Lisa asked us to find possible sources in The Bedford Bibliography that we might be able to use for our seminar projects. Here are some:
Under Rhetoric and Composition Theory:
144. Bartholomae, David. “Inventing the University.”
163. Brodkey, Linda. Writing Permitted in Designated Areas Only Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1996.
167. Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1950.
174. Elbow, Peter. “Being a Writer vs. Being an Academic: A Conflict in Goals.” CCC 46 (February 1995): 72-83.
206. Owens, Derek. Resisting Writings (and the Boundaries of Composition). Dallas: Southern Methodist UP, 1994.
212. Pratt, Mary Louise. “Arts of the Contact Zone.”
222. Vitanza, Victor, ed. PRE/TEXT: The First Decade. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburg P, 1993.
Under Literacy:
254. Daniell, Beth. “Against the Great Leap Theory of Literacy.” PRE/TEXT 7 (Fall-Winter 1986): 181-93.
274. Ong, Walter J., S.J. “Literacy and Orality in Our Times.” ADE Bulletin 58 (September 1978): 1-7. Rpt in Enos (449 below).
275. Ong, Wlater J., S.J. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Methuen, 1982.
276. Pattison, Robert. On Literacy: The Politics of the Word from Homer to the Age of Rock. New York: Oxford UP, 1982.
283. Taylor, Denny, and Catherine Dorsey-Gaines. Growing up Literate: Learning from Inner-City Families. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 1988.
286. Yagelski, Robert P. Literacy Matters: Writing and Reading the Social Self. New York: Teachers College P, 2000.
Under Basic Writing:
442. Bartholomae, David. “The Tidy House: Basic Writing in the American Curriculum.” Journal of Basic Writing 12 (Spring 1993): 4-21. (Here Bartholomae argues that the basic writing classroom should adopt the arts of the contact zone, from Pratt, which is what I blogged about recently.)
449. Enos, Theresa, ed. A Sourcebook for Basic Writing Teachers. New York: Random House, 1987.
451. Fox, Tom. Defending Access: A Critique of Standards in Higher Education. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1999. (“John Ogbu’s theory of oppositional culture explains, in part, why initiation doesn’t work as a curricular strategy. What is needed are constant critiques of the ideologies that reduce writing courses to service and skills.”
455. Harris, Joseph. “Negotating the Contact Zone.” Journal of Basic Writing 41.1 (1995): 27-42.
461. Lu, Min-Zhan. “Conflict and Struggle: The Enemies of Preconditions of Basic Writing?” CE 54 (December 1992): 887-913. (“…the real task of the basic writer is neitehr to conform to nor abandon a monolithic discourse community, but to find innovative discursive strategies for negotiating the boundaries.”)
Under Gender, Race, and Class:
494. Gibson, Michelle, Martha Marinara, and Deborah Meem. “Bi, Butch, and Bar-Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender, and Sexuality.” CCC 52.1 (September 2000): 69-95.
Under Cultural Studies:
514. Berlin, James A. Rhetorics, Poetics, and Cultures: Refiguring English Studies. Urbana, Ill.: NCTE, 1996.
516. Cushman, Ellen. “The Rhetorician as an Agent of Social Change.” CCC 47 (February 1996): 7-28.
520. Rosteck, Thomas, ed. At the Intersection: Cultural Studies and Rhetorical Studies. New York: Guilford, 1999.
521. Sirc, Geoffrey. “Never Mind the Tagmemics, Where’s the Sex Pistols?” CCC 48 (February 1997): 9-29.
