Skip to content
2018
Volume 75, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 0010-096X
  • E-ISSN: 1939-9006

Abstract

Cultural rhetorics—as orientation, methodology, and practice—has made meaningful contributions to writing pedagogy (Brooks-Gillies et al.; Cedillo and Bratta; Baker-Bell; Cedillo et al.; Cobos et al.; Condon and Young; Powell). Despite these contributions, classroom teachers and writing program administrators can struggle to conceptualize assessment beyond bureaucratic practice and their role in assessment beyond standing in loco for the institution. To more fully realize the potential of cultural rhetorics in our classrooms and programs, the field needs assessment models that seek to uncover the counterstories of writing and meaning-making. Our work, at the intersections of queer rhetorics and writing assessment, provides a theoretical framework called Queer Validity Inquiry (QVI) that disrupts stock stories of success—a success that is always available to some at the expense of others. Through four diffractive lenses—failure, affectivity, identity, and materiality—QVI prompts us to determine what questions about student writers and their writing intrigue us, why we care about them, and whose interests are being served by those questions.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/ccc202332674
2023-09-01
2024-05-01
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baker-Bell April. Linguistic Justice: Black Language, Literacy, Identity, and Pedagogy. Routledge 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Beck Estee. “Implications of Persuasive Computer Algorithms.” Routledge Companion to Digital Writing & Rhetoric edited by Alexander Jonathan and Rhodes Jacqueline, Routledge 2018, pp 291–302.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Richard Braddock, et al. Research in Written Composition. National Council of Teachers of English 1963.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brooks-Gillies Marilee, et al. “A Cultural Rhetorics Approach to Understanding Power Dynamics within a University Writing Center.” Praxis, vol. 19, no. 1 2022, pp 68–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Carr Margaret. Assessment in Early Childhood Settings: Learning Stories. Paul Chapman 2000.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Caswell Nicole I., and Banks William P.. “Queering Writing Assessment: Fairness, Affect, and the Impact on LGBTQ Writers.” Writing Assessment, Social Justice, and the Advancement of Opportunity edited by Poe Mya, Inoue Asao B., and Elliot Norbert, Colorado State UP 2018, pp 355–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cedillo Christina, and Bratta Phil. “Relating Our Experiences: The Practice of Positionality Stories in Student-Centered Pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, vol. 71, no. 2 2019, pp 215–40.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cedillo Christina V., et al. “Listening to Stories: Practicing Cultural Rhetorics Pedagogy: A Virtual Roundtable.” Constellations: A Cultural Rhetorics Publishing Space 2018, https://constell8cr.com/pedagogy blog/listening-to-stories-practicing-cultural-rhetorics-pedagogy/.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cobos Casie, et al. “Interfacing Cultural Rhetorics: A History and a Call.” Rhetoric Review, vol. 37, no. 2 2018, pp 139–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Condon Frankie, and Young Vershawn Ashanti. Performing Antiracist Pedagogy in Rhetoric Writing and Communication. WAC Clearinghouse, U of Colorado P 2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Connors Robert J. Composition-Rhetoric: Backgrounds, Theory, and Pedagogy. U of Pittsburgh P 1997.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. D’Agostino Susan. “Designing Assignments in the ChatGPT Era.” Inside Higher Ed, 31 Jan 2023, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2023/01/31/chatgpt-sparks-debate-How-design-student-assignments-now.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Danielewicz Jane, and Elbow Peter 2009 “A Unilateral Grading Contract to Improve Learning and Teaching.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 244–68.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Daniels Harvey A. Famous Last Words: The American Language Crisis Reconsidered. Southern Illinois UP 1983.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. DePaul University. “Direct Versus Indirect Assessment of Student Learning2023, https://resources.depaul.edu/teaching-commons/teaching-guides/feedback-grading/Pages/direct-assessment.aspx.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Diederich Paul B. “The Measurement of Skill in Writing.” School Review, vol. 54, no. 10 1946, pp 584–92.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Drummond Tom, and Owens Kayla Shea. “Making Learning Visible2020, https://tomdrummond.com/helping-other-adults/making-learning-visible/.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Eley Earle G. “Should the General Composition Test Be Continued? The Test Satisfies an Educational Need.” College Board Review, vol. 25 1955, Winter, pp. 9–13.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Greene Peter. “No, ChatGPT Is Not the End of High School English. But Here’s the Useful Tool It Offers Teachers.” Forbes, 11 Dec 2022, https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2022/12/11/no-chatgpt-is-not-the-end-of-high-school-english-but-heres-the-useful-tool-it-offers-teachers/?sh=524bf8d01437.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Heidtman Johanna, et al. “Positivism and Types of Theories in Sociology.” Sociological Focus, vol. 33, no. 1 2000, pp 1–26. doi:10.1080/00380237.2000.10571154.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Herman Daniel. “The End of High-School English.” The Atlantic, 9 Dec 2022, https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/openai-chatgpt-writing-high-school-english-essay/672412/.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Inoue Asao B. Antiracist Writing Assessment Ecologies Teaching and Assessing Writing for a Socially Just Future. WAC Clearinghouse: Parlor P 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kryger Kathleen, and Zimmerman Griffin X.. “Neurodivergence and Intersectionality in Labor-Based Grading Contracts.” Journal of Writing Assessment, vol. 13, no. 22 2020, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0934x4rm.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Marche Steven. “The College Essay Is Dead: Nobody Is Prepared for How AI Will Transform Academia.” The Atlantic, 6 Dec 2022, https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/chatgpt-ai-writing-college-student-essays/672371/.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Martinez Aja Y. Counterstory: The Rhetoric and Writing of Critical Race Theory. National Council of Teachers of English 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Martinez Aja Y. “A Plea for Critical Race Theory Counterstory: Stock Story vs. Counterstory Dialogues Concerning Alejandra’s ‘Fit’ in the Academy.” Performing Antiracist Pedagogy in Rhetoric, Writing, and Communication edited by Condon Frankie and Young Vershawn Ashanti, WAC Clearinghouse/UP of Colorado 2016, pp 65–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Mislevy Robert J., et al. “On the Structure of Educational Assessments.” Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, vol. 1, no. 1 2003, pp 3–62. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15366359MEA0101_02.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Noble Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. NYU P 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Oleksiak Timothy. “Slow Peer Review in the Writing Classroom.” Pedagogy, vol. 21, no. 2 2021, pp 369–83. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-8811551.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Ọnụọha Mimi. “The Library of Missing Datasets.” Mixed Media Installation 2016, https://mimionuoha.com/the-library-of-missing-datasets.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Powell Malea, et al. “Our Story Begins Here: Constellating Cultural Rhetorics.” enculturation, 25 Oct 2014, http://enculturation.net/our-story-begins-here.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Schatten Jeff. “Will Artificial Intelligence Kill College Writing?” The Chronicle Review, 14 Sep 2022 https://www.chronicle.com/article/will-artificial-intelligence-kill-college-writing?cid=gen_sign_in.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Shor Ira. When Students Have Power: Negotiating Authority in a Critical Pedagogy. U of Chicago P 1996.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Varnum Robin. “From Crisis to Crisis: The Evolution Toward Higher Standards of Literacy in the United States.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 3 1986, pp 145–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. West-Puckett Stephanie. “Making Classroom Writing Assessment More Visible, Equitable, and Portable through Digital Badging.” College English, vol. 79, no. 2 2016, pp 127–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. West-Puckett Stephanie, et al. Failing Sideways: Queer Possibilities for Writing Assessment. Utah State UP 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhang Qilong. “Do Learning Stories Tell the Whole Story of Children’s Learning? A Phenomenographic Enquiry.” Early Years, vol. 37, no. 3 2016, pp 255–67.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.58680/ccc202332674
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error