seminar and listserv discussions, on
four (4) papers, and on
a final exam.

Your individual paper and exam grades and final grade for the seminar will be lowered if you turn work in past the due dates. Your final seminar grade will be lowered if you have excessive, unexcused absences (4 or more). Your final grade will be an "F" if you do not turn in all of your written (including papers and final exam) work.

Seminar and Listserv Discussions:

I expect you to participate in discussions both in seminar meetings and on the Listserv for the seminar. Your questions or comments should indicate that you have carefully read and studied the material and that you have substanitive concerns that must be addressed. If you wish to argue with the authors or with me or with one of your "colligs" in seminar, you should feel free to do so, but you should be prepared to do so. Asking a question or disagreeing with someone for the mere sake of doing so will get you in trouble. Moreover, I expect basic collegiality in the exchanges. When discussing an issue or whatever, we will want to know Why you are raising or addressing an issue and specifically What's (politically-ethically) at stake in the issue.

There are occasions, however, when a motive for a question is not always clear to the asker. Sometimes, even the question is not fully formed and only becomes so in the constant reasking and re/interrogating of it. Often when the question is fully formed the answer/s are rather obvious. Though Karl Popper ('Objective Knowldege') and Paul Feyerabend ('Against Method') differ greatly on How knowledge is discovered or made, they both agree generally on the simple 'fact' (interpretation) that there are processes through and by which questions evolve or revolve. Therefore, we will be 'open' to the openness of Questioning, when a Q becomes an Answer, an A becomes a Question. We will have been open to the conditions metalepsis. Having said all this, let us not forget that many questions get answered because the question loses a shelflife or interest for the community, just as many problems get solved by simply disolving in thin air.

Writing Assignments: The Four Short Papers and Final Exam

The Four Short Papers

Although the specific topics will evolve from your reading and writing, and from our discussions in class, I can give you some over-all general topics that you would have to develop into an arguable claim: For example, Plato/Socrates's attack on Rhetoric and Aristotle's defense; the necessity of an interplay between Rhetorics and philosophy, between homo rhetoricus and homo seriosus; the relationships among epistemology, ethics, and Composition; or the application of Rhetorical theory to history or science. I will be mentioning all kinds of topics for research while we discuss each week's readings. But (really) let me emphasize, I expect you to determine the topic (such a determination is part of the writing project itself and therefore part of the grade--your audience's reception--as well).

I expect that these 8+ page papers (for those who might ask: double spaced, helvetica font, 1" margins) will be tightly written, sustained arguments--coherent, cogent, and insightful. You, in other words, are to submit essays that follow the conventions of standard academic prose. Your audience(s) for each paper will be me, your fellow students, and Rhetoricians and Compositionists and the Academy in general. (Your papers--at least, those that are either an "A" or a "B"--may be published as a project on the Web site for the seminar and, hence, can be read by anyone with a computer, telephone, the right software, and a modem. These papers will be published electronically, again if published, most likely at the end of the semester.)

Criteria for grades on these "graduate" papers:

"A" = is a publishable insight (in other words, it makes a scholarly contribution) to the topic either by adding a new way of thinking about the topic in terms of the field's discussion of it, or by adding a totally new topic of value to the field;

"B" = is not necessarily publishable, but is, nonetheless, an insightful synthesis of the material read (this grade would signify M.A. level work being done in a seminar designed exclusively for prospective Ph.D. candidates);

"C" = is a mere reporting of information and most likely does not work out of some communal concern with a problem that is relevant to the subject matter of this course in particular or in general (this grade would signify B.A. level work);

"F" = a failure to do the assignment either because it was not handed in or because the paper demonstrates an inability even to explain the readings.

I will be using a folio approach to assessing your papers. My having said this at this point, of course, contradicts everything that I have said above. This, I fully understand!

Therefore, a more inclusive account of assessment: I will be assessing you in two ways:

First, by way of the subjective criteria that I mentioned above in terms of publications. (I have been an Editor of a major journal in my field since 1980 and I generally understand what is and what is not acceptable for publication.) You should expect to have to revise your papers, as any prospective author for a journal in the field is expected to revise his/her manuscript, sometimes many times before publication.

Second, by way of your subjective criteria that you will for the most part determine as you develop your own portfolio of all your reading, thinking, and writing--of your work and play--for this seminar.

There will be, therefore, two portfolios that you will develop and will keep developing simultaneously: One for yourself, one for me.

In the one for yourself, you might keep a journal of your thoughts about the class, your reading notes, seminar notes, your expectations, your afterthoughts, your 'whatevers'. Though I will not grade your portfolio per se, I will examine it from time to time and make whatever evaluative comments I might make orally to you with the sole purpose of suggesting different strategies to thinking about your readings and writings.

At this point in time (1/3/2000) I do not have--I now do have (12/30/2001) a list of criteria for the portfolio you will be keeping for me. You can find the criteria here, but I may intermittently redevelop the criteria in response to your papers and with you during the semester (and will be posting the changes as arrived at). I will not be taking a Platonic approach to criteria (based on ideal criteria!) but an Aristotelian-Sophistic approach (based on evolving customs and rules as reflected variously by groups and journals and ethical-political interests in the field).

You should expect to meet with me in conference about your papers, perhaps several times for each assignment. For now, understand that I will be looking for growth in respect to your discussions online and seminar and in your papers and revisions. While I will expect you to know, follow, and demonstrate the basic scholarly research and writing protocols of the field of rhetoric and composition (and of a variety of journals in the field), I will also expect you to demonstrate, while learning the field, how to synthesize the material and to reshape it for a variety of audiences in the field so as to effect change.

Therefore, though we will start with a set of criteria to be used for the portfolio you will keep for me, these criteria will be open to becoming amended processually. I am going to take, in yet other words, a constitutional-and-amendment approach, therefore, to developing the criteria and assessing the discussions and papers.

Please be aware that this assessment of your papers for this seminar will be reported 'collectively' at the end of the semester to the [name of office to be supplied when I know it!] on campus. Please also understand that this was not my choice, but predetermined by the English Department the first time that the seminar was taught last AY by another instructor.

Due dates for the four papers:

#1, February 13th.
#2, March 13th.
#3, April 17th.
#4, May 8th.

The final exam will be a take-home assignment. The exam may include more than one question and will definitely deal with ALL OF THE READINGS.

For the exam, each student will have approximately 2-3 days, and there will be a fixed number of typed (margin, font specified) pages for the response (the precise number of days and pages will be decided on later). The purpose of the exam is to allow you finally to synthesize and to assess the discussions carried on among the authors-thinkers in the course material and among ourselves in the seminar discussions. The exam should allow you to locate yourself among others in the field.

Special Note for People who turn in papers and the final exam late and for People who have excessive absences, and a note on plagiarism: Turning in Papers On Time: If the individual papers are not turned in on time, I will lower the grade one letter grade; and if the paper is still not turned in the following week or weeks, I will lower the grade even more letter grades, to be determined by the number of weeks. If your failure to turn in a paper on time is the result of a legitimate excuse, then, let me know in writing and with the appropriate document(s). Please also understand that though excessive absences owing to being ill may be legitimate, it is necessary for you to have attended class on a regular basis to be considered for a passing grade. If you are ill and cannot attend class for a long period of time, then, it would be best to drop the seminar and sign up the next time the seminar is offered. If the final exam is submitted after it is due, I will lower the grade one letter. Please understand that to be considered for a passing grade in this seminar, you will have had to turn in all assignments and the final exam. If you do not, you will have awarded yourself a grade of "F" for the seminar. Please understand that I cannot drop you from this seminar. It is entirely your responsibility. There will be no incompletes. There will be no exceptions if I can help it. plagiarism: We will talk about--but surely you already know about--academic honesty and plagiarism, but often I find that even graduate students as well as on occasion colleagues do not understand this issue. Please read carefully UTA's statement concerning disciplinary action taken against plagiarism.

Attendance: All students enrolled in this graduate seminar are required to attend. Don't miss! If you miss more than three classes, I will lower your final grade by one full letter grade.

Determination of Final Grade: Each essay is worth two letter grades; your discussions in seminar and on the listserv are collectively worth two letter grades; and the final exam is worth three letter grades. I will give you a generic letter grade and a numerical grade. An "A" = 4, "B" = 3, "C" = 2, "D" = 1, "F" = 0. I will give no "+" or "-" grades. The breakdown for your numerical grades and equivalents in letter grades is as follows: "A" (4.0--3.7), "B" (3.6--3.0), "C" (2.9--2.0), "D" (1.9--1.0), and "F" (0.9--0). There will be a total of 13 grades divided by 13 for a final grade.

As I have stated above, your individual and final grades are subject to being lowered.