Becoming most fully ourselves : gender, voice, and ritual in dissertations

The writing and defense of the dissertation serve both as demonstration one is able to do the work of a scholar and as a rite of initiation. In contrast to much academic writing, dissertations generally adhere to narrowly conceived notions of academic discourse. I explore this within the context of an academic community in which under-representation remains a serious issue. This dissertation is about women writing dissertations. I draw from conversations with fifteen women, in or beyond, the process; friends’ anecdotes; published accounts; and, autobiographically, my experience. I suggest the dissertation’s initiatory role is at least as important as its scholarly role; during the process one establishes a sense of self as scholar, writer, and researcher. Students come to the dissertation with some notion of self as writer and scholar – a culturally negotiated sense that is more, or less, congruent with the culturally established self required for successful completion of the dissertation. The degree of congruence (or alternatively, harmony and dissonance) shapes the process of doing a dissertation. I argue that both the community and the language in which dissertations must generally be written are gendered masculine. Negotiating a voice that is acceptable in a dissertation while maintain fidelity to a sense of who one is seems more problematic as one’s distance from the center of dominant culture increases. Believing that agency lies in altering the reiteration of such processes, I worked with my committee to find ways to alter the process yet still do a dissertation I write in a variety of voices – essay and poetry as well as analytical – play with visual qualities of text, and experiment with non-verbal interpretations. These don’t exhaust possibilities, but do give a sense of how the rich variety of expression found in academe cam be brought into the dissertation. I thus demonstrate that one need not reconstitute herself through characteristic academic discourse in order to be initiated into the community of scholars. I suggest both the desirability of encouraging flexibility in the language, form, and process, of dissertations, and the theoretical necessity for such flexibility if the academic community is to become diverse. The writing and defense of the dissertation serve both as demonstration one is able to do the work of a scholar and as a rite of initiation. In contrast to much academic writing, dissertations generally adhere to narrowly conceived notions of academic discourse. I explore this within the context of an academic community in which under-representation remains a serious issue. This dissertation is about women writing dissertations. I draw from conversations with fifteen women, in or beyond, the process; friends’ anecdotes; published accounts; and, autobiographically, my experience. I suggest the dissertation’s initiatory role is at least as important as its scholarly role; during the process one establishes a sense of self as scholar, writer, and researcher Students come to the dissertation with some notion of self as writer and scholar – a culturally negotiated sense that is more, or less, congruent with the culturally established self required for successful completion of the dissertation. The degree of congruence (or alternatively, harmony and dissonance) shapes the process of doing a dissertation. I argue that both the community and the language in which dissertations must generally be written are gendered masculine. Negotiating a voice that is acceptable in a dissertation while maintain fidelity to a sense of who one is seems more problematic as one’s distance from the center of dominant culture increases. Believing that agency lies in altering the reiteration of such processes, I worked with my committee to find ways to alter the process yet still do a dissertation I write in a variety of voices – essay and poetry as well as analytical – play with visual qualities of text, and experiment with non-verbal interpretations. These don’t exhaust possibilities, but do give a sense of how the rich variety of expression found in academe cam be brought into the dissertation. I thus demonstrate that one need not reconstitute herself through characteristic academic discourse in order to be initiated into the community of scholars. I suggest both the desirability of encouraging flexibility in the language, form, and process, of dissertations, and the theoretical necessity for such flexibility if the academic community is to become diverse. The writing and defense of the dissertation serve both as demonstration one is able to do the work of a scholar and as a rite of initiation. In contrast to much academic writing, dissertations generally adhere to narrowly conceived notions of academic discourse. I explore this within the context of an academic community in which under-representation remains a serious issue. This dissertation is about women writing dissertations. I draw from conversations with fifteen women, in or beyond, the process; friends’ anecdotes; published accounts; and, autobiographically, my experience. I suggest the dissertation’s initiatory role is at least as important as its scholarly role; during the process one establishes a sense of self as scholar, writer, and researcher Students come to the dissertation with some notion of self as writer and scholar – a culturally negotiated sense that is more, or less, congruent with the culturally established self required for successful completion of the dissertation. The degree of congruence (or alternatively, harmony and dissonance) shapes the process of doing a dissertation. I argue that both the community and the language in which dissertations must generally be written are gendered masculine. Negotiating a voice that is acceptable in a dissertation while maintain fidelity to a sense of who one is seems more problematic as one’s distance from the center of dominant culture increases. Believing that agency lies in altering the reiteration of such processes, I worked with my committee to find ways to alter the process yet still do a dissertation I write in a variety of voices – essay and poetry as well as analytical – play with visual qualities of text, and experiment with non-verbal interpretations. These don’t exhaust possibilities, but do give a sense of how the rich variety of expression found in academe cam be brought into the dissertation. I thus demonstrate that one need not reconstitute herself through characteristic academic discourse in order to be initiated into the community of scholars. I suggest both the desirability of encouraging flexibility in the language, form, and process, of dissertations, and the theoretical necessity for such flexibility if the academic community is to become diverse. The writing and defense of the dissertation serve both as demonstration one is able to do the work of a scholar and as a rite of initiation. In contrast to much academic writing, dissertations generally adhere to narrowly conceived notions of academic discourse. I explore this within the context of an academic community in which under-representation remains a serious issue. This dissertation is about women writing dissertations. I draw from conversations with fifteen women, in or beyond, the process; friends’ anecdotes; published accounts; and, autobiographically, my experience. I suggest the dissertation’s initiatory role is at least as important as its scholarly role; during the process one establishes a sense of self as scholar, writer, and researcher Students come to the dissertation with some notion of self as writer and scholar – a culturally negotiated sense that is more, or less, congruent with the culturally established self required for successful completion of the dissertation. The degree of congruence (or alternatively, harmony and dissonance) shapes the process of doing a dissertation. I argue that both the community and the language in which dissertations must generally be written are gendered masculine. Negotiating a voice that is acceptable in a dissertation while maintain fidelity to a sense of who one is seems more problematic as one’s distance from the center of dominant culture increases. Believing that agency lies in altering the reiteration of such processes, I worked with my committee to find ways to alter the process yet still do a dissertation I write in a variety of voices – essay and poetry as well as analytical – play with visual qualities of text, and experiment with non-verbal interpretations. These don’t exhaust possibilities, but do give a sense of how the rich variety of expression found in academe cam be brought into the dissertation. I thus demonstrate that one need not reconstitute herself through characteristic academic discourse in order to be initiated into the community of scholars. I suggest both the desirability of encouraging flexibility in the language, form, and process, of dissertations, and the theoretical necessity for such flexibility if the academic community is to become diverse.

ENHANCING COMMUNICATION THROUGH SUCCESSFUL REPAIR: EXAMINING FLUENCY AND MECHANISMS FOR SYNTACTIC PROGRESS IN APHASIC AND NON-APHASIC SPEECH

The fields of Rhetoric and Communication usually assume a competent speaker who is able to speak well with conscious intent; however, what happens when intent and comprehension are intact but communicative facilities are impaired (e.g., by stroke or traumatic brain injury)? What might a focus on communicative success be able to tell us in those instances? This project considers this question in examining communication disorders through identifying and analyzing patterns of (dis) fluent speech between 10 aphasic and 10 non-aphasic adults. The analysis in this report is centered on a collection of data provided by the Aphasia Bank database. The database’s collection protocol guides aphasic and non-aphasic participants through a series of language assessments, and for my re-analysis of the database’s transcripts I consider communicative success is and how it is demonstrated during a re-telling of the Cinderella narrative. I conducted a thorough examination of a set of participant transcripts to understand the contexts in which speech errors occur, and how (dis) fluencies may follow from aphasic and non-aphasic participant’s speech patterns. An inductive mixed-methods approach, informed by grounded theory, qualitative, and linguistic analyses of the transcripts functioned as a means to balance the classification of data, providing a foundation for all sampling decisions. A close examination of the transcripts and the codes of the Aphasia Bank database suggest that while the coding is abundant and detailed, that further levels of coding and analysis may be needed to reveal underlying similarities and differences in aphasic vs. non-aphasic linguistic behavior. Through four successive levels of increasingly detailed analysis, I found that patterns of repair by aphasics and non-aphasics differed primarily in degree rather than kind. This finding may have therapeutic impact, in reassuring aphasics that they are on the right track to achieving communicative fluency.