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.

Looking at the effectiveness of an earth science unit designed using the Understanding by Design process

This report shares my efforts in developing a solid unit of instruction that has a clear focus on student outcomes. I have been a teacher for 20 years and have been writing and revising curricula for much of that time. However, most has been developed without the benefit of current research on how students learn and did not focus on what and how students are learning. My journey as a teacher has involved a lot of trial and error. My traditional method of teaching is to look at the benchmarks (now content expectations) to see what needs to be covered. My unit consists of having students read the appropriate sections in the textbook, complete work sheets, watch a video, and take some notes. I try to include at least one hands-on activity, one or more quizzes, and the traditional end-of-unit test consisting mostly of multiple choice questions I find in the textbook. I try to be engaging, make the lessons fun, and hope that at the end of the unit my students get whatever concepts I‘ve presented so that we can move on to the next topic. I want to increase students‘ understanding of science concepts and their ability to connect understanding to the real-world. However, sometimes I feel that my lessons are missing something. For a long time I have wanted to develop a unit of instruction that I know is an effective tool for the teaching and learning of science. In this report, I describe my efforts to reform my curricula using the “Understanding by Design” process. I want to see if this style of curriculum design will help me be a more effective teacher and if it will lead to an increase in student learning. My hypothesis is that this new (for me) approach to teaching will lead to increased understanding of science concepts among students because it is based on purposefully thinking about learning targets based on “big ideas” in science. For my reformed curricula I incorporate lessons from several outstanding programs I‘ve been involved with including EpiCenter (Purdue University), Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), the Master of Science Program in Applied Science Education at Michigan Technological University, and the Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning (MACUL). In this report, I present the methodology on how I developed a new unit of instruction based on the Understanding by Design process. I present several lessons and learning plans I‘ve developed for the unit that follow the 5E Learning Cycle as appendices at the end of this report. I also include the results of pilot testing of one of lessons. Although the lesson I pilot-tested was not as successful in increasing student learning outcomes as I had anticipated, the development process I followed was helpful in that it required me to focus on important concepts. Conducting the pilot test was also helpful to me because it led me to identify ways in which I could improve upon the lesson in the future.

Add a Dash of Rhetoric, a Pinch of Technical Communication, a Handful of Pedagogy, and Mix Well: Cookbooks and Recipes as Instructional Texts, and What Domestic Texts from 1870 to 1935 Can Teach Us About Technical Communication

Through the use of rhetoric centered on authority and risk avoidance, scientific method has co-opted knowledge, especially women's everyday and experiential knowledge in the domestic sphere. This, in turn, has produced a profound affect on technical communication in the present day. I am drawing on rhetorical theory to study cookbooks and recipes for their contributions to changes in instructional texts. Using the rhetorical lenses of metis (cunning intelligence), kairos (timing and fitness) and mneme (memory), I examine the way in which recipes and cookbooks are constructed, used and perceived. This helps me uncover lost voices in history, the voices of women who used recipes, produced cookbooks and changed the way instructions read. Beginning with the earliest cookbooks and recipes, but focusing on the pivotal temporal interval of 1870-1935, I investigate the writing and rhetorical forces shaping instruction sets and domestic discourse. By the time of scientific cooking and domestic science, everyday and experiential knowledge were being excluded to make room for scientific method and the industrial values of the public sphere. In this study, I also assess how the public sphere, via Cooperative Extension Services and other government agencies, impacted the domestic sphere, further devaluing everyday knowledge in favor of the public scientific model. I will show how the changes in the production of food, cookbooks and recipes were related to changes in technical communication. These changes had wide rippling effects on the field of technical communication. By returning to some of the tenets and traditions of everyday and experiential knowledge, technical communication scholars, practitioners and instructors today can find new ways to encounter technical communication, specifically regarding the creation of instructional texts. Bringing cookbooks, recipes and everyday knowledge into the classroom and the field engenders a new realm of epistemological possibilities.