NCTE/CCCC's Recent War on Scholarship Export

@article{citeulike:1216224, abstract = {This article documents aspects of the history of support for scholarship by two professional organizations involved with teaching composition at the postsecondary level: the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC). Evidence is found that for the past two decades, the two organizations have substantially withdrawn their sponsorship of one kind of scholarship. That scholarship is defined as RAD: replicable, aggregable, and data supported. The history of RAD scholarship as published in NCTE and CCCC books and journals, compared to that published elsewhere, is traced from 1940 to 1999 in three areas: teaching of the research paper, gain in writing skills during a writing course, and methods of peer critique. The history of NCTE and CCCC attempts at scholarly bibliography is also traced. Implications are considered for the future of the study of college composition as an academic discipline.}, author = {Haswell, Richard H.}, citeulike-article-id = {1216224}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://wcx.sagepub.com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/cgi/content/abstract/22/2/198}, comment = {NCTE was established in 1911; CCCC in 1949. Both have, over the past two decades, evidenced a hostility to quantitative research and have subscribed to a binary between quantitative and qualitative research. That makes composition studies the only discipline that does not respect quantitative studies (199-200). Although the organizations define scholarship broadly, they only support qualitative research, which effectively starves quantitative studies (218-219). Champions "RAD studies, or scholarly investigation that is replicable, aggregable, and data supported. RAD scholarship is a best effort inquiry into the actualities of a situation, inquiry that is explicitly enough systematicized in sampling, execution, and analysis to be replicated; exactly enough circumscribed to be extended; and factually enough supported to be verified. RAD scholarship may or may not use statistics." For that reason, Haswell eschews the term empirical (201). He does, however, call it "hard" research (217). He believes that the concept of RAD research may subvert the qualitative/quantitative binary that has been so damaging for composition studies (201-202). Haswell provides a table that contrasts the characteristics of RAD and non-RAD research (208). He examines the NCTE/CCCC record of publishing RAD research in three areas: research papers, "the success of writing courses in improving student writing," and peer response (206). "The two professional organizations have nearly stopped publishing RAD scholarship into the research paper assignment, and they represent the only venues in the professional field of college composition studies where that has happened" (209). The same is true for research in gain in writing courses (210) and peer response (213). Nor have the organizations succeeded in sustaining a bibliography of research in the field (213-215). Even when a practice is well supported by RAD scholarship, when the practices loses its novelty, NCTE/CCCC ignore the data that support it (217). Haswell fears that the trend might lead to the end of composition studies as a discipline (217-218). }, journal = {Written Communication}, keywords = {comp\_studies, ncte, research}, month = {April}, number = {2}, pages = {198--223}, posted-at = {2007-04-08 20:42:19}, priority = {0}, title = {NCTE/CCCC's Recent War on Scholarship}, url = {http://wcx.sagepub.com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/cgi/content/abstract/22/2/198}, volume = {22}, year = {2005} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1216224 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1216224 N2 - This article documents aspects of the history of support for scholarship by two professional organizations involved with teaching composition at the postsecondary level: the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) and the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC). Evidence is found that for the past two decades, the two organizations have substantially withdrawn their sponsorship of one kind of scholarship. That scholarship is defined as RAD: replicable, aggregable, and data supported. The history of RAD scholarship as published in NCTE and CCCC books and journals, compared to that published elsewhere, is traced from 1940 to 1999 in three areas: teaching of the research paper, gain in writing skills during a writing course, and methods of peer critique. The history of NCTE and CCCC attempts at scholarly bibliography is also traced. Implications are considered for the future of the study of college composition as an academic discipline. IS - 2 JF - Written Communication EP - 223 TI - NCTE/CCCC's Recent War on Scholarship VL - 22 SP - 198 KW - comp_studies KW - ncte KW - research N1 - NCTE was established in 1911; CCCC in 1949. Both have, over the past two decades, evidenced a hostility to quantitative research and have subscribed to a binary between quantitative and qualitative research. That makes composition studies the only discipline that does not respect quantitative studies (199-200). Although the organizations define scholarship broadly, they only support qualitative research, which effectively starves quantitative studies (218-219). Champions "RAD studies, or scholarly investigation that is replicable, aggregable, and data supported. RAD scholarship is a best effort inquiry into the actualities of a situation, inquiry that is explicitly enough systematicized in sampling, execution, and analysis to be replicated; exactly enough circumscribed to be extended; and factually enough supported to be verified. RAD scholarship may or may not use statistics." For that reason, Haswell eschews the term empirical (201). He does, however, call it "hard" research (217). He believes that the concept of RAD research may subvert the qualitative/quantitative binary that has been so damaging for composition studies (201-202). Haswell provides a table that contrasts the characteristics of RAD and non-RAD research (208). He examines the NCTE/CCCC record of publishing RAD research in three areas: research papers, "the success of writing courses in improving student writing," and peer response (206). "The two professional organizations have nearly stopped publishing RAD scholarship into the research paper assignment, and they represent the only venues in the professional field of college composition studies where that has happened" (209). The same is true for research in gain in writing courses (210) and peer response (213). Nor have the organizations succeeded in sustaining a bibliography of research in the field (213-215). Even when a practice is well supported by RAD scholarship, when the practices loses its novelty, NCTE/CCCC ignore the data that support it (217). Haswell fears that the trend might lead to the end of composition studies as a discipline (217-218). AU - Haswell, Richard PY - 2005/04// UR - http://wcx.sagepub.com.libezproxy2.syr.edu/cgi/content/abstract/22/2/198 ER -