The Problem of Multiple Identities, Part II

The problem of multiple identity is also multifaceted. If it's hard for people to imagine belonging to more than one discipline, it also seems hard for some people to understand that a researcher doesn’t have to be bound to a single mode of inquiry or a methodology.

In the last few months, I have had conversations with a few graduate students (who haven't taken my research methods course, of course) who made remarks that seemed to imply that I didn’t specialize in empirical research.

Well, yes, if it means that I don't do empirical research exclusively. But if that means I don't do empirical research, I don't know what to say. Perhaps I'm better known for my historical and philosophical inquiry, but I have published a fair share of empirical studies as well (e.g., Matsuda, 1999, 2001, 2002, Matsuda & Matsuda, 2001; Matsuda & Tardy, 2008; Tardy & Matsuda, 2009), using a range of methodological tools—from interviews and surveys as well as discourse analysis.

As a student of Janice Lauer who has always insisted that her students be proficient in multiple modes of inquiry--including philosophical, historical, empirical (qualitative and quantitative), and rhetorical (and to this list I would add narrative)--I'm not comfortable with the assumption that it's OK for people to stick to a single mode of inquiry.

Like Tony Silva, I firmly believe that all researchers in my fields should familiarize themselves with various theoretical and methodological tools and incorporate those that would best address the research question at hand. I thought I made that clear in the introduction to Second Language Writing Research (Matsuda & Silva, 2005) but I guess not everyone reads everything—sigh.

I do realize that many people have their favorite modes of inquiry and methodological tools that they rely on. It's also natural that people are drawn to certain research questions that lend themselves to the mode of inquiry one is most familiar with.

But as researchers, we need to develop a rich repertoire of theoretical and methodological tools if not to use them all then to understand and, if necessary, critique contributions by other researchers.

As Dwight Atkinson says in his chapter in Second Language Writing Research, “do try.”

The Problem of Multiple Identities

The problem of multiple identities in academia has been an important driving force behind my work. (It all boils down to the issue of identity and power, it seems.)

Over the last 15 years, I have been fighting the pervasive perception in some of my fields (i.e., applied linguistics, composition and rhetoric) about multidisciplinarity--that it's not possible to be a full-fledged member of more than one discipline. Back when I was in graduate school, if I said I was specializing in second language writing, people in rhetoric and composition often thought I was really a second language specialist who happens to be coming to CCCC; some people in applied linguistics also thought that I was an "L1" compositionist who happens to be coming to applied linguistics conferences. (This has not been much of an issue in TESOL for some reason—perhaps because L2 writing was already well-established there?)

It didn't seem to occur to many of them that I was actually starting out in both fields at the same time.

This is one of those tacit cultural assumptions in academia that is hard to challenge because people don't seem to realize that they have those assumptions nor are they able to articulate what their own assumptions are or why they came to those conclusions. It may be because some people in those fields are not used to working in multiple disciplines that the notion of being multidisciplinary was unimaginable. (People who cross those disciplinary boundaries often seem to keep quiet about their other disciplinary identities). It may also be related to the institutional practices that require people to identify their "tenure home" and to align their professional activities with the job description when they got hired. Whatever the case may be, challenging unarticulated assumptions is one of the hardest things to do intellectually.

This was one of the most intriguing and disturbing dissonances that I decided to make fighting monodisciplinarity one of my professional missions. How did I do that?

• I went to all the major conferences—AAAL, CCCC and TESOL—on a regular basis. I have tried not to miss any except when the schedule overlapped or when there was a family situation that required my attention.
• I got myself elected or appointed to various committees, such as the Executive Committee and Nominating Committee, and to other leadership positions.
• I published my work in journals in multiple fields and subfields. My goal was to establish a tenurable record in each discipline so I didn’t have to worry about tenure requirements—I didn’t want to shift my attention away from what I considered to be the most important research issue or problem.
• I articulated the unarticulated assumption. I explicitly pointed out the problem of monodisciplinarity through my research and placed them in high profile journals to change the perception in both fields.
• I helped make L2 writing an integral part of composition studies by institutionalizing the cause.
• I took positions in departments where my multidisciplinary expertise would be valued.
• I refused to choose one discipline or another as my primary discipline and insisted that I belonged to both.

After more than a decade of hard work, the world seems to be a better place—at least to people who specialize in second language writing. But sometimes I still get remarks—even from close friends who know my work well—that seem to imply that I’m more X than Y or that I should choose one over the other.

Old habits die hard, I guess.

Job Ad: Lecturer in Rhetoric and Composition with expertise in ESL Writing

Lecturer in Rhetoric and Composition with expertise in ESL Writing

Lecturer in Rhetoric and Composition. Beginning August 16, 2009. Required: Ph.D. in Rhetoric and Composition or in a related discipline with appropriate relevant coursework; experience in teaching college-level first-year ESL writing courses; evidence of effective teaching. Desired: Theoretical grounding, expertise, and teaching experience in second language writing; evidence of participation in professional conferences in applied linguistics, composition, rhetoric or TESOL.

Teaching load is 4 composition courses each semester. Appropriate professional university service responsibilities. Three-year renewable appointment.

Applicants must submit: Letter of application; vita; teaching philosophy; unofficial graduate transcripts; three letters of recommendation; and copies of recent teaching evaluations to D. Baker, Rhet/Comp ESL Writing Lecturer Search Committee, Department of English, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 870302, Tempe AZ 85287-0302, postmarked by January 2, 2009; if not filled, the 15th of every month until search is closed. We do not accept incomplete applications. E-mailed materials will not be accepted. A background check is required for employment. AA/EOE.

Job Ad: Advanced Associate or Full Professor in History of Rhetoric

The Department of English at Arizona State University (ASU) seeks an advanced associate or a full professor and accomplished scholar-teacher in rhetoric and composition who has compiled an established record of scholarship in any area of the history of rhetoric. ASU is a Research I university with outstanding research facilities and infrastructure support and is located within the rapidly growing and dynamic metropolitan Phoenix area. Our English department is a large and diverse unit of faculty committed to excellence in teaching, to new and exciting research, and to ongoing community outreach.

Required: Ph.D. in rhetoric and composition or related discipline; college-level teaching experience; evidence of ability to teach and develop graduate and undergraduate courses in the history of rhetoric; and a compelling record of ongoing, high-quality scholarship in any area of the history of rhetoric appropriate to rank.

Desired: Established record of scholarship and publications on classical and/or medieval rhetoric appropriate to rank; experience in teaching graduate courses in the history of rhetoric, especially classical rhetoric.

Applicants must send: Cover letter, curriculum vita, names of three references with contact information to Chair of Associate/Full Professor of History of Rhetoric Search CommitteeDepartment of EnglishArizona State UniversityP.O. Box 870302Tempe, AZ 85287-0302.

Application Deadline (no faxes or e-mails): Postmarked by October 31, 2008; if not filled, then every Monday thereafter until the search is closed. ASU is an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer and is dedicated to the recruitment and employment of a diverse workforce. A background check is required for employment.

Job Ad: Associate Professor of Rhetorical Theory

Associate Professor of Rhetorical Theory

The Department of English at Arizona State University (http://www.asu.edu/clas/english) seeks an Associate Professor and accomplished scholar-teacher with an excellent record of scholarship in any area of rhetorical theory. ASU is a Research I University with outstanding research facilities and infrastructure support and is located within the rapidly growing and dynamic metropolitan Phoenix area. The Department of English is a large and diverse unit of faculty committed to excellence in teaching, to new and exciting research, and to ongoing community outreach.

REQUIRED: PhD in Rhetoric/Composition, or related discipline; demonstrated excellent record of research, teaching, mentorship, and service as appropriate to rank of Associate Professor.

DESIRED: Expertise in one or more of the following areas: Feminist rhetorical theory, African American rhetorical theory, Latino/a rhetorical theory, and/or Queer rhetorical theory.

Typical teaching load is 2/2 for tenured and tenure-track faculty with a significant research agenda. Teaching opportunities are at the undergraduate, Master’s, and PhD levels.

APPLICANTS MUST SEND: Cover letter, CV, and names of three references (with Name, Address and Phone number) to Chair, Search Committee for Associate Professor of Rhetorical Theory, Department of English, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 870302, Tempe, AZ 85287-0302.

APPLICATION DEADLINE: October 31, 2008 (no faxes or emails); if not filled, then every Monday thereafter until the search is closed. All applications will be acknowledged, and a background check is required for employment. A short list of candidates will be asked to submit writing samples; after review of writing samples, selected candidates will be invited to interview. AA/EOE.

DePalma, Ringer and Webber

"(Re)Charting the (Dis)Courses of Faith and Politics, or Rhetoric and Democracy in the Burkean Barnyard," an article co-authored by three of my former students at the University of New Hampshire, just appeared in the latest issue of Rhetoric Society Quarterly (38.3).

Congratulations to Mike DePalma, Jeff Ringer and Jim Webber!

Job Ad: Associate or Full Professor of Rhetoric and Composition

Writing Programs Director/Advanced Associate or Full Professor of Rhetoric and Composition

The Department of English at Arizona State University (http://www.asu.edu/clas/english) seeks an experienced writing programs administrator and accomplished scholar-teacher with an established record of outstanding scholarship and professional contributions to any area of Rhetoric and Composition. ASU is a Research I institution with outstanding research facilities and infrastructure support, and is located within the rapidly growing and dynamic metropolitan Phoenix area. Our English department is a large and diverse unit of faculty committed to excellence in teaching, to new and exciting research, and to ongoing community engagement.

Required: Ph.D. in Rhetoric and Composition, or related discipline; experience as a lead writing programs administrator; college-level teaching experience appropriate to rank; evidence of ability to teach and develop graduate and undergraduate courses in Rhetoric and Composition; and a compelling record of ongoing, high-quality scholarship in any area of Rhetoric and Composition.

Desired: Outstanding record of scholarship and publications on topics related to writing program administration.

Applicants must send: Cover letter, curriculum vita, names of three references with contact information to Chair of Writing Programs Director/Rhetoric and Composition Search Committee, Department of English, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 870302, Tempe, AZ 85287-0302.

Application Deadline (no faxes or e-mails): Postmarked by September 26, 2008; if not filled, then every Monday thereafter until the search is closed. All applications acknowledged. ASU is an affirmative action/equal employment opportunity employer and is dedicated to recruiting a diverse faculty community. A background check is required for employment.

Call for Nominations: The 2008 Advancement of People of Color Leadership Award

In response to a recommendation of the Task Force to Advance and Support Members of Color, the NCTE Executive Committee established the Advancement of People of Color Leadership Award. The NCTE Advancement of People of Color Leadership Award (APCL) is a special award given to an NCTE member of color who has made a significant contribution to NCTE and the development of our professional community. The award was established in 2007 and will be first presented in 2008.

The NCTE Executive Committee has asked that nominations be solicited. Council members may self-nominate or nominate any Council colleague.

Please send your nominations, with a brief commentary (maximum one page) on the qualities and services of the nominee to:

Diane Waff, Chair
Advancement of People of Color Leadership Award Subcommittee
NCTE
1111 W. Kenyon Road
Urbana, IL 61801-1096

Deadline for your nomination is September 15, 2008.

Reprint

A friend of mine--a rising star in rhetoric and composition--told me recently that he has received a request for permission to reprint his article, which is quite an honor. He was wondering if there were any issues he should be aware of.

Here is my response (with a few minor changes):

Congratulations on having your article reprinted.

The answer depends on who owns the copyrights. If you signed a copyright release when you had your article published with the journal, then this is a courtesy request. You can say no and I’m sure the editor would honor that, but I don’t see why you wouldn’t want to have your article reprinted. The original publisher has the final say in whether to grant permission (and charge a fee).

If you kept your copyrights (or more precisely, part of the copyrights) concerning the right to reprint (which is unusual in humanities journals), then it would be your decision alone (though I would also have the editor contact the publisher just to be safe).

Normally, reprint authors in our fields don’t get any royalty, but it wouldn't hurt to ask to have a copy of the book sent to you. If you wish to make any minor changes to the article (typos, copy editor’s edits you didn’t like), you can also ask about it at this point. I wouldn’t make any major revisions at this point, though.

Recent Publications

I've been too busy to even keep track of my own work. Here are a few publications that recently came out.

Knoblauch, A. A., & Matsuda, P. K. (2008). First-year composition in the 20th century U.S. higher education: An historical overview. In P. Friedrich (Ed.), Teaching academic writing (pp. 3-25). New York: Continuum.

As the title suggests, this chapter provides an overview of the development of first-year composition--starting with the creation of the first-year composition course in the late 19th century. It also considers the rise of rhetoric and composition as a discipline in the mid 20th century and explores some of the major pedagogical approaches in the 20th century. Abby, by the way, is going to start as Assistant Professor at Kansas State University.

Matsuda, P. K. (2008). Myth: International and U.S. resident ESL writers cannot be taught in the same class. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Writing myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching (pp. 159-176). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

This piece examines one of the extreme positions I've seen people take--that ESL writing courses (intensive or first-year) are for international students only and that resident students' needs are too different from international students for them to be placed in the same course. Well, it may be, but given the demographics, all writing teachers--mainstream, basic, or ESL--need to be prepared to work with students who come from various language backgrounds.

Matsuda, P. K. (2008). Voice in second language writing: Implications for Japanese learners of English. JACET Summer Seminar Proceedings, No.7: Issues in L2 Writing Instruction (pp. 9-14). Tokyo: The Japan Association of College English Teachers.

This is an outcome of a JACET summer seminar in Kusatsu, Gunma, Japan. (If you are in Japan in August, I highly recommend it.) Based on my earlier study of voice (Matsuda, 2001), I considered the implications of voice for English learners in Japan. While my view on voice encompasses both individual and social voice, I couldn't help but notice that many Japanese students want to develop their own individual voice. That is, they don't want to stand out but they don't want to be the same as everyone else. Individual identiy, after all, is something we create by combining socially available discursive and non-discursive repertoire.

Matsuda, P. K., & Atkinson, D. (2008). A conversation on contrastive rhetoric: Dwight Atkinson and Paul Kei Matsuda talk about issues, conceptualizations, and the future of contrastive rhetoric. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, & W. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 277-298). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Dwight and I often have conversations on various topics in the field (and we often don't agree with one another), and we decided it would be a good idea (and fun) to share some of those conversations with other people in the field. So we tape-recorded one of our conversations when I visited his family cottage on Deer Isle, Main. Steve Simpson transcribed the conversation for us. (He reflects on that experience in Simpson and Matsuda (2008) that I mention below.) We edited it very little, but it sounds remarkably coherent and even handed--it was interesting for us to see what kinds of conversations we often have. (We were aware of the presence of the tape recorder, of course, but after a few beers, it just didn't seem to matter.)

Matsuda, P. K., & Tardy, C. M. (2008). Continuing the conversation about voice in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 100-105. (doi:10.1016/j.esp.2007.04.002)

This is a response to the response that Paul Stapleton and Rena Helms-Park wrote to our article on voice (Matsuda & Tardy, 2007). It may sound pretty strong, but we felt compelled to respond to all the points that Stapleton and Helms-Park raised in their piece. (I've met them both, and they are great people.) Chris and I have a follow-up article on voice (though not in response to this dialogue) that's being considered for publication as we speak.

Simpson, S., & Matsuda, P. K. (2008). Mentoring as a long-term relationship: Situated learning in a doctoral program. In C. P. Casanave & X. Li (Eds.), Learning the literacy practices of graduate school: Insiders' reflections on academic enculturation (pp. 90-104). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Steve and I wrote this piece during the summer of 2006. I thought of this as a culminating experience for our mentoring relationship at UNH and an important step toward our relationship as colleagues. It was useful for me to reflect on my approach to mentoring and to hear Steve's perspective as well. I was also happy that we were able to receive responses from some of my other mentees, including Michelle Cox, Joleen Hanson, Matt Schneider, and Christina Ortmeier-Hooper. Matt Schneider, who came from San Francisco State to work with me during the summer, observed the whole process of writing this piece. I was lucky to have had the chance to work with these and many other great grad students at UNH, who remain my important colleagues and friends.

A list of major publications is available at: http://matsuda.jslw.org/publications.html.