Yes, a technorhetorician can get tenure

Computers and Composition

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 9-18

  Maid, Barry ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK   (United States)

Author keywords

Ambivalence; Assessment; Evaluation guidelines; Standards; Technorhetorician

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042227872     PISSN: 87554615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S8755-4615(99)00026-2     Document Type: Article

References (8)

1. Boyer Ernest. Scholarship reconsidered. 1990;Carnegie Foundation, Princeton, NJ.
2. Conference on College Composition and Communication. (1998). CCCC promotion and tenure guidelines for work with technology. Available: http://www.ncte.org/positions/4c-tp-tech.html [Accessed August 30, 1999].
3. Hult Christine. The scholarship of administration. Janangelo J., Hansen K. Resituating writing. 1995;119-131 Boynton/Cook, Portsmouth, NH.
4. Maid, Barry. (1998, May). Reconciling technorhetoric with promotion and tenure guidelines. Presentation at the 14th Computers and Writing Conference, Gainesville, FL.
5. Maid, Barry. (1995, June). WPA or technorhetorican: Different margin, same problem. Presentation at the 23rd Wyoming Conference on English, Laramie, WY.
6. Maid, Barry. (1994, March). How writing programs reflect new definitions of scholarship. Presentation at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Nashville, TN.
7. Modern Language Association. (1998). Guidelines for evaluation computer-related work in the modern languages. Available: http://www.mla.org/reports/ccet/ccet-guidelines.htm (Accessed August 30, 1999].
8. WPA Executive Committee. (1996). Evaluating the intellectual work of writing program administrators: A draft. Writing Program Administration, 20(1-2), 92-103.