW Executive Board because, from our discussion, we know it isn't quite that yet.<BR>
<BR>
So here's what we've decided (or rather as new co-editor of BWe, *I''ve* decided and Susan's going along with it though of course she's recused herself from the discussion and any ensuing review):<BR>
<BR>
I've asked her to provide this context for the Social Justice Policy, concerning when it was first presented as an idea, why she felt CBW should adopt one, and what concerns have been raised about it--as well as the policy itself. Given the complexity and controversy associated with this proposed policy, it seemed appropriate for it to begin its life as a single-authored essay (by Susan). That way the organization can stand back and listen to and (in measured ways) contribute to the dialogue surrounding the creation of this policy before settling on anything official. It's just a variation of the roundtable idea, only online and with basic writing teachers and advocates who might not travel to SF next March for the panel discussion proposed. We are moving BWe and CBW's webpages to Texas A&M-Commerce and we are in the process of setting up a "comments" feature for this journal so readers can respond directly.<BR>
<BR>
Takers? We'd need the review by July 24. If you can (and I hope you can), please contact me at Shannon_Carter@tamu-commerce.edu and I'll get a copy to you. We plan to publish the 2008 issue (Issue 7) by late August/early September. <BR>
<BR>
Thank you so much for your help!<BR>
<BR>
--Shannon<BR>
<BR>
Shannon Carter, PhD<BR>
Associate Professor of English<BR>
Texas A&M-Commerce<BR>
shannon_carter@tamu-commerce.edu<BR>
<A HREF="http://faculty.tamu-commerce.edu/scarter/">http://faculty.tamu-commerce.edu/scarter/</A><BR>
903-886-5492<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>