f Journals in Composition Studies, Thirty-Five Years After

References

1. “Aims and Scope.” Written Communication us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/journal/written-communication#aims-and-scope Accessed 20Mar 2019.
   [Google Scholar]
2. “About.” WOE: Writing on the Edge 2018 woejournal.ucdavis.edu/about.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Adler-Kassner Linda Wardle Elizabeth editors Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies. Utah State UP 2015.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Alvarez Steven. “Taco Literacy: Public Advocacy and Mexican Food in the U.S. Nuevo South.” Composition Studies , vol.45, no. 2 2017, , pp.151–66.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Anderson Kate T. et al. “Seeing Academically Marginalized Students’ Multimodal Designs from a Position of Strength.” Written Communication , vol.34, no. 2 2017, , pp.104–34.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Boe John et al. eds.., Teachers on the Edge: The WOE Interviews 1989–2017. Routledge 2017.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bouwer Renske De Smedt Fien. “Introduction Special Issue: Considerations and Recommendations for Reporting Writing Interventions in Research Publications.” Journal of Writing Research , vol.10, no. 2 2018, , pp.115–37.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Brandt Deborah. The Rise of Writing: Redefining Mass Literacy. Cambridge UP 2014.
   [Google Scholar]
9. CCC Online cccc.ncte.org/cccc/ccconline Accessed 2Nov 2018.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Ching Kory Lawson. “Tools Matter: Mediated Writing Activity in Alternative Digital Environments.” Written Communication , vol.35, no. 3 10.1177/0741088318773741..
    [Google Scholar]
11. Christiansen M. Sidury. “Creating a Unique Transnational Place: Deterritorialized Discourse and the Blending of Time and Space in Online Social Media.” Written Communication , vol.34, no. 2 2017, , pp.135–64.
    [Google Scholar]
12. CLOCKSS. “Why CLOCKSS?” clocks.org.
13. Cloud Doug. “Rewriting a Discursive Practice: Atheist Adaptation of Coming Out Discourse.” Written Communication , vol.34, no. 2 2017, , pp.165–88.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Cohn Jenae Druckman. “User Testing Student ePortfolios.” Kairos , vol.23, no. 1 Fall 2018 praxis.technorhetoric.net/tiki-index.php?page=PraxisWiki:_:eportfolios.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Computers and Composition: An International Journal journals.elsevier.com/computers-and-comp osition Accessed 20Mar 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Connors Robert J.. Composition-Rhetoric: Backgrounds, Theory, and Pedagogy. U Pittsburgh P 1997.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Connors Robert J.. “Journals in Composition Studies.” College English , vol.46, no. 4 1984, , pp.348–65.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Daniel James Rushing. “Freshman Composition as a Precariat Enterprise.” College English , vol.80, no. 1 2017, , pp.63–85.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Dyson Anne Haas. “A Sense of Belonging: Writing (Righting) Inclusion and Equity in a Child’s Transition to School.” RTE , vol.52, no. 3 2018, , pp.236–61.
    [Google Scholar]
20. “Editorial Policy.” College English , vol.80, no. 1 2017, 3.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Emig Janet. “Writing as a Mode of Learning.” CCC , vol.28, no. 2 1977, , pp.122–28.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Fredlund Katherine. “Feminist CHAT: Collaboration, Nineteenth-Century Women’s Clubs, and Activity Theory.” College English , vol.78, no. 5 2016, , pp.470–95.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Fulwiler Toby Young Art. Language Connections: Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum. NCTE 1982.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Garcia Antero et al. “Invisible Potential: The Social Contexts of Technology in Three 9th-Grade ELA Classrooms.” RTE , vol.52, no. 4 2018, , pp.404–26.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Hahn Edward. “Reviewing Writing, Rethinking Whiteness: A Study in Composition’s Practical Life.” Composition Studies , vol.46, no. 1 Spring 2018, , pp.15–33.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Hogg Charlotte.. “Sorority Rhetorics as Everyday Epideictic.” College English , vol.80, no. 5 2018, , pp.423–48.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Holberg Jennifer L. Taylor Marcy. “Editors’ Introduction.” Pedagogy , vol.1, no. 1 2001, , pp.1–5.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Holcomb Chris Buell Duncan A.. “First Year Composition as ‘Big Data:’ Towards Examining Student Revisions at Scale.” Computers and Composition , vol.48 2018, , pp.49–66.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Imbrenda John-Philip. “‘No Facts Equals Unconvincing’: Fact and Opinion as Conceptual Tools in High School Students’ Written Arguments.” Written Communication , vol.35, no. 3 2018, , pp.315–43.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Journal of Writing Research jowr.org Accessed 20Mar 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Kimmons Royce et al. “Essay Composition across Media: A Quantitative Comparison of 8th Grade Student Essays Composed with Paper vs. Chromebooks.” Computers and Composition , vol.44 2017, , pp.13–26.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Lauer Janice M.. “Composition Studies: Dappled Discipline.” Rhetoric Review , vol.3, no. 1 1984, , pp.20–29.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Leong Alvin Ping et al. “Examining Structure in Scientific Research Articles: A Study of Thematic Progression and Thematic Density.” Written Communication , vol.35, no. 3 2018, , pp.286–314.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Lewis Cynthia. “and gladly teach Hearing a Play: Learning from Radio Shakespeare.” College English , vol.80, no. 4 2018, , pp.364–84.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Lindemann Erika editor Reading the Past, Writing the Future: A Century of American Literacy Education and the National Council of Teachers of English. NCTE 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Lueck Amy J.. “‘Classbook Sense’: Genre and Girls’ School Yearbooks in the Earlier-TwentiethCentury American High School.” College English , vol.79, no. 4 2017, , pp.381–406.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Malenczyk Rita et al. Composition, Rhetoric, and Disciplinarity. Utah State UP 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Minnix Christopher. “‘Globalist Scumbags’: Composition’s Global Turn in a Time of Fake News, Globalist Conspiracy, and Nationalist Literacy.” Literacy in Composition Studies , vol.5, no. 2 2017 10.21623%2F1.5.2.5.
    [Google Scholar]
39. North Stephen. The Making of Knowledge in Composition. Boynton Cook/Heinemann 1987.
    [Google Scholar]
40. O’Brien April. “Horrorism and Ontological Dignity: What Do/not Historical Signs Tell Us?” Present Tense , vol.7, no. 1 www.presenttensejournal.org/volume-7/horrorism-and-ontological-dignity-what-do-not-historical-signs-tell-us/.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Olive Thierry Barbier Marie-Laure. “Processing Time and Cognitive Effort of Longhand Note Taking When Reading and Summarizing a Structured or Linear Text.” Written Communication , vol.34, no. 2 2017, , pp.224–46.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Ostergaard Lori. “Working with Disciplinary Artifacts: An Introductory Writing Studies Course for Writing Majors.” Composition Studies , vol.43, no. 2 2015, , pp.150–71.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Palmquist Mike. Personal interview,14Dec 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Qin Kongii. “‘Doing Funny’ and Performing Masculinity: An Immigrant Adolescent Boy’s Identity Negotiation and Language Learning in One US ESK Classroom.” RTE , vol.52, no. 4 2018, , pp.427–54.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Quigley Stephen. “Welcome to the Letters of Anna Calhoun Clemson” Kairos , vol.22, no. 2 2018 kairos.technorhetoric.net/22.2/disputatio/quigley/index.html.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Ray Brian et al. “Rethinking SETs: Returning Student Evaluations of Teaching for Student Agency.” Composition Studies , vol.46, no. 1 2018, , pp.34–56.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Rhetoric Public Affairs. “About this Journal.” Rhetoric Public Affairs muse.jhu.edu/journal/171.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Riche David. “Toward a Theory and Pedagogy of Rhetorical Vulnerability.” Literacy in Composition Studies , vol.5, no. 2 2017, , pp.84–101.
    [Google Scholar]
49. “Submission Guidelines.” Computers and Composition Online ncte.org/resources/journals/teaching-english-in-the-two-year-college/write-for-us/ Accessed 20Mar 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
50. “Submission Guidelines.” Research in the Teaching of English ncte.org/resources/journals/research-in-the-teaching-of-english/write-for-us/ Accessed 20 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
51. “Submission Guidelines.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College www.journals.elsevier.com/computers-and-composition Accessed 20Mar 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
52. “Submission Overview.” Journal of Response to Writing journalrw.org/index.php/jrw Accessed 20Mar 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Sullivan Patricia A.. “In Memoriam: Robert J. Connors, 1951-2000.” JAC , vol.20, no. 3 , pp.483–85.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Voss Julia. “Who Learns from Collaborative Digital Projects?” Composition Studies , vol.46, no. 1 2018, , pp.57–80.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Wilder Laura Yagelski Robert. “Describing Cross-Disciplinary Analytic Moves in First-Year College Writing.” RTE , vol.52, no. 4 2018, , pp.382–403.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Wolfe Christopher R. et al. “Most Any Reason Is Better Than None: Consequences of Implausible Reasons and Warrants in Brief Written Arguments.” Written Communication , vol.35, no. 3 2018, , pp.255–85.
    [Google Scholar]