Placing the History of College Writing: Stories from the Incomplete Archive

Reviewed by Anna Plemons, Clinical Assistant Professor, Washington State University on 5/21/18

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

This text uses neosophistic rhetorical theory to suggest that the concepts of nomos, kairos, epideixis, and dynation are fruitful frames through which to situate an analysis of student writing. This claim, that a historical analysis of student composition at two specific institutions before 1950 is generative for understanding student writing today, unfolds in a sequence of historical analyses using archival material from Ohio University and the University of Houston. The text is comprehensive it its analysis and defense of its major claims.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

Without local knowledge of the institutions or archives discussed, I have no reason to question the accuracy of this text.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 3

This text is relevant to Composition historians and since it primarily utilizes archival research, questions of obsolescence are not as critical as they would be for texts attempting to engage or discuss contemporary issues. The style and density of the prose is appropriate for advanced graduate students or other scholars in the field.

Clarity rating: 3

This text requires a familiarity with rhetorical theory and discourse. The writing is dense at times as the author works to carefully construct a highly academic argument.

Consistency rating: 5

In regards to consistency in the use of terminology and framework, this text has a fairly clear through-line.

Modularity rating: 3

I do not think this text was designed to be used modularly. It is a historical monograph which is designed to be read linearly as one extended argument.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The book has a clear structure and the topics follow in a logical fashion.

Interface rating: 5

The interface of this text is straightforward. There are not very many images/charts and all of the display features work seamlessly.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

The text contains very few grammatical errors.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

Regarding cultural relevance, the text is not culturally insensitive or offensive, but neither is it particularly culturally expansive. The archival research provides the basis for some local cultural analysis, but inclusivity does not seem to be an explicit aim of this text.

Comments

One of the potential strengths of this text is the model it provides for doing rhetorical research in Composition Studies. It also provides a thorough literature review and could, in that way, be of use to other scholars interested in similar lines of inquiry.