CompPile: Share and Comment

WPA 2008 Roundtable: Rich Haswell

Glenn

Monday, July 7th, 2008

¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0 A Debate over the Preservation and Accessibility of Scholarship in Composition Studies and Writing Program Administration

Rich Haswell
WPA Conference
Denver, July, 2008

¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0 An overload of information, that is, anything much beyond what is truly needed, leads to information blackout. It does not enrich, but impoverishes. [Peter F. Drucker, Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (1977)]

¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0 If we are to take ourselves seriously as an intellectual field—and deserve the respect of those in other fields—then lore must give way to databases! [David R. Russell, WPA-L, 7/30/2002]

¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Resolved

¶ 5 Leave a comment on paragraph 5 0 That an ongoing, exhaustive record of scholarship, now made possible by technology, runs counter to the interests and well-being of writing programs and their administration.

¶ 6 Leave a comment on paragraph 6 0 1-Affirmative
The local regulations that writing teachers and writing program apply do not need past knowledge to function.

¶ 7 Leave a comment on paragraph 7 0 1-Negative
A writing program needs past knowledge since it operates by a constant improvement of regulations so that their application will have better effect, and both the improvement and effect can only be understood through knowledge of the past.

¶ 8 Leave a comment on paragraph 8 0 2-Affirmative
Teachers and administrators don’t need knowledge of the past; they need recommendations for action provided through policy statement, textbooks, and other summaries, not a mountain of scholarship.

¶ 9 Leave a comment on paragraph 9 0 2-Negative
Teachers and administrators need to appraise the mountain—all the available history and all the available facts—and do so themselves in order to keep from being manipulated by interests other than their own, including the interests of the people who write policy statements, textbooks, and summaries.

¶ 10 Leave a comment on paragraph 10 0 3-Affirmative
Teachers and administrators do not have time to read and apply all the available history and all the available facts; indeed the more of it is available, the less the task is feasible.

¶ 11 Leave a comment on paragraph 11 0 3-Negative
The task depends on the kind of scholarship that is available. Teachers and administrators do have the time to read and apply all the scholarly knowledge if summaries, synopses, keywording, and reviews of the research and scholarship are made available in pace with the full record of scholarship now deliverable by technology.

¶ 12 Leave a comment on paragraph 12 0 4-Affirmative
The full record of scholarship can now be delivered by technology, true, but who is going to locate and enter it into the delivery systems? The job of teaching or administering composition does not afford people the time to do that.

¶ 13 Leave a comment on paragraph 13 0 4-Negative
Technology now also provides ways for large groups of people to interconnect, so that the task of locating and entering the record can be divided up to the point that one individual’s contribution, even a busy teacher’s, even a busier WPA’s, is doable.

¶ 14 Leave a comment on paragraph 14 0 5-Affirmative
But why should a WPA or a teacher do it? Scholarship in composition does not progress as does research in science; rather it circles back through old emphases, perspectives, and trends. An exhaustive record of the scholarship of the past would contain huge amounts of redundant information.

¶ 15 Leave a comment on paragraph 15 0 5-Negative
Scholarship in composition is full of redundancies in part because a full record of it has never been readily accessible. A full and easily consulted record of the past work would help keep teachers, WPAs, and scholars (not that the three are mutually exclusive) from duplicating what has already been done.

¶ 16 Leave a comment on paragraph 16 0 6-Affirmative
Back to the “full record,” I see. But why should “record” be a given? The mode of knowledge creation, elaboration, and dissemination most appropriate to composition is lore. Lore is a mode that does not need formal keeping of records for its viability, much less an exhaustive keeping of records.

¶ 17 Leave a comment on paragraph 17 0 6-Negative
Lore may be the most common mode of knowledge in the daily enterprise of composition programs but that does not mean it is flawless or can’t be bettered. Informal exchange of knowledge—lore—is subject to distortion, distortion that can be critiqued by the past record of formal knowledge. Thus lore grows.

7-Affirmative
What is the nature of that growth? Formal or informal, new knowledge maintains older knowledge that is relevant and discards old knowledge that is not relevant. A full record would just hinder the natural growth of knowledge.

7-Negative
Time and again in other disciplines, advances in knowledge have been prompted with a return to neglected scholarship. Why not also in composition? To neglect a contribution to the field is one thing; to discard it—block ways back to it—is another.

¶ 18 Leave a comment on paragraph 18 0 8-Affirmative
Yet so much of what has been published in composition is local and situational—that is, designed for a short shelf life. Why preserve it?

¶ 19 Leave a comment on paragraph 19 0 8-Negative
Preserve it so it can be used for comparison. The local and the situational are defined as such by comparison with other locales and situations. Out of the comparison are born the local regulations that form a course or a program.

¶ 20 Leave a comment on paragraph 20 0 9-Affirmative
The local regulations that writing teachers and writing program apply do not need past knowledge to function.

¶ 21 Leave a comment on paragraph 21 0 9-Negative
A writing program needs past knowledge since . . . [et cetera].

You can follow any comments on this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment. Pinging is currently not allowed.