[This is part 2 of my CCCC experience. Sorry for the lag—I have a post-conference head cold that is throwing me off schedule.]
I’ve been told that CCCC panels can be pretty hit or miss, but I think I lucked out with a pretty solid set of panels. Here’s the breakdown of sessions I attended:
- A.01—Performing the Archive: Practice, Stories, and Materiality
- B.11—Black and Brown Literacies: Gateways to Transformative Theories, Practices, and Meaningful Engagement(s)
- C.01—Gateways and Barriers: Disability Policy in the Writing Classroom, Program Administration, and Composition’s Disciplinary History
- D.31—Checking Up on Wired Writing Programs: Emerging Perspectives on Program-Wide Technology Integration
- E.19—Access Denied? Universal Design, Privacy, and Socio-economic Access
- F.22—Affect, Embodiment, and the Tensions of “Unruly” Rhetorical Writing Pedagogy
- G.02—Writing History in the Digital Age: New Gateways for Feminist Historiography
- I.04—Mixing and Revising: Writers and Texts
- J—Access: a Happening
I don’t want to go through all of the panels (you can check out my tweets of the separate sessions @ahhitt), but I do want to give a shout-out to my Syracuse peers. It was really great to listen to their research, and I had the opportunity to check out five of their presentations: B.11 and F.22. In B.11, Latoya (Scholar for the Dream!) examined the literacy practices of black girls in hip-hop culture and online spaces, specifically Nicki Minaj’s literacy practices through Twitter. Latoya argued that we need to continually reexamine what we lose by exclusively focusing on academic discourse, ensuring that we continue to create informal virtual writing spaces without surveillance (where people can explore and practice writing in ways that shape their identities). The session’s respondent, Valerie Kinloch, reminded us that this kind of research must move beyond words and toward action, which necessitates that we think about how to transfer critical pedagogical practices to communities.
Then, in F.22, more SU peers worked through how to critically and supportively engage with feminism, queerness, and race in the writing classroom. Kate extended Nancy Welch’s concept of rhetorical sidetaking to discuss how a white female graduate student can be a responsible ally with students and with feminist women of color. Anna discussed how to reclaim public voices in the classroom, noting that this reclamation must account for our students’ particular bodies (as ethos is embodied), acknowledging that particular student bodies receive more discrimination and, thus, are more at risk of reclaiming those public voices. Finally, Tim, much like Kate, explored how a white male can try to address radical rhetorical alliances, citing stronger rhetorical listening as one possibility.
Of course, there were other SU folks who represented at Cs whose sessions I couldn’t attend. I heard that Ben knocked it out of the park with his presentation on his community work in Syracuse and his new edited collection, I Witness: Perspectives on Policing in the Near Westside. And I heard a lot of good things about our faculty presentations.
Cs was a great opportunity to hear people’s research and to meet new folks with similar research interests—the Disability Studies SIG was particularly awesome for that. However, Cs was also a great opportunity to support my peers and the work that they do. I was so amazed with their research and how well they presented themselves, and the conference experience reminded me how grateful I am to be part of this community.