History of the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition

Revised Version2-15 -15 History of the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition Janice Lauer, Consortium Archivist Professor of English, Emerita Purdue University 1992

Revised Version2-15 -15

History of the Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and

Composition Janice Lauer, Consortium Archivist

Professor of English, Emerita

Purdue University

1992 Background

In 1992, at the Conference on College Composition and

Communication (CCCC) in Cincinnati a small group of scholars was convened by Charles Bazerman to discuss ideas for a consortium: Linda Flower, Dick Hayes, Janice Lauer, Louise Phelps, and Barbara Walvoord In 1993 at the San Diego CCCC a steering committee wasformed to include Charles Bazerman, Linda Flower, Dick Hayes, Janice Lauer, Louise Phelps, and Barbara Walvoord Janice Lauer accepted the position of coordinator of the Consortium At these two sessions the attendees confirmed the need for a consortium of

doctoral programs

Preparation 1993

In the summer of 1993, Janice Lauer sent a draft of the

invitation letter and timetable to the R/C subgroup (Appendix A) Shethen sent invitations (Appendix B) to join the Consortium to all

programs that identified themselves as offering doctoral degrees in Rhetoric and Composition in response to a survey published in

Rhetoric Review To those responding to the invitation, she asked them to designate a representative from each affiliating program and

to provide a list of dissertations (Appendix C) Fifty-six programs

registered to be part of the Consortium and designated their

representatives In addition a workshop on doctoral education was planned for the next meeting of the CCCC

First Meeting 1994 Nashville

The first official meeting of the Consortium was convened by Janice

Lauer in the Spring of 1994 at the CCCC in Nashville Attendees discussed the following items

1 The construction of an identity and set of purposes for the

Consortium

1 Identity: “A research-oriented coalition of doctoral programs

in Rhetoric and Composition”

2 Purposes:

a to facilitate the exchange of research by R/C faculty and graduate students through online postings of dissertations and ongoing faculty research projects, including historical, theoretical, interpretive, and empirical studies

b to provide a listserv to enable online exchange among members of the Consortium

c to establish Rhetoric and Composition categories in the Dissertation Abstracts Index

d to provide mutual support of each other’s programs interms of ideas, needs, and problem areas, e.g.,

` 1 the development of graduate curricula, faculty

resources, library enhancement, course and

dissertation loads, promotion, and tenure issues

2 the admission and financial needs of graduate

students, academic support, and job placement

3 the building of relationships with English

departments and other disciplines

3 The establishment of subcommittees to address the above

purposes and issues

a A Home Page: Catherine Hobbs

b On-line dissertations: Janice Lauer, James Porter, Patricia Sullivan

c On-line bibliographies: Gail Hawisher

d On-line exchanges: Cindy Selfe

e Dissertation categories in the DAI: Robert Johnson, Catherine Hobbs, and Anne Rosenthal

f Research strands at the CCCC: Richard Young, Louise Phelps, and Michael Halloran

g Collaboration with the CCCC Research Network Forum: person to be determined

h Regional Networking: Janet Atwill, Paul Ranieri, Lisa McClure

i Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman

j Exchange of information on exams, organization of programs: Michael Flanigan

k Graduate Student Exchange: person to be determined

l Course requirements and descriptions: Lisa McClure and Gerald Nelms

4 Other agenda items:

a Review of the membership list: Janice Lauer

b Graduate Program Survey: Stuart Brown

c Dues and Stationery: Janice Lauer, $10.00 for two

years to cover mailings and stationery

d Workshops for program directors

e Plans for a whole day pre-convention workshop at

the next CCCC on the following topics:

1 Graduate curriculum: designs, requirements,

representations, courses, texts

2 Doctoral Students: admissions, continuing

financial and academic support, job placement

3 Graduate faculty: resources, course and

dissertation loads, promotion and tenure,

faculty and graduate students exchanges

4 Contexts: relationships with English departments

and other fields: starting and maintaining

doctoral programs

ON FILE:

In the Consortium Archives files for 1994 are:

-A Report from the Task Force on the Convention,

-The list of programs that joined the Consortium

-Several memos

1995 Washington, D.C.

Workshop The Consortium sponsored a whole-day pre-convention

workshop “Graduate Programs in Rhetoric and Composition:

Curriculum, Faculty, Graduate Students, and Contexts,” led by JaniceLauer, Frank O’Hare, Ross Winterowd, and Richard Young

Meeting Janice Lauer convened the second meeting following the

workshop Agenda items included:

1 Report and discussion of key issues from the workshop

2 Revised membership list: Janice Lauer

3 Reports of subcommittees:

a On-line dissertations: Catherine Hobbs

b On-line bibliographies: Gail Hawisher

c On-line exchanges: Cindy Selfe

d Dissertation Categories in the DAI: Robert Johnson, Catherine Hobbs, and Anne Rosenthal

e Research Strands at the CCCC: Richard Young, Louise Phelps, and Michael Halloran

f Regional Networking: Janet Atwill, Lisa McClure, and Gerald Nelms

g Course requirements and descriptions: Lisa McClure and Paul Ranieri

h Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman

i Exchange of program information: Michael Flanigan

1 A presentation of the Consortium background: Janice Lauer

2 Membership list, dues, and stationery: Janice Lauer

(Dues payable to "Doctoral Consortium in Rhetoric and Composition." Tax ID number: 35-192-1404TT)

3 Reports and discussion of the subcommittees’ work

a Home page (Agora: http://www.uoknor.edu/agora/):

Catherine Hobbs

b Dissertation categories in the DAI: Chuck Bazerman,

Linda Ferreira Buckley, Rhonda Grego

c Web site: Consortium programs and courses: Lisa

McClure

d Graduate student exchange of information: Lisa

McClure

e Regional networking, etc.: Paul Ranieri

f Support for developing programs: Charles Bazerman,

Ann Merle Feldman

g Graduate program survey: Stuart Brown

4 New business

a Program criteria or ranking: John Warnock

b Program review: Louise Phelps

1 Consortium Home Page and Doctoral Dissertations:

Catherine Hobbs The new address was:

http://www.ou.edu/cas/English/agora, hosted by the

University of Oklahoma Dissertation titles were to be sent

to Catherine Hobbs for inclusion

2 Dissertation Abstracts International: Janice Lauer and LindaFerreira-Buckley A new category was established in the DAI: 0681 Rhetoric and Composition

3 A New On-line Index of Essay Anthologies and Composition

Journals Lee Honeycutt, Rensselaer Polytechnic

Institute, established an index of books, compositionjournals and essays in anthologies by scholars in

Rhetoric and Composition:

4.Web Site, Graduate Student Exchanges

Lisa McClure and colleagues at Southern Illinois University constructed a template for each doctoral program Each could be linked to the consortium website The site also posted a chart listing graduate student addresses and interests

5 Consortium Ad in Journal(s): Linda Ferreira-Buckley

An ad will be placed in a journal to announce the Consortium’s on-line resources for prospective students

or others interested in Rhetoric and Composition doctoral programs

6 Doctoral Program Development and Review

The Consortium will create an archive of documents that

have been used to develop and argue for R/C programs and a list of members willing to advise others

A subcommittee will write criteria to guide program review; a draft will be shared on-line: Louise Phelps, Carol Berkenkotter, Lynne Dianne Beene

7 A report on a survey of graduate student placement: Jeanne Fahenstock, Marie Secor, and Robert Schwegler

8 Regional networking: Janice Lauer reported on the annual Midwest gatherings of faculty and graduate students in

Rhetoric and Composition from Purdue, Ohio State, U of Illinois at Urbana, U Illinois at Chicago, Illinois State, Ball State, Miami U of Ohio, U of Louisville, and Carnegie

Mellon The gatherings met at different universities, senior graduate students presented their research, and informal networking occurred

ON FILE:

-Letter from Louise Phelps about criteria for doctoral candidates,

-Bob Schwegler’s analysis of the MLA Job List,

-A chart of graduate students’ research interests,

-The membership list,

-A Website update by Lisa McClure and Catherine Hobbs,

-Program descriptions, and

-Correspondence about diverse matters

1 Web site and Graduate Student Exchanges: Lisa McClure

2 Dissertation titles (Agora: http://www.uo.edu/cas/):

Catherine Hobbs

3 Other desirable categories in the DAI:

4 Consortium Ad in a Journal: Linda Ferreira-Buckley

5 The archive for program development and review: Louise Phelps, Carol Berkenkotter, and Lynne Dianne Beene

6 Regional networking, etc.: Members

7 Student job placement

8 A report on the On-line Index of Rhetoric and Composition

publications (Lee Honeycutt)

9 Updating of the membership list.

ON FILE:

-An updated membership list

No other material is available

1999 ATLANTA

At the CCCC meeting of the Consortium in Atlanta, Patricia Sullivan again chaired the meeting for Janice Lauer, whose husband had just died

Agenda

1 On-going Efforts

a Website and Graduate Student exchanges: Lisa Mcclure

b Dissertation Categories in the Dai

c Program Development and Review (Workshop): Louise

Phelps

d Regional Networking, etc.: Members

e This year’s student placement: Gail Stygall

f Correct addresses

2 New Business

ON FILE:

-Notes on the workshop,

-Report on the implications of the Ohio State review of doctoral

programs,

-Email about the next pre-convention workshop, and

-Assorted other emails

English

4 More Dissertation Categories in the DAI were discussed:

Members

5 Stuart Brown agreed to develop a proposal for a workshop

and Consortium meeting at the next CCCC’s Convention

6 Dues: Members agreed to suspend dues temporarily

because most of the contacts were being made online

-An updated membership list

No other material is available

1 The Internet as facilitator of course exchanges and

cooperation among doctoral R/C programs: Chuck

Bazerman

2 Hiring practices for R/C positions: Stuart Brown

3 Recruitment practices for R/C graduate students:

Members

4 Other DAI categories

ON FILE:

-A list of core courses in 65 doctoral programs,

No other material is available

2002 CHICAGO

Stuart Brown and Patricia Sullivan convened the Consortium meeting

at the CCCC in Chicago,

Agenda

a Using technology to share resources (Louise Phelps)

b Current dissertation practices (Doug Hesse)

c Electronic resources status: webpage listserv (Lisa Mc Clure)

d Hiring practices for R/C positions

e Recruitment practices for R graduate students

f Program evaluation

g Professionalism of graduate students

h Status at CCCC (similar to Research Network?)

i The coming year’s agenda

ON FILE :

-Updated membership list (Christine Ferris),

-Report on technical innovations for doctoral program collaboration

(Louise Phelps),

2003 NEW YORK

Stuart Brown and Patricia Sullivan convened the Consortium meeting

at the CCCC in New York,

ON FILE:

-Updated list of members,

-Report on broader institutional influences on R/C doctoral programs

(Christine Farris)), -Published essay on rethinking graduate education (Jody Nyquist), -Minutes

-“Survey of Doctoral Programs Should Include More Fields and

Opinions of Students.” Jeffrey Brainard

-Session on the Future off Graduate Education in Rhetoric and

Composition ”

-Plan for the next Consortium meeting on Five Issues Affecting

Doctoral Programs, Doug Hesse

2004 SAN ANTONIO

Stuart Brown convened the Consortium meeting at the CCCC in San

Antonio A list of members was circulated (Appendix D)

Louise Phelps reported on her efforts to approach NRC (Visibility

Plan) on the matter of including the Consortium in their

taxonomy (Appendix E)

Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:10 AM

To: emi6423u@postoffice.uri.edu; Gail Stygall; porterj8@msu.edu ;

Janice Lauer

Cc: tkent@grad.usu.edu; sbrown@nmsu.edu; enos@u.arizona.edu

Subject: action plan for visibility project

Stuart and Theresa because we will need your help on the

information about the Consortium and programs I'm open to

correction if I have misconstrued these roles I imagine we may get offers of help from others At this point I am thinking the emerging field strategy is the best, for three reasons:

1 Our programs do not have the classic form of a mature field, in that they are often still tracks within other degrees In that

respect they look like a subfield However, the problem is that this

is an artifact the field has interdisciplinary roots and is actually

opportunistically finding niches wherever they are available, not

arising monolithically within one discipline as its subdiscipline

Charlotte Kuh (see Libby's message) seems put off by this

complexity, although the discussion of methodology on the NRC website suggests to me that the committee realized that is quite typical of new fields.

2 I don't really know much about how the NRC works with this

taxonomy, but if I understand it correctly it does reputational

rankings I am not sure we are ready for that.

3 It sounds from our sources as if NRC is not likely to go for the full independent field status anyway I have a lot of questions (as you see in my report) and am hoping to get many of them cleared up by seeing Charlotte Kuh and perhaps talking to NRC researchers this summer I have to call since she did not answer my email I will try to reach her before leaving for overseas on May 8.

I realize that some of you understand how all this works better than

I do from your Grad School or other sources, including direct

contact with the NRC Please answer these questions if you have the answers, correct my misunderstandings, add information, contacts, etc.!

I am rather out of commission while away until around June 7, except that I hope during that period that I may be able to meet with

Charlotte Kuh I don't have email capacities during much of that time However, you can send a message during that time to

dgist@med.unc.edu (with copy to me at this address) and it will

eventually reach me (This is my parents' address, where I will be

part of May and early June.)

Re documenting the degree programs and degrees:

Our most urgent need is to have our best corrected list of existing programs and (this is different) a corrected list of Consortium

members It has been suggested that we start data collection by directly calling every program to request data on its graduates over the last 5 years I am not sure that email will work, especially mass mailing, and esp in the summer We would need to have a protocol for what to ask, but basically I think we would want two things: to verify the exact status of the degree as degree (for purposes of

deciding whether to claim it is "not in English" see my comments on the ambiguity of that) to put it most simply, when a person gets the degree, what is it officially named? and, second, to get data on the graduates of the program We must have the last five years and it

would be great to have it back to 1993, when the Consortium began.

If someone of this group (maybe we can enlist help outside it, as some have offered) were to do this, could we get funds for the long distance calls, Stuart, Janice? Or even pay a modest stipend to a graduate student?

A more detailed case would involve, I presume, the kind of work Gail did before to try to locate graduates through various listings and clues I think we need to know this, but the main issue is going to

be graduates from recognized, identifiable R/C programs (including programs where the degrees are tracks in other degrees) And there are all sorts of methodological decisions she made that we should probably try to be consistent with.

Take a closer look at the other suggested data in my action plan draft A lot of it is in previous RR surveys, but is out of date

Theresa was saying it is time to do another, but that will take more time than we have, I think, to get our detailed case to the NRC The NRC seems to be working to fund the (new) committee that will revise

and finalize the taxonomy, starting in the fall.

Louise

ON FILE:

-Updated membership list and minutes,

-“Doctoral Exam Practices in 22 Ph.D Programs in Rhetoric

and Composition” (Deborah Brandt)

-“International Graduate Students: Challenges and

Opportunities” (Pat Sullivan)

-“Research Doctorate Programs, Study on methodology and

Stuart Brown — Report on MA Survey

- response from 55 out of about 200 MA programs in the field (“disappointing”) - some selected high points from data collected (“data is suspect”)

 * 400 graduate programs in English (source: ADE); 179 PhD programs in English; 74 have rhet/comp PhD programs

 * 42 out of 55 are tracks inside an English MA degree

 * “steady if not increasing growth in number of MA programs”

 * 1,000 students registered at the MA level (end of 2004); only 14% are from

underrepresented groups

 * writing samples one of key criteria for admission

 * in 2002-2003, almost 200 MA graduates from programs reporting (79 go on to PhD programs)

 * #1 challenge: lack of resources Other concerns: recruiting; what are foundational knowledge

bases we expect MAs to have?

 * strengths: faculty; inter/multi-disciplinary aspects of degree; theory-practice

connection

Discussion of Stuart’s report (Gail, Louise, Theresa, Carolyn, and others)

Q: Where do MA students come from? National Writing Project, undergrad peer tutors, undergrad

professional/technical writing programs

John Ackerman — Report on PhD Survey (PowerPoint presentation) — 1:56 some selected highlights:

- 70% response rate: 45 of 65 programs reporting

- 613 graduates over past 5 years; 1,625 since 1965

- 85% of R/C programs are still in English

- are we reaching “steady state” (0 slope) in number of PhD graduates? starting to level out - we are a senior field: 72% are full or associate profs

Discussion of John’s report

Q: Can PPT presentation be published or shared? Could it be posted on web site? Q: Could data be “dangerous”? Concern expressed about “growing too much.” Discussion of availability, loss, growth of faculty lines in R/C

3 Proposal for Next Year’s Consortium Meeting (Louise Phelps) — 2:20

- possible topic: articulation of MA and PhD programs (how do MAs pick PhD programs; how do we prepare MAs for PhD work?)

[ ••• break ••• ]

4 Report on Visibility Project (Louise Phelps) — 2:32

- Rhet/Comp not mentioned at all in current NRC taxonomy - NRC taxonomy schedule

* June-December 2005: NRC will finalize taxonomy and questionnaire

* December 2005-April 2006: heads-up letters to universities for institutional coordinators

* July-August 2006: institutional questionnaires sent out; heads-up letter to graduate directors * October-December 2006: faculty questionnaires distributed and collected

- coordinated effort to prepare case for NRC

- advantages of listing R/C as “emergent field”

- discussion of NRC criteria (e.g., number of degrees in 5 years; 25-university threshold;

relationship between field and subfields)

- we have enough to qualify on the quantitative measures (e.g., “critical mass”)

- presentation of case outline LP made to NRC

- NRC excludes applied fields

- programs are various; titles are variant, use different key terms (e.g., “rhetoric,” “writing,”

“literacy,” etc.); programs have different institutional status

- generic term: Rhetoric and Composition

- Professional/Technical Writing/Communication qualifies as a subfield

Proposal for Business Meeting

- do we want to publish guidelines, as a Consortium, for programs to follow?

Continuation/Expansion of Visibility Project

- Survey of Earned Doctorates — new set of codes for 2006-2007

- R/C does have a code for Dissertation Abstracts: it is 0681, Rhetoric and Composition (under Language) The Consortium (not individuals) can add subcategories: the Consortium will need

to discuss and agree on them to submit officially.

- It's possible to request additional codes be given to dissertations already listed under a code number: e.g., list dissertations from before 1996 (when R/C code was assigned) Best done by groups, e.g., a program or programs, sending in a list, rather than individuals Dissertations can

be listed under multiple codes (they are topics, not disciplines)

URL for Consortium web site: http://www.rhetoric.msu.edu/rc_consortium/ URL for NRC

taxonomy project: ww7.nationalacademies.org/

[ Round of applause for Louise’s good work on Visibility Project ]

Questions and discussion

- Importance of getting information to NRC; importance of identifying R/C as distinct field

- Grad program director must get to Graduate Dean and/or institutional coordinator for NRC taxonomy if necessary going around departmental preferences

- Theresa Enos: Do we have to run this kind of research through IRBs?

Ex Officio Role

Charles Bazerman

The committee reviewed a list of 73 Doctoral Programs in the

Consortium was made available (Appendix F)

CCCC — Chicago, March 22, 2006, 3:30-5:00 pm

MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING

1 Meeting convened (Chair: Stuart Brown) — 3:57

2 Update of Consortium web site (Jim Porter)

- Jim’s proposal: upgrade web site in summer 2006 —> Why? To increase value, functionality, and interactivity of site to members Two questions: (a) how to pay for the upgrade –

approximately $1,000-$1,500; (b) what kind of information and functionality would be useful to have? (e.g., institutions can update own information; use the site as a mechanism for

- possible funding venues: Pew or Carnegie? WIDE Research Center at MSU

3 Issues of Membership Dues (Stuart Brown) — 4:10

- report on status of Consortium account: account balance approximately $527

- account is missing $130 (to El Paso Fitness Center) —> Stuart has filed police report

- Janice and Stuart will work on fixing the account to allow for adding/accessing funds

- Consortium agreed last year to set up $50 membership fee; there will be follow up shortly about that

4 Consortium caucus/meeting for 2006 CCCC (Gail Hawisher)

Q: What should our focus be for next year’s CCCC?

- Is there core or canonical knowledge to the discipline? (Carolyn Miller)

- Do mapping of the profession, have people bring different visualizations (Cindy Selfe)

- Report on the outcome of the NRC proposal (Janice Lauer)

- Older programs’ identities vs newer programs’ identities (Wendy Scheer); how have programs changed over time (Gail Hawisher)

- Use the Consortium meeting as a vehicle for supporting future CCCC panel proposal (like the IP Caucus)(Karen Lunsford); take the consortium program on the road (Gail Hawisher)

- What was the impetus for new programs? (Kevin DePew)

- 1:45 time limit for session (within Caucus format)

- Gail: Email me if you want to contribute to a workshop on mapping the field (Gail, as new Chair, will be submitting Consortium caucus proposal.)

5 Update on NRC Assessment (Louise Phelps) — 4:30

- Information is difficult to find out, but as far as Louise can tell, if there is an update of the taxonomy, then Rhetoric/Composition will be listed as a new field

- Louise provides handout of draft of NRC survey for programs (institutional questionnaire) + PPT slides from NRC

- Louise talks about timetable for NRC taxonomy process: “We have to put on a full court press for faculty and administrators to contact their institutional coordinator and let them know about the need to provide this data to NRC.” Could happen in early May

- Late September 2006: faculty questionnaire will be distributed

- October 2006: student questionnaire will be distributed (English one of areas being studied, so some R/C students in English will be asked to submit/complete survey) Possible problem: Will students list R/C as subfield of English (which contradicts the proposal we have submitted which treats R/C as its own field)?

- Louise: “What we should be doing right now is informing everybody” to be alert to the

importance of the questionnaires (and the importance of listing R/C as an “emerging field”) and

to contact their institutional coordinators — and there will not be a lot of advance notice about this.

- Disaggregating R/C data from other English data is important to do, but it may be difficult to do (Janice Lauer)

6 Report on Survey Data Collection (John Ackerman)

- 80% response rate on program surveys (65 out of 78)

- data collected belongs to field

- Louise Phelps: “If anybody knows about new programs, please let us know.”

7 Question of Faculty Identity in R/C — How to Define? (Kathleen Welch)

Q: How should somebody be designated as a rhetoric/composition faculty member? Are there criteria for this? (case: questionable claim by faculty member at Oklahoma) Could the

Consortium or its members provide feedback and help?

- Pat Sullivan: The ads for new positions in rhetoric/composition would provide some criteria for determining national standards in the field as to what constitutes specialization in

rhetoric/composition

- Carolyn Miller: Sustained publication record and scholarly activity should count more than course work or graduate training

- Louise Phelps: Look at NRC criteria for defining a faculty member in a specialization area

8 Nominations for New Assistant Chair (Stuart Brown)

- Hugh Burns volunteers —> No action taken on nomination

9 Meeting adjourned — 5:12

Respectfully submitted,

Jim Porter

2007 NEW YORK

The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and

Composition, comprising representatives of some seventy

institutions, has met for more than 15 years at CCCC CCCC is the natural home for the group’s annual meeting since our Interests in graduate education are intricately bound with the organization’s The first part of this year’s program will be a workshop themed around theconnections between the many different kinds of programs that mark our field The discussion will be led by representatives from several universities who will provide brief opening statements or talking

points Our intention is to provide a forum to generate a dialogue among people involved in both establishing and maintaining graduate

programs in order to better understand our many professional

identities Those whose programs will be participating on the programinclude colleagues from Eastern Carolina University, Michigan State University, Ohio State University, North Carolina State University, Michigan Technological University, and Purdue University

Participation from other universities is also welcome

The second part of the Caucus will be the business meeting of the Consortium and will focus on organizational aspects along with the outcome of the Consortium’s proposal to the National Research Council (NRC).

No other material is available

2008 New Orleans

In 2008, Gail Hawisher convened the Consortium meeting

This two-part caucus session will include discussions of professional issues related to writing research and available research venues for “Making Our

Research Visible: Doctoral Destinies.” Discussants will focus on the kinds of information we need to collect, the research we need to conduct, and the

possibilities we envision for broadly disseminating the scholarship of a field that

is continually changing Issues surrounding the visibility of the field’s research seem particularly pressing given that Rhetoric and Composition is now

recognized by the NRC (National Research Council)

Session Description: The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition, representing some seventy institutions, has met for more than 15 years at CCCC, most recently for three and a half hours on Wednesday as a Caucus CCCC is the natural home for the group's annual meeting since our interests in graduate education are intricately bound to those of the organization The first part of this year's program will be a workshop themed around the kinds

of writing research we need to conduct to make ourselves visible The discussion

will be led by representatives from several universities who will provide brief opening statements or talking points Our intention is to provide a forum to generate ideas as to how we might publish and promote socially meaningful research that also serves professional goals

Those programs that will be participating on the program include colleagues from Texas Women’s University, Ohio State University, New Mexico State University, University of California, Santa Barbara, Penn State University, Kent State

University, the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign Participation from other universities is also welcome The second part of the Caucus will be the business meeting of the Consortium and focus on organizational issues along with a discussion of the newest,

emerging survey from Rhetoric Review on doctoral programs in Rhetoric and

Composition.

The final version of the Organizational Roles was presented:

Executive Committee: Revolving Roles and Continuing Roles

Revolving Roles & Duties (2 years each)

1 Chair (2006-8 Gail Hawisher)

- CCCC Meetings

-Executive Committee Luncheon Meeting (Wednesday 11:30) -Program Submissions

-Wednesday’s Special Events (Wednesday 1:30—5:00)

-Consortium Meeting and Workshop -Business Meeting

-Session(s) during the Conference -Point person/ Spokesperson for the Consortium

-Liaison to the CCCC

2 Associate Chair (2006-8 John Ackerman)

-Secretary/ Minutes of Meetings

-Conversations with Graduate Students Group

3 Assistant Chair (2006-8 Hugh Burns)

-Liaison with MA Programs

-Newcomers’ Table (CCCC)

-Liaison to Graduate Students (Canon 5 Visibility Project )

Continuing Roles & Duties

1.Membership/ Treasurer (Stuart Brown)

-Updating Lists

-Dues

2.Website Co-ordinator (Malea Powell)

3 Visibility Efforts (Louise Phelps)

-NRC

4 Archivist (Janice Lauer)

-Historical records

-Current Records

-Nomination Process

5 Assessment

-Gathering Institutional Data

-Job Statistics (Academia, Outside Academia, Our Graduates)

Ex Officio Role

Assistant Chair of CCCC (2007-8 Charles Bazermen)

A flyer for graduate students was also reviewed:

Welcome Graduate Students!

On behalf of the Consortium for Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition and the MA-Degree Consortium of Writing Studies

Specialists, welcome to the Conference on College Composition and Communication!

Start Spreading the News! New York! New York! Now what?

PACE YOURSELF Schedule sessions that look interesting each day, but also schedule

breaks and times for walks

ATTEND VARIOUS KINDS OF SESSIONS So much variety, so little time Try the

half-day workshops, enjoy the key- note presentations, work in the concurrent sessions in your specialty, take in a special interest group (SIG), but most of all enjoy the informal opportunities

to meet and talk with a wide range of professionals who share your interest

CHOOSE SESSIONS THAT MATCH YOUR RESEARCH AGENDA Select

session topics that match your specific research profile rather than on the name recognition of the speakers

GET INVOLVED If you attend a session where volunteers are solicited, join! Why not? TALK A LOT Talking the talk will help you walk the walk when you return home

EXCHANGE E-MAIL ADDRESSES Matches are made in cyberspace Collaborate to

Graduate!

MEET THE PUBLISHERS AND EXHIBITORS Know that the publishers see a future

textbook author in you, so talk with the professionals; they sincerely want to hear from you And they will remember you Trust us!

HAVE FUN! Enjoy the CCCC experience The memories will last a lifetime! Supporters

of the CCCC 2007 Graduate Student Welcome Booth

MA-Degree Consortium of Writing Studies

Specialists

Mission: To support M.A Programs those

either fully or partially focused on composition

and rhetoric that are independent of Ph.D

programs and that serve a variety of needs for

local student populations, needs that are often

distinct from M.A programs that feed Ph.D

programs in rhetoric and compo- sition

MADCOWWS creates spaces for conversations

among M.A programs that are driven primarily

by our unique needs

Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition

Mission: The Consortium, founded in 1993, fosters communi- cation and collaboration among doctoral programs in Rhetoric and Composition The Consortium seeks to enhance research capabilities, dissemination of scholarly work, and visibility of scholars in Rhetoric and Composition The Consortium works to influence professional organizations, policy makers in higher education, funding agencies, and other groups

Contact:

Gail Hawisher

-List of Current Members

-Plan for research component

2009 SAN FRANCISCO

John Ackerman convened the meeting There was continued

discussion of governance

Officers’ Terms of Service

The Chair, Associate Chair, and Assistant Chair will serve for a year term in each office

two-The At-Large member will serve for a two-year, non-rotational term.The Graduate Student Representative will be appointed annually for

a one-year term

In odd numbered years, the Consortium will nominate and elect the

incoming officer who will eventually assume the duties of incoming Assistant Chair

In even numbered years, the new incoming Assistant Chair will attend

the Executive Committee luncheon in advance of assuming duties at the end of the CCCC convention

Officers will assume their new duties on the day after the close of the CCCC in even numbered years

For instance, the Incoming Assistant Chair (elected in odd years at the Consortium meeting at the CCCC) will assume her/his duties as Assistant Chair on the same day Similarly, The Associate Chair will become Chair; the Assistant Chair will become Associate Chair; and the Consortium Chair will become Immediate Past chair, all on the same day

• Organizes occasional Consortium sessions at the CCCC

• Serves as the point person/spokesperson for the Consortium

• Serves as the primary liaison to the CCCC

• Appoints a representative to attend the non-CCCC stakeholder groups with an interest in writing

Associate Chair

• Serves as the Secretary of the Consortium, taking informal notes at the Executive Committee luncheon and formal Minutesduring the Consortium meeting

• Serves as the Liaison to the Undergraduate Majors Consortium SIG

Assistant Chair

• Serves as a Liaison with the Newcomers Committee

• Serves as the Liaison to the MA Programs Consortium

At-Large Member

Graduate Student Member

Ex Officio Member (CCCC Assistant Chair)

Continuing Consortium Roles (non-rotating)

Membership Coordinator and Treasurer

• Updates membership lists

Web site Coordinator

• Updates and coordinates Consortium web site

• Keeps historical records

• Keeps current records

• Facilitates nomination process

Assessment Coordinator

• Gathers institutional data for Consortium members

• Gathers statistics on post doctoral employment

ON FILE: Minutes of Topical Consortium Meeting

- Agenda,

- -An updated list of members,

- -Minutes of Topical Consortium Meeting

Two documents from Louise Phelps:

- 1) A Taskforce on Data Bases and 2) New Codes

-Minutes of Topical Consortium Meeting

-Memo on CIP codes (Louise Phelps)

-Report on Task Forces (Louise Phelps)

2010 LOUISVILLE

Chair:

John Ackerman, University of Colorado, Boulder, convened the meeting.

The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and

Composition, representing over 70 universities, has met since 1992 at CCCC and most recently on Wednesday afternoon CCCC is home for our annual meeting, and we use this forum to link doctoral education with the discipline, with masters degrees and undergraduate programs, and with local and national assessment projects Most recently,

we have sponsored the Visibility Project that has insured that graduate training is Rhetoric and Composition is recognized

by the National Research Council and other national

databases and

classification systems such as the National Center for

Educational Statistics and the Survey of Earned Doctorates These efforts provide Consortium members and our field with evidence to defend and extend doctoral education in a variety of locales In keeping with the 2010 CCCC Program theme—The Remix—we offer a two-part meeting that begins with cross talk on a special topic, and then, after 3:00 PM break, closes with our business meeting For the 2010

Consortium in Louisville, our topic is Research that Serves Public Policy, and we invite brief presentations on how

scholarship and research in Rhetoric and Composition

contribute to “national, state, and local policies that have an impact on our classrooms and the students we teach”

(and the communities and stakeholders we serve) In

proposing this session, we are keenly aware of financial pressures on our campuses and in our communities and of the multifarious roles and identities we enact in a century defined by globalization and international cooperation.

By framing our research through the lenses of public policy,

we will engender a discussion of doctoral course work,

methodological training, and professional acumen We invite CCCC members to join us in discussing how to make our graduate programs more relevant and how our projects and collaborations directly contribute to the health of our

institutions and of our supporting communities

The business meeting consists of reports from the

Consortium officers, elections of new officers, planning for the 2011 Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and Composition in Atlanta, and planning for how the Consortium through our website and membership can connect with

stakeholder groups inside and outside of CCCC.

ON FILE:

-Emails about the Executive Council Meeting

-Reports on CCCC Committees Profession: Visibility and Databases

Grants and Contracts for Ph.D students in Writing, Rhetoric, and Composition at UC, Davis

ON FILE:

-Emails about the Executive Council Meeting

-Report on CCCC Committee on Profession Visibility and

Databases

-Grants and Contracts for Ph.D Students on Writing,

Rhetoric, and Composition at UC, Davis

2011 ATLANTA

Chair: Cynthia L Selfe convened the meeting in Atlanta

The program was described in the following account:

The Consortium of Doctoral Programs in Rhetoric and

Composition, representing over 70 universities, has met since

1992 at CCCC and most recently as a Caucus on Wednesday afternoon CCCC is home for our annual meeting, and we use this forum to link doctoral education with the discipline, with

masters and undergraduate organizations, and with local and national assessment projects Most recently, we have

sponsored the Visibility Project that has insured that graduate training in Rhetoric and Composition is recognized by the

National Research Council and other national data-bases and classification systems such as the National Center for

Educational Statistics and the Survey of Earned Doctorates These efforts provide consortium members and our field with evidence to defend and extend doctoral education in a variety of locales In keeping with the 2011 CCCC Program theme “All Our Relations: Contested Spaces, Contested Knowledge” we offer a two-part caucus that opens with cross talk on a special topic, and then after break at 3:00, closes with our business

meeting For the 2011 Consortium in Atlanta, our topic is

Designing and Adapting Doctoral Programs to Changing Times and Contexts, and we invited brief presentations on how the changing nature of doctoral programs in Rhetoric and

Composition contribute to “national, state, and local policies that have an impact on our classrooms and the students we teach” (and the communities and stakeholders we serve) By framing our discussion through the multiple lenses that give us

perspective on both change and adaptation to change, we will engender a discussion of doctoral course work, faculty

recruitment, program administration and program design We invite CCCC members to join us in this discussion We will be using the CDPRC listserv and other forums to invite

participation in this session and to attend the consortium

business meeting The business meeting consists of reports from the consortium officers, elections of new officers, planning for

the 2012 Caucus in St Louis, and planning for how the

Consortium through our website and membership can connect with stakeholder groups inside or outside of CCCC.

ON FILE:

-The Agenda

-A document from U of California, Davis on Grants and Contracts

2012 St LOUIS

Cindy Selfe convened the meeting The bylaws were

discussed.

Bylaws of Consortium of Doctoral Programs, 2012

Officers’ Terms of Service

The Chair, Associate Chair, and Assistant Chair will serve for a year term in each office

two-Two At-Large members will serve for two-year, non-rotational terms

The Graduate Student Representative will be appointed annually for

a one-year term, in consultation with appropriate CCCC graduate student groups

All officers, the At-Large members, and the individuals filling

Continuing (non-rotating) Consortium roles will serve as members of the Consortium Executive Committee

In odd numbered years, the Consortium will nominate individuals for

the post of Assistant Chair at the CCCC Consortium meeting and elect the Assistant Chair officer by ballot in the Spring following the CCCC The Assistant Chair will assume the duties of incoming

Assistant Chair at the following CCCC (during even numbered years)

In even numbered years, the newly elected Assistant Chair will attend

the Executive Committee luncheon as Incoming Assistant Chair, in

advance of assuming her/his regular duties as Assistant Chair at the end of the CCCC convention

Officers will rotate and assume their new duties on the day after the close of the CCCC in even numbered years

For instance, the Incoming Assistant Chair (nominated in

odd-numbered years at the Consortium meeting at the CCCC and elected

by ballot that Spring) will assume her/his duties as Assistant Chair at the end of the next CCCC held in the following even-numbered year The Associate Chair will become Chair; the Assistant Chair will

become Associate Chair; and the Consortium Chair will become Immediate Past Chair, all at the end of the CCCC meeting held in even-numbered years

Two At-Large members will be nominated at the CCCC meetings in even years (and elected by ballot in the Spring following the CCCC ineven-numbered years) The elected At-Large members will assume their duties immediately after being elected and end their duties on the last day of the next CCCC held in an even numbered year, two years after being elected

Elections

Nominations for Assistant Chair will be taken at the Business

Meeting Chair contacts nominees to ask if they are willing to run, reminding nominees about the responsibilities and duties of the

office

Voting will be done via email message in the Spring following the CCCC and sent to the official representatives of each school in the Doctoral Consortium and members of the Consortium Executive Committee

Officers Duties

Chair

• Serves as a member of the Consortium’s Executive Committee

• Facilitates the Executive Committee luncheon at the annual CCCC convention (Wednesday, 11:30-1:00)

• Organizes topical program portion of the Consortium meeting atthe CCCC, asks speakers to attend and present on the topic

• Creates and circulates an Agenda for the Consortium meeting

at the CCCC

• Leads the Business Meeting portion of the Consortium meeting

at the CCCC

• Organizes occasional Consortium sessions at the CCCC

• Serves as the point person/spokesperson for the Consortium

• Serves as the primary liaison to the CCCC

• Appoints a representative to attend the non-CCCC stakeholder groups with an interest in writing

• Checks with nominees for Assistant Chair and the At-Large Representatives to determine their willingness to have their name placed on the ballot

• Conducts annual balloting

Associate Chair

• Serves as a member of the Consortium’s Executive Committee

• Serves as the Secretary of the Consortium, taking informal notes at the Executive Committee luncheon and formal Minutesduring the Consortium meeting

• Serves as the Liaison to the Undergraduate Majors Consortium SIG

• Posts notices of the Consortium meeting at the CCCCC on all relevant listservs to encourage attendance at these meetings Assistant Chair

• Serves as a member of the Consortium’s Executive Committee

• Serves as a Liaison with the Newcomers Committee

• Serves as the Liaison to the MA Programs Consortium

• Posts information about Consortium issues/conversations on relevant listservs to encourage

input from the broadest possible spectrum of members and interested colleagues

At-Large Members

• Serves as members of the Consortium’s Executive Committee

• Serves as liaisons to appropriate CCCC graduate-student

groups

Graduate Student Member (identified in consultation with relevant CCCC graduate student groups)

Ex Officio Member (CCCC Assistant Chair)

Continuing Consortium Roles (non-rotating)

Membership Coordinator and Treasurer

• Updates membership lists

Web site Coordinator

• Updates and coordinates Consortium web site

<http://www.cws.illinois.edu/rc_consortium/index.html>

• Updates and coordinates Consortium listserv

consortium@list.msu.edu

Liaison to Visibility Project

• Coordinating the Consortium's role in the Visibility Project and acting as liaison to other organizations and to CCCC

Committee in efforts to make rhetoric and composition/writing studies visible in national databases and classification systems

Consortium Archivist

• Keeps historical records

• Keeps current records

• Facilitates nomination process

Assessment Task Force

• Gathers institutional data for Consortium members

• Gathers statistics on doctoral programs, enrollments,

graduation, and post doctoral employment

The rotation of officers was also reviewed

Officers Rotation 2009-2012

2009

Chair, John Ackerman

Associate Chair, Cynthia Selfe

Assistant Chair, Joyce Neff

2010

Chair, Gail Hawisher (ends term April 2010)

Associate Chair, Cynthia L Selfe

Assistant Chair, Joyce Neff

Incoming Assistant Chair, Kristine Blair (attends Executive

Committee Luncheon CCCC 2011)

At-Large Member, Carl Whitaus (attends Executive Committee

Luncheon CCCC 2011)

At-Large Member, Marilyn Cooper (attends Executive Committee Luncheon CCCC 2011)

Graduate Student Member: Amber Buck

Membership Coordinator and Treasurer: Helen Foster

Liaisons to Visibility Project: Louise Phelps

Assessment Task Force: Wendy Sharer

Archivist: Janice Lauer

Web Site Coordinator: Gail E Hawisher

2011

Chair, Cynthia L Selfe (ends term April 2012)

Associate Chair, Joyce Neff

Assistant Chair, Kristine Blair

At-Large Member, Marilyn Cooper (attends Executive Committee Luncheon CCCC 2012, and serves as At-Large representative

through CCCC 2012 meeting)

At-Large Member, Carl Whithaus (attends Executive Committee Luncheon CCCC 2012, and serves as At-Large representative

through CCCC 2012 meeting)

Membership Coordinator and Treasurer: Helen Foster

Liaisons to Visibility Project: Louise Phelps

Assessment Task Force: Wendy Sharer

Archivist: Janice Lauer

Web Site Coordinator: Gail E Hawisher

Incoming Assistant Chair elected (attends Executive Committee Luncheon at the CCCCs 2012)

2012

Chair, Cynthia Selfe (ends term April 2012)

Associate Chair, Joyce Neff

Assistant Chair, Kristine Blair

Incoming Assistant Chair (assumes regular duties at the close of the

2012 CCCC)

At-Large Member, Marilyn Cooper (attends Executive Committee Luncheon CCCC 2012, and serves as At-Large representative

through CCCC 2012 meeting)

At-Large Member, Carl Whithaus (attends Executive Committee

Luncheon CCCC 2012, and serves as At-Large representative

through CCCC 2012 meeting)

Membership Coordinator and Treasurer: Helen Foster

Liaisons to Visibility Project: Louise Phelps

Assessment Task Force: Wendy Sharer

Archivist: Janice Lauer

Web Site Coordinator: Gail E Hawisher

Nominated and Elected in 2012

At-Large Member (begins duties immediately after Spring 2012 Election,attends Executive Committee Luncheon at the CCCCs 2013, ends duties at close of CCCC 2014) At-Large Member (begins duties

immediately after Spring 2012 Election, attends Executive Committee Luncheon at the CCCCs 2013, ends duties at close of CCCC 2014)

ON FILE:

-The Agenda,

-Listserv Information,

-Assessment Survey Results, and

-Foreign Language Agreement

2013 Las Vegas

Joyce Neff convened the meeting