HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3_uno PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 22:27:06 CST
From:         Irvin Peckham <peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Taking Offense at Reason
              92 2:14 pm

> And usable documents depend on the audience and context of use.  So,
> informative writing is very audience-centered.  And I think this
> side-bar on Kinnevian categories challenges the idea that categories
> are not inclusive, that they just record tendencies.  For these
> supposed tendencies have demanded rethinking, something my classes in
> technical writing work on.
>
The point, Gary, was still to speak of tendancies:  what features might
be in the writer's/speaker's mind as he or she thinks of his/her text
(the audience, the subject, or maybe the simple desire to write out
one's thoughts--derrogated as expressive urges).  Just compare an
"old" car manual (the kind that didn't concern itself too much with
audience--the pre-volks for idiots kinds [that no self-respecting
mechanic would buy because the writer had too much of his eye on
his audience) with Kennedy's inaugural address.  There are differences
here, Gary.  Or consider my diary that I have been keeping for about
20 years.  Nope.  Sorry.  Not for you folks.  Me only.  I'd burn out
your eyes if you saw it.
  The claim about "informative" writing is not that writers do not
concern themselves with audience.  It's how much.
Irv.
>
>
> -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
> |
> |   Gary Beason
> |   Purdue University
> |   bubba@mace.cc.purdue.edu
>


--
Irvin Peckham
Internet: peckham@unomaha.edu
From: IACDES@ASUACAD.BITNET (David E. Schwalm)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Accrediting Writing Instruction
Date: 17 Nov 92 06:17:47 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

From: David E. Schwalm
You should see what I tried to sneak into our NCA self-study, Sharon. I wrote
up the description of first-year comp and its delivery. Made it into the first
draft. Somebody's going to edit it somewhere along the line, probably. (It was
an analysis of the staffing pattern of the English Department showing how 70%
of dept. credit hours are produced by TAs and FAs.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:59:42 -0700
From:         CROWLEY@NAUVAX.BITNET
Subject:      Accrediting Writing Instruction

Well, David Schwalm, you finally got me off the wall.  Those of us who worked
at implementing the Wyoming Resolution tried a lot of ways to get our
standards for post-secondary writing instruction into the works at the
regional accrediting agencies (North Central etc).  What we discovered was that
while these agencies will receive professional standards, there is no
institutional guarantee that they will be taken into account when a review
group goes out to a given college or university to look at a given English
department, say.  The only way to insure that professional standards are
taken into account is to smuggle sympathetic persons who are versed in the
standards onto review teams, and then to make sure that these people use the
standards when reviews are written.  This would strenthen the claims made
by many English departments that their writing programs are understaffed,
underfunded, underappreciated, etc etc.  (I see I misspelled strengthen in
an earlier line--surely the ether-friendly English teachers on this list
will forgive such a thing?)   A proposal for gathering folks who would be
willing and able to serve on review terms in this capacity is before the
exec committee of CCCC.      Sharon Crowley
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sat, 21 Nov 1992 11:03:54 AST
Comments:     <21NOV92.11972908.0089.MUSIC@UNB.CA>
From:         Russ Hunt <HUNT@UNB.CA>
Subject:      Re: Getting a C

Irv writes:
> 	Maybe it's not Clinton we should be worried about but his
> advisers.  I read in the Nov 18 issue of The Chronicle of Higher
> Education that some people in Clinton's group are suggesting that
> the part of Bush's America 2000 plan about having national standards
> assessment and more rigor would be kept.
     No surprises there.  In Canada we have a New Democratic
Party, which in many ways is left of either established party in
the US.  In educational matters, however, it's as much a part of
the conservative, trickle-down establishment as Bush & Co.  or
Mulroney Ltd.  In practice, I see no connection between
enlightened social policies and enlightened educational ones.  At
least not since Dewey and the pragmaticists.
                                    -- Russ
                                _~|__
Russell A. Hunt            _~|__)_ __)~|__   Learning and Teaching
Department of English      )_ __)_|_)__ __)     Development Office
St. Thomas University        |  )____) |        EMAIL: hunt@unb.ca
Fredericton, New Brunswick___|____|____|____/  FAX: (506) 450-9615
E3B 5G3   CANADA          \                / PHONE: (506) 452-7700
                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:34:18 -0500
From:         SIRAKOV@VASSAR.BITNET
Subject:      RE: at-risk students

Irv Peckham writes:
>I have recently been struck
>by the incredible differences between the attitudes toward
>students and pedagogy, rules, etc., that I have seen in the
>schools we are considering for our daughter (generally reserved
>for the wealthy or class crashers like us--Holyoak, Smith, Vassar,
>Carleton, Grinell are the ones on our list) and large universities
>like the ones I went to (Wisconsin--generally cheap) or like the
>working class univ. where I teach.  These latter schools have
>sink or swim attitudes (the tough boy pose).  The former make
>sure that most (if not all--they consider their charges to be
>too precious to waste) succeed.

Far be it for me to stand idly by while alma mater gets blasted for shoddy
standards and elitism!  As a recent grad of Vassar ('92) and current
employee of same, I'd like to put in my own two cents here.

Vassar's academic standards are quite high.  I worked hard to get my Vassar
degree, and I know many people who were bounced out of here (Vassar
terminology:  encouraged to take a "non-academic leave") for a semester or
more because their grades were not up to snuff.   Vassar does demonstrate a
commitment to its students, but that's what a lot of students come here
for, and I don't think Vassar is designing a situation where students _must
succeed_ at all costs.   I also don't think Vassar is purposefully elitist
in its admissions, any more than any other college of the same size and
caliber.   I think it's difficult to compare a small, liberal-arts college
such as Vassar, or Grinnell, or "Holyoak" (do you mean Mt. Holyoke? and if
so, wow, I never knew they had such a huge library) and a powerhouse state
university such as Wisconsin.  When you go to Vassar, you sacrifice the
opportunity to do research with key players in the field, you have no
classes with star personalities, you don't have great lab facilities, you
get no football team, and you miss a lot of the things that make huge
universities the places that they are.  On the other hand, you gain small
classes, with great teachers; a focus on teaching over research; a
willingness to consider innovative pedagogy, and a sense of community with
students, faculty and administration.

There is no desire here to coddle students.  There is only a desire to be
fair, and to give students what they asked for in coming to a small,
liberal arts college.  Many students elect to go to large universities, and
those places may be better for them.

By the way, I'm interested to see that you feel that the lack of
requirements at a place like Vassar makes its graduates more flexible, more
individually driven once they graduate.  I agree, but many at Vassar don't,
and the administration is moving towards instituting more requirements,
particularly in math and sciences.

I hope this doesn't come off as a flame.  I didn't intend it to be.  It's
the ol'
 school spirit coming out, I guess.  Vivat academia!
From: YKFAC@TTACS.BITNET (Amanda Corcoran)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Re: Multimedia and hypermedia
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:14:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"

BIll--I also would appreciate a copy of your text from
Prentice-Hall. My snail mail is
Amanda Inskip Corcoran
English Department
Texas Tech University
Lubbock TX 79406

I"m currently teaching TW on IBM D
daedalus and would like to read
anything combining computers and TW. Thanks.

MY zip is 79409--sorry about that.
Amanda Inskip Corcoran--Texas Tech
              Amanda Inskip Corcoran--Texas Tech
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3_uno PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:35:30 CST
From:         Irvin Peckham <peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: What makes a good exercise?
              92 5:33 pm

This is an off the cuff reply, which I am afraid I am noted for.
I am suspicious of the work "exercise."  It seems to be arhetorical.
What I ask my students to do in class has to grow out of what has
been done.  So in general, I would say that exercises are what
one should do in the morning.

--
Irvin Peckham
Internet: peckham@unomaha.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:56:41 -0500
From:         "(Raul A. Huerta)" <kendo@UC1.UCSU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Images

Frankly, I have been quite astonished to read comments on this list about
images.  Yes, there is a rhetoric of images and believe it or not it pre-dates
_rhetoric_.  How long has writing been around folks?  Don't any of you read
Chinese?  Haven't any of you taken an anthropology class -- was the first
"writing" ideographic in nature -- or has the alphabet been here all along.  I
_view_ multimedia as simply being the point in which the _west_ has finally
reached the point of intellectual sophistication found in the Chinese and
Mayan writing systems.  The point is to take images and merge them with writing-
in other words combine the notion of mind and body!

********************************************************************************
Raul Huerta                                    "Do not seek to follow
Frank E. Ganett Memorial Library               in the footsteps of the
Utica College of Syracuse University           men of old, seek what
1600 Burrstone Road                            they sought."
Utica, NY 13502                                                Basho
(315) 792-3041  rah@uc1.ucsu.edu
********************************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:43:46 MST
From:         "David E. Schwalm" <IACDES@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re:Multimedia/In Defense of Reason

From: David E. Schwalm
In Jim C's response toGary B, he suggests that written argument has multiple
voices in the sense that argument presupposes conflicting points of view. But
writing also has an aural dimension for most or many readers--or even multiple
aural dimensions (vide the various readings of Ulysseus on IBM thingy). We
hear, in a rather literal sense, irony. Texts are not all that silent. Often
what puts us to sleep in many tech manuals is the monotone voice. Hummmmmmm.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:49:03 CST
From:         Bob Boston <S2.RSB@ISUMVS.IASTATE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Gail's Question About Beginnings

Gail, at Iowa State we started teaching writing classes with computers in
January, 1983.  Two public-access labs of 24 Zenith 100's.  No network.  We
could reserve a lab for classes a few times each semester (once a week was out
of the question) so we'd typically have a one-hour orientation session and
then leave the kids to their own devices for a few weeks. (Fortunately, Jeff
Balvanz of the Comp Center had written an excellent on-disk tutorial for Word
Star.) Even so, we had to handle most of the computer questions in a
traditional classroom without being able to demonstrate.  Quite a job.

In 1984, some of us moved to the campus VAX system to be able to use the
network, but VAX's line editor and RunOff formatting program were just too
difficult to handle for all but the simplest formats.  I spent a lot of time
writing macros.

In 1985, several of us banded together to use the university's Wylbur network,
for Wylbur had a full-screen editor which all terminals on campus and most
micros (even my old Apple ///) could use.  The mail feature was also much more
convenient than that on the VAX, and we could help our students online.  I
held electronic office hours from 4 until 10 P.M. each weekday, and that was a
great experience.

We finally got our first English classroom/lab in January of 1989.

Bob Boston
Iowa State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Fri, 20 Nov 1992 08:29:46 EST
From:         "(Bill Konrad)" <konrad@MACE.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: I cry thee mercy!
              Nov 19, 92 11:58 pm

Bill Condon,

I agree wholeheartedly with your suggestions for self-restraint on
postings. I enjoy the discussions (usually as a lurker) on MBU-L, but
the volume lately has sorely tempted me to unsubscribe (or maybe to
SET NOMAIL) until I have more time to deal with the high volume of
messages.

Almost feel guilty about adding to the volume with this "ditto"
message.
--
Bill Konrad
konrad@mace.cc.purdue.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:45:42 EST
From:         Fred McFarland <WWN@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: software & hardware

What software are you using on yoru campus-wide network?
Fred McFarland
(WWN@Cornellc.cit.cornell.edu)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:45:29 -0700
From:         "(Michael Day)" <mday@SILVER.SDSMT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Success at U.C. Berkeley

Tim:  Nobody calls ME a sissy and gets away with it!  ;-)

Congratulations on your success!

Michael
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sun, 15 Nov 1992 15:47:32 -0600
From:         tmmyers@IASTATE.EDU
Subject:      getting a "C"

Wing-Keong Loke the consummate chronic prevaricator
writes:

I make what I learn very important to me.  So what if I get a
"C?"  What's important is I've got a start, and if I have interested
myself enoguh, I'll continue to read up on the subject throughout my
life.

Being a "scholar" (or at least in academics) I tend to agree with what
is being said here.  However, that attitude runs into some difficulties.
When applying to graduate schools, I have seen a few that have a "bench
mark" of a certain GPA, and "C"s usually fall well below that mark.  What is
a poor prospective student to do?  Go for pleasing the instructors and
getting the "A", or learn with the "C"s?

Tim Myers
tmmyers@iastate.edu
From: peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU (Irvin Peckham)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Re: Still defending reason
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:32:42 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3_uno PL11]

> Jim Crosswhite writes:
> David Schwalm, Since you asked, and off the top of my head (after
> thinking it over for 5 years), I'd say that reason is a kind of
> rhetoric, and logic is one form that reasoning takes. Of course, this
> makes logic a kind of rhetoric, which is fine with me. The audience that
> would follow the rules of what we think of as logic would be a very
> specific kind of human being. ..the kind we defer to in some

Jim wrote more of course, but he made me want to ask a quasi-innocent
question:  what does he (and what do you all) mean by logic?  I don't
really know whether everyone else knows this and I don't--which of
course puts me in the dumb category.  Thought I would risk the question
anyway.
  I had written before of S. Langer's distinctions between presenational
and discursive logic (Joni I think wanted the reference and I gave
a vague one:  it was in ch. 4 of Phil. in a New Key).  I have heard
here and there about different kinds of logic--logics that differ
with cultural situations.  Mixed in with this confusion is my having
been swayed by Lakoff's argument that our notions of logic are possibly
shaped or even determined by our perceptions (and feelings, I believe)
of our body structures, e.g., set theory derived from inside/outside
notions (our bodies as containers--inside).
  I suppose Jim is referring to such things as cause and effect (which
could perhaps be usefully interrogated); if, then and syllogistic
reasoning?  Is there a claim that this kind of "logic" is transcendentally
valid?
Irv

--
Irvin Peckham
Internet: peckham@unomaha.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 16 Nov 1992 21:44:01 EST
From:         Fred McFarland <WWN@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Info for an argument

Thanks for Pamela Farrell's name and address for Nat. Dire or Writing Centers.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sun, 15 Nov 1992 11:33:59 EST
From:         "(Gary Beason)" <bubba@MACE.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Multimedia
              at Nov 11, 92 6:43 pm

>     Multimedia opens up new, more direct ways to create
> presence in argumentation.  Multimedia's appeal to the
> imagination is much more direct, much more immediate and
> forceful. One *can* see and hear the ox, in quicktime.

I'll quibblehere--text allows (as visuals do, but differently))
division of the whole 'picture' in ways that visuals can't.
Significance is not always easily communicated visually (and although
reading is visual, I'm referring to design, pictures, graphs, etc. as
visual).

I think this issue of focus may be what my students, at least,
distrust about visuals.  If the cliche is "a picture says a thousand
words" it may be 900 words too many.  The illustration or the graph
may have too much "noise."  But this same danger lies with text.

Clarifying and focusing visuals is a different set of strategies for
students long used to hearing about text.

>
>     The historical link between writing and reasoning, the
> one that our students have inherited, is no accident. A
> reason is an influence without force or violence. Writing is
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> language without even the force of sound. Written reasoning
> is the whispering of language.

I'm not sure what you mean here, Jim.  It sounds interesting, but I'm
not sure I buy into it, at least not if you mean that reasoning is
intrinsically fair and equal.  Schopenhauer pointed out that reasoning
is both the fair and unfair use of logic.  The mere fact that
deduction, for example, is propositional commits a violence in that it
is monological.  In *Beyond Good and Evil* Nietzsche explains how
philosophers have basically imprisoned themselves (and quite
seriously!) in the calm (seeming) control of monologic (not his term
but the idea is such).  And there is a force in this way of thinking,
a forcing out of focus what is other, what is somehow nonessential.

Induction is also selective--find the "representative" example, say
the handbooks.

Selectivity and exclusion, while not necessarily violence, is force, a
coercion, especially in monological reasoning.

Also, when you say the "force of sound," are you also thinking about
Ong; in *Presence of the Word* he argues that the oral is more polemic.


-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
|
|   Gary Beason
|   Purdue University
|   bubba@mace.cc.purdue.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: smh@AAL.ITD.UMICH.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Subject: Responses to posts
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:07:09 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <smh@aal.itd.umich.edu>

Angela, let me second Jim McDonald's recent posting.  Of course it is
sometimes disappointing to post something and have no one (seemingly)
respond to it, but we can't really measure silence on the net in any but
negative terms.  I've been thinking about ways to re-imagine silence
both here and in my class' on-line discussions in light of the recent
thread of lurking (which is one of the things that has kept in
oops, that should be it, afloat in my mind, David).  I'd like to think
that in many ways silence makes room for words, or at least shapes the
space for words.  And many times I don't respond on MBU but I do talk
about postings with other people here.  I don't like the term
wallflower, since it implies that people who don't post much don't
really participate....but that's another matter.
Susanmarie Harrington
University of Michigan
ENglish COmposition Board
smh@aal.itd.umich.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU