Matching Items (44)
Description
At their cores, both rhetoric and public sphere theory have conceptualized how membership in public and counterpublic settings, as well as participation in public life and discussion, is cultivated, shared, contested, and shaped. Previous case studies on publics and counterpublics have looked at the experiences of individuals and collectives who enact practices in rhetorical invention that mark participation in public life. Much of public sphere scholarship focuses squarely on seasoned individuals in positions of authority and decision making in mainstream publics. Conversely, counterpublic spheres focus on the labor of individuals who have extensive experience in articulating discursive practices in response to dominant publics. However, a quietude that has permeated much of rhetoric and public sphere scholarship comes by way of the absence of youth-based voices in the public sphere. It is these same youths who are expected to lead the very publics that claim to represent them, yet do not afford them a mode of participation or agency in their own right. Given that studies in critical and vernacular rhetoric invest significant inquiry into the ways that marginalized communities enact responses towards dominant and mainstream ideologies, it is necessary to consider how these youthful perspectives contribute to rhetoric and the public sphere writ large.
In an effort to inform the rhetorical tradition of its potential in accounting for the voices of youth, this study explores the ways in which youth speak, perform, and embody the various ways in which they belong to a public sphere. Through fieldwork in the LGBTQ youth organization One n’ Ten, I aim to speak to the ways in which rhetorical scholarship can begin to move towards a rhetoric of youth in public life. In this field, I utilize the concepts of enclaving and imagining in counterpublic spheres to examine the practices, discourses, and values that give rise to a queer counterpublicity that emboldens LGBTQ youth to speak and act in a way that honors their identities. Moreover, I draw on theories of critical and vernacular rhetorics to make sense of how One n’ Ten provides youth with opportunities to enact rhetorical agency conducive toward participation in public and counterpublic spheres. Finally, I discuss implications pertaining to how the experiences of young individuals stand to substantially inform theories in public, counterpublic, critical, and vernacular rhetorics, all of which contain opportunities to represent the experiences of both LGBTQ youth and youth writ large as members of public life.
In an effort to inform the rhetorical tradition of its potential in accounting for the voices of youth, this study explores the ways in which youth speak, perform, and embody the various ways in which they belong to a public sphere. Through fieldwork in the LGBTQ youth organization One n’ Ten, I aim to speak to the ways in which rhetorical scholarship can begin to move towards a rhetoric of youth in public life. In this field, I utilize the concepts of enclaving and imagining in counterpublic spheres to examine the practices, discourses, and values that give rise to a queer counterpublicity that emboldens LGBTQ youth to speak and act in a way that honors their identities. Moreover, I draw on theories of critical and vernacular rhetorics to make sense of how One n’ Ten provides youth with opportunities to enact rhetorical agency conducive toward participation in public and counterpublic spheres. Finally, I discuss implications pertaining to how the experiences of young individuals stand to substantially inform theories in public, counterpublic, critical, and vernacular rhetorics, all of which contain opportunities to represent the experiences of both LGBTQ youth and youth writ large as members of public life.
ContributorsFlores, Carlos A (Author) / Brouwer, Daniel C (Thesis advisor) / Hess, Aaron R (Thesis advisor) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This dissertation explores findings from a year-long investigation of the context-driven practices, strategies and beliefs of five multilingual Cultural Health Navigators (CHNs) working in a local pediatrics clinic serving large numbers of refugee families from a variety of cultural backgrounds who are experiencing a range of healthcare challenges. Grounded in a methodology of engagement (Grabill, 2010), this inquiry systematically documents and analyzes the range of ways in which the CHNs assist refugee families and their healthcare providers, their rationale for the decisions made and actions taken, and their concerns about the challenges they encounter. I show that while much of what the CHNs do to assist refugee families and their healthcare providers is routine and can be expected, CHNs also tend to manage complex work involved in mediating refugee families’ interactions with healthcare providers and the healthcare system in ways that cannot always be anticipated in advance. Through a close analysis of their practices and reflections, I show how their various interactions, actions and decisions are responsive to specifics of the situation at hand, informed by their lived experiences as CHNs and immigrants/refugees, and influenced by a dynamic, emergent and embodied notion of context. The findings of this study demonstrate how the CHNs’ collective and distributed knowledge production work shapes experiences with acquiring health literacy, and the material consequences of such efforts and practices.
Drawing on ethnographic research methods and critical-incident methodologies that involved the CHNs in the inquiry process, this study provides a nuanced analysis of the different kinds of work they do, the constraints they encounter, and how they creatively respond to such constraints in real time. The findings demonstrate that a collaborative engagement with critical incidents as a method of intercultural inquiry facilitates a more robust and dynamic understanding of the distributed nature of decision-making practices and ways of knowing. Embodying sensitivity to situated ways of knowing and dynamic practices in institutional settings, this study demonstrates the value of combining social science methodologies with rhetorical inquiry methods to conduct interdisciplinary and cross-institutional research to address pressing social problems in ways that benefit historically marginalized groups.
Drawing on ethnographic research methods and critical-incident methodologies that involved the CHNs in the inquiry process, this study provides a nuanced analysis of the different kinds of work they do, the constraints they encounter, and how they creatively respond to such constraints in real time. The findings demonstrate that a collaborative engagement with critical incidents as a method of intercultural inquiry facilitates a more robust and dynamic understanding of the distributed nature of decision-making practices and ways of knowing. Embodying sensitivity to situated ways of knowing and dynamic practices in institutional settings, this study demonstrates the value of combining social science methodologies with rhetorical inquiry methods to conduct interdisciplinary and cross-institutional research to address pressing social problems in ways that benefit historically marginalized groups.
ContributorsMorelli, Katherine Elizabeth (Author) / Warriner, Doris (Thesis advisor) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Goggin, Peter (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The Stretch Model is a model of first year composition (FYC) that “stretches” the first semester's class over two semesters in order to help writing students who arrive at university with low test scores to succeed in their composition courses. Originally piloted in 1994 at Arizona State University (ASU), the Stretch Model of composition has been found to be effective in terms of retention and persistence of first language (L1) writers (e.g., Glau, 1996; 2007). It has become known at ASU and abroad as the Stretch Program. Since 1997, a separate track of the Stretch Program has been solely for second language (L2) writers, and L2 writing students are now roughly 17% of the program's population. Until fairly recently, there was no attempt to collect L2 data to support the Stretch Program's claims for effectiveness for the L2 population. As many universities across the nation have garnered inspiration for their own programs ("Stretch Award" 2016), and L2 writers have the potential to be in any composition class (Matsuda, Saenkhum, & Accardi, 2013), it is imperative to include the voices of L2 writers in the analysis of the Stretch Program. This study addresses the need for L2 writers' voices to be included in the analysis of the Stretch Program at Arizona State University. From the quantitative analysis of 64,085 students’ institutional data records, and qualitative analysis of 210 student surveys, findings include L2 writers have the highest rates of passing, but the lowest rates of persistence in the three-semester first year composition requirement when compared to Stretch L1 students and the traditional FYC population. Survey data also lends L2 student perceptions to complicate the main features of the Stretch Program including perceived writing improvement, having the same teacher and classmates for two semesters, and having more time to work on their writing. The quantitative findings are consistent with Snyder’s (2017a) analysis of the 2012 fall Stretch Program L1 and L2 cohorts.
ContributorsSnyder, Sarah Elizabeth (Author) / Rose, Shirley K. (Thesis advisor) / Matsuda, Paul Kei (Thesis advisor) / James, Mark A. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This dissertation investigates the origins of dual enrollment (DE) writing courses that give students the opportunity to receive college credit for writing in high school. While no previous research dates DE programs to before the 1970s, this dissertation analyzes the development of the self-proclaimed “longest-running” DE program that began at the University of Connecticut in 1955. In this work, I contend that the University of Connecticut’s DE program began as a complacent act that further advanced already privileged (white affluent) students and further marginalized students of color, which extends marginalizing aspects of the origins of the first-year writing requirement.
I first establish the historical, social, and political context for the development of DE programs at the University of Connecticut with an overview Brown v. Board of Education, whites’ resistance to integration, and the white complacency of citizens in Connecticut in the 1950s. Using whiteness theory and feminist research methods, archival research conducted at the University of Connecticut focused on the development of DE programs shows an institutional absent presence, that is, there is an absence of reference to Brown, integration, or race of students where it concerns the construction, inception, and operation of the first DE writing courses. And finally, an attempt at a disparate impact analysis of current assessment practices that determine enrollment in DE writing courses highlights access and assessment as a connection between the history and the present state of DE programs and DE composition courses. With the inclusion of DE composition, my dissertation project fills at least some of the identified gap in historical research in Rhetoric and Composition Studies during the 1950s and extends arguments of how white complacency has and continues to influence the field and first-year writing.
I first establish the historical, social, and political context for the development of DE programs at the University of Connecticut with an overview Brown v. Board of Education, whites’ resistance to integration, and the white complacency of citizens in Connecticut in the 1950s. Using whiteness theory and feminist research methods, archival research conducted at the University of Connecticut focused on the development of DE programs shows an institutional absent presence, that is, there is an absence of reference to Brown, integration, or race of students where it concerns the construction, inception, and operation of the first DE writing courses. And finally, an attempt at a disparate impact analysis of current assessment practices that determine enrollment in DE writing courses highlights access and assessment as a connection between the history and the present state of DE programs and DE composition courses. With the inclusion of DE composition, my dissertation project fills at least some of the identified gap in historical research in Rhetoric and Composition Studies during the 1950s and extends arguments of how white complacency has and continues to influence the field and first-year writing.
ContributorsMoreland, Casie Rachelle (Author) / Miller, Keith D. (Thesis advisor) / Rose, Shirley K. (Committee member) / Farris, Christine R. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
This dissertation examines collaborative inquiry as a form of graduate mentoring. To investigate this issue, I analyze the research and writing process of a team of five multilingual graduate students and their mentor as they collaboratively design, implement, and report a study based in their local writing program over the course of two years. Through a qualitative activity analysis of team meetings, participant interviews, and the team’s written drafts and email correspondence, I investigate the ways in which self-sponsored, team-based collaborative research and writing supports participants’ learning and development of a professional identity.
Key findings show that unanticipated obstacles in the research context present participants with “real-world” dilemmas that call forth disciplinary alignments, reinforce existing disciplinary practices, and, most importantly, generate new practices altogether. An example of this process is reflected in the research team's frequent need to adjust their research design as a result of constraints within the research environment. The team's ability to pivot in response to such constraints encouraged individual members to view the research enterprise as dynamic and fluid, leading ultimately to a heightened sense of agency and stronger awareness of the rhetorical challenges and opportunities posed by empirical research. Similarly, participants’ demonstrated an ability to recognize and resolve tensions stemming from competing demands on their time and attention during the course of their graduate study. Actively constructing resonances across various domains of their graduate worlds—coursework, teaching, and non-curricular research and professionalization activities—served to clarify purposes and increase motivation.
An additional aspect of this study is the way graduate students leverage their language resources in the collaborative process. This dissertation extends the disciplinary conversation by investigating ways in which language resources function as rhetorical tools within the research context. This focus on language, in concert with collaboration and rhetorical stances to inquiry, challenges persistent views of authorship, apprenticeship, and language norms, while simultaneously lending insight into how graduate students invent new ways of participating in their professional worlds.
Key findings show that unanticipated obstacles in the research context present participants with “real-world” dilemmas that call forth disciplinary alignments, reinforce existing disciplinary practices, and, most importantly, generate new practices altogether. An example of this process is reflected in the research team's frequent need to adjust their research design as a result of constraints within the research environment. The team's ability to pivot in response to such constraints encouraged individual members to view the research enterprise as dynamic and fluid, leading ultimately to a heightened sense of agency and stronger awareness of the rhetorical challenges and opportunities posed by empirical research. Similarly, participants’ demonstrated an ability to recognize and resolve tensions stemming from competing demands on their time and attention during the course of their graduate study. Actively constructing resonances across various domains of their graduate worlds—coursework, teaching, and non-curricular research and professionalization activities—served to clarify purposes and increase motivation.
An additional aspect of this study is the way graduate students leverage their language resources in the collaborative process. This dissertation extends the disciplinary conversation by investigating ways in which language resources function as rhetorical tools within the research context. This focus on language, in concert with collaboration and rhetorical stances to inquiry, challenges persistent views of authorship, apprenticeship, and language norms, while simultaneously lending insight into how graduate students invent new ways of participating in their professional worlds.
ContributorsBommarito, Daniel Vincent (Author) / Matsuda, Paul Kei (Thesis advisor) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Rose, Shirley K. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Scholars have attended to paradoxes inherent in wider public discourse where subordinated groups most affected by laws and sanctions have the least political, material, and rhetorical capital to speak back to them. Such scholarship often focuses either on the subordinated status of a group or the work of subordinated groups going public as part of a collective mass movement for social change. In doing so, scholarship risks undermining the agency of subordinated rhetors or treating mass-movement rhetoric as somehow both exceptional and yet necessary for enacting cultural citizenship. What is less frequently studied is the agency that local publics demonstrate through their tenacious organizational decision-making in the face of political, material, and rhetorical sanctions.
In response to this gap, this project features the Puente Movement, a mixed-documentation-status grassroots organization in Phoenix, AZ. Specifically, I’ve analyzed this organization’s public efforts from April 23rd, 2010 to September 6th, 2012 to oppose Senate Bill 1070—a state-specific measure to stop undocumented immigration across the Mexico/Arizona border and deport current undocumented residents. I situate the study in the larger context of Latino cultural citizenship. Combining a critical-incident interview technique and a rhetorically informed decision-making framework, I analyze Puente’s active construction and public circulation of argumentative appeals in relation to their decision-making that attempted to leverage Puente’s identity and membership to serve its constituents and to continue to direct wider public attention to SB 1070. Using a five-part framework to assess potential risks and benefits, the study documents the complexity of this decision-making. For instance, the study shows how Puente’s strategy of Barrio Defense Committees negotiated the tension between protecting the identification of local residents and publically protesting the injustices of immigration sanctions. It also highlights how a strategy to use member’s undocumented status as a point of publicity actively engaged tensions between the narratives Puente members wanted to present to the public about undocumented people and the images otherwise circulated. Behind these strategies and others like them is Puente’s persistent effort to re-frame immigration controversy. Findings are relevant to the study of Latino/a social movements, public-spheres scholarship, and action-research with subordinated rhetors.
In response to this gap, this project features the Puente Movement, a mixed-documentation-status grassroots organization in Phoenix, AZ. Specifically, I’ve analyzed this organization’s public efforts from April 23rd, 2010 to September 6th, 2012 to oppose Senate Bill 1070—a state-specific measure to stop undocumented immigration across the Mexico/Arizona border and deport current undocumented residents. I situate the study in the larger context of Latino cultural citizenship. Combining a critical-incident interview technique and a rhetorically informed decision-making framework, I analyze Puente’s active construction and public circulation of argumentative appeals in relation to their decision-making that attempted to leverage Puente’s identity and membership to serve its constituents and to continue to direct wider public attention to SB 1070. Using a five-part framework to assess potential risks and benefits, the study documents the complexity of this decision-making. For instance, the study shows how Puente’s strategy of Barrio Defense Committees negotiated the tension between protecting the identification of local residents and publically protesting the injustices of immigration sanctions. It also highlights how a strategy to use member’s undocumented status as a point of publicity actively engaged tensions between the narratives Puente members wanted to present to the public about undocumented people and the images otherwise circulated. Behind these strategies and others like them is Puente’s persistent effort to re-frame immigration controversy. Findings are relevant to the study of Latino/a social movements, public-spheres scholarship, and action-research with subordinated rhetors.
ContributorsOliver, Veronica (Author) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Miller, Keith (Committee member) / Bebout, Lee (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
In this dissertation, I study large-scale civic conversations where technology extends the range of “discourse visibility” beyond what human eyes and ears can meaningfully process without technical assistance. Analyzing government documents on digital innovation in government, emerging data activism practices, and large-scale civic conversations on social media, I advance a rhetoric for productively listening to democratic discourse as it is practiced in 2016. I propose practical strategies for how various governments—from the local to the United Nations international climate talks—might appropriately use technical interventions to assist civic dialogues and make civic decisions. Acknowledging that we must not lose the value that comes from face-to-face civic deliberation, I suggest practical pathways for how and when to use technology to increase democratic engagement from all stakeholders.
ContributorsSutherland, Alison (Author) / Adamson, Joni (Thesis advisor) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Simeone, Michael (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
This study offers a critical discourse analysis of four Saudi newspapers, examining their coverage of two particular incidents relating to the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice. Following van Dijk’s framework, the study examines the ideological role of language within media discourse. The tools of analysis include headlines, leads, lexical choices, reported speech, unnamed sources, and silenced texts. The findings of the study show that there are differences between the four newspapers in the coverage of the two incidents. The analysis also reveals different ideological attitudes among writers.
ContributorsAlshalawi, Hamad (Author) / Adams, Karen L (Thesis advisor) / Long, Elenore (Committee member) / Prior, Mathew (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
A pressing question in public policymaking is how best to allocate decision-making authority and to facilitate opportunities for input. When it comes to science, technology, and environmental (STE) policy decisions, persons impacted by those decisions often have relevant information and perspectives to contribute yet lack either the specialized, technical knowledge or the means by which to effectively communicate that knowledge. Consequently, due to a variety of factors, they are frequently denied meaningful involvement in making them. In an effort to better understand why this is so, and how this might change, this dissertation uses an activity systems framework to examine how three factors mediate the circulation of information in STE public engagement mechanisms.
In this project, I examine the transcripts of a 2015 administrative hearing and community meeting about the Santa Susana Field Lab—a former nuclear- and rocket engine-testing facility 30 miles from Los Angeles, where an experimental nuclear reactor suffered a partial meltdown in 1959. Specifically, I identify (1) who was designated as an "expert" versus a member of "the public," (2) the structural features, and (3) the stylistic features of participants' remarks at these events; and I study how these factors mediated the flow of information at each. To do so, I view "expert" and "public" as what Michael McGee has termed ideographs, and consider the structural and stylistic features that prior scholarship has identified to impact information flow.
Based on my analysis, I theorize that role designations, structural features, and stylistic features work together to mediate whose, what, and how information flows in public engagement mechanisms. Based on my findings, I also suggest that this mediation impacts policy outcomes. As such, I contend that better understanding the relationships among these mediational means, information flow, and policy outcomes is an important step towards developing public engagement mechanisms that most effectively use the relevant knowledge and other insights of all who have a stake in policy decisions.
In this project, I examine the transcripts of a 2015 administrative hearing and community meeting about the Santa Susana Field Lab—a former nuclear- and rocket engine-testing facility 30 miles from Los Angeles, where an experimental nuclear reactor suffered a partial meltdown in 1959. Specifically, I identify (1) who was designated as an "expert" versus a member of "the public," (2) the structural features, and (3) the stylistic features of participants' remarks at these events; and I study how these factors mediated the flow of information at each. To do so, I view "expert" and "public" as what Michael McGee has termed ideographs, and consider the structural and stylistic features that prior scholarship has identified to impact information flow.
Based on my analysis, I theorize that role designations, structural features, and stylistic features work together to mediate whose, what, and how information flows in public engagement mechanisms. Based on my findings, I also suggest that this mediation impacts policy outcomes. As such, I contend that better understanding the relationships among these mediational means, information flow, and policy outcomes is an important step towards developing public engagement mechanisms that most effectively use the relevant knowledge and other insights of all who have a stake in policy decisions.
ContributorsChurg, Emily (Author) / Long, Elenore (Thesis advisor) / Hannah, Mark (Thesis advisor) / Catlaw, Thomas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
Ethos or credibility of a speaker is often defined as the speaker's character (Aristotle). Contemporary scholars however, have contended that ethos lies with the audience because while the speaker may efficiently persuade, the audience will decide if it wants to be persuaded (Farrell). Missing from the scholarly conversation is attention to how ethos is performed between speaker and audience under institutional structures that produce inequitable power relations subject to changing political contexts over time. In this dissertation I analyze how ethos is performed that is a function of a specific social and political environment.
My grandfather, Al Foon Lai, was a paper son. As an adult, I learned that paper sons were members of paper families that may or may not actually exist except on paper; furthermore paper immigration was the way many Chinese entered the United States to get around the Chinese Exclusion Act (1882-1943). Grandfather held legal status, but grandfather's name was fictitious and thus his entry to the United States in 1920 was illegal. Today by some authorities he would be classified as an illegal immigrant. As Grandfather's status as a paper son suggest, Grandfather's credibility as someone with the legal prerogative to reside in the U.S. was a dynamic construct that was negotiated in light of the changing cultural norms encoded in shifting immigration policies. Grandfather constructed his ethos "to do persuasion" in administrative hearings mandated under the Chinese Exclusion Act that produced asymmetrical power relations. By asymmetrical power relations I mean the unequal status between the administrator overseeing the hearing and Lai the immigrant. The unequal status was manifest in the techniques and procedures employed by the administrative body empowered to implement the Chinese Exclusion Act and subsequent laws that affected Chinese immigrants. Combining tools from narrative analysis and feminists rhetorical methods I analyze excerpts from Al Foon Lai's transcripts from three administrative hearings between 1926 and 1965. It finds that Grandfather employed narrative strategies that show the nature of negotiating ethos in asymmetrical power situations and the link between the performance of ethos and the political and social context.
My grandfather, Al Foon Lai, was a paper son. As an adult, I learned that paper sons were members of paper families that may or may not actually exist except on paper; furthermore paper immigration was the way many Chinese entered the United States to get around the Chinese Exclusion Act (1882-1943). Grandfather held legal status, but grandfather's name was fictitious and thus his entry to the United States in 1920 was illegal. Today by some authorities he would be classified as an illegal immigrant. As Grandfather's status as a paper son suggest, Grandfather's credibility as someone with the legal prerogative to reside in the U.S. was a dynamic construct that was negotiated in light of the changing cultural norms encoded in shifting immigration policies. Grandfather constructed his ethos "to do persuasion" in administrative hearings mandated under the Chinese Exclusion Act that produced asymmetrical power relations. By asymmetrical power relations I mean the unequal status between the administrator overseeing the hearing and Lai the immigrant. The unequal status was manifest in the techniques and procedures employed by the administrative body empowered to implement the Chinese Exclusion Act and subsequent laws that affected Chinese immigrants. Combining tools from narrative analysis and feminists rhetorical methods I analyze excerpts from Al Foon Lai's transcripts from three administrative hearings between 1926 and 1965. It finds that Grandfather employed narrative strategies that show the nature of negotiating ethos in asymmetrical power situations and the link between the performance of ethos and the political and social context.
ContributorsCarter, Karen Lynn Ching (Author) / Long, Elenore (Thesis advisor) / Hannah, Mark (Committee member) / Warriner, Doris (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016