▼ My project concedes, through a careful review of the literature in composition studies, classical rhetoric, and postmodern discourse theory, that there is no clear distinction between observing culture and acting within it between, in effect, knowing and language, epistemology and agency. There is, therefore, no clear way to determine meaning, content, and definition, three key components in the study of writing. And yet, for the sake of research within the field, tentative distinctions are necessary. But herein lies the problem: on the one hand, writers must be in control of their texts meaning (the knowledge they communicate); otherwise agency rhetorical choice in untenable for composition. On the other hand, the meanings of any text are only knowable to readers because meaning is inscribed within historical and social contexts.The problem with this distinction between epistemology and agency is that composition studies unproductively unites praxis (as commonly understood from Aristotles usage, practical knowledge whose goal is action) with this dualism, thereby reinforcing a distinct and unnecessary theory/practice division. Epistemology and cultural analysis have been aligned with theory, while writing and agency have been aligned with practice. A careful review of composition pedagogy suggests that these associations have been the cause of contention and unproductive scholarly and material rifts within the field. I contend, however, that these dualisms (theory/practice and epistemology/agency), far from hindering our work, may enable productive research in composition studies if they are reframed by scholars as oscillating independently of one another by scholars making tentative, strategic connections for the sake of explaining and theorizing more effectively and thoroughly the teaching of writing, and its (necessarily) indeterminate relationship to knowledge. I propose a praxis that fully engages both theory and practice, enabling research, disciplinary discourse, and pedagogy through full reciprocity. Advisors/Committee Members: Drew, Julie.

▼ Current scholarship suggests a positive correlation between the use of the graphic novel and its overall effectiveness as a tool within the classroom. It was apparent, however, that there was a gap in the research in terms of using the graphic novel as it applies to helping composition students develop certain writing skills. Therefore, the focus of this thesis is to explore the ways in which the graphic novel can be used inside of the composition classroom to help strengthen first-year students' writing skills. In specific, in-class activities were designed to be used in conjunction with the graphic novel, Maus, to develop analytical skills, strengthen skills for interviewing, and expand descriptive writing skills. Advisors/Committee Members: Thelin, William.

▼ Writing Values: Between Composition and The Disciplines explores the differences I imagined between Composition and other classrooms, especially the social sciences. Three Composition instructors and instructors from History, Sociology, Political Science, and Economics explain their experiences with writing in their classrooms. They discuss revision, the student, the purpose of writing, and writing assessment. I compare their stories with my own experiences against a backdrop of theory in the field of Composition to find out the nature of the disconnect, if any, between writing in Composition and in other disciplines. Advisors/Committee Members: Bean, Janet.

▼ The process of becoming a writer – choosing the topic, recognizing the audience, acknowledging the facts and theories of the subject – is similar to that which an actor goes through to design a specific character for a specific role. This similarity, and its inherent potential for effective teaching and learning, has been neglected in the Composition/Rhetoric field’s literature and in the college writing classroom. Some students come to First Year Composition (FYC) with the understanding that writing is merely repeating what the instructor has told them, and writing in the way the instructor has told them, not realizing that they, too, have a voice. This is not a new observation, and composition theory has and continues to address the issue of developing a writerly voice, but the problem remains: students too often do not develop their own well-rounded author/character, but stick to a flat stereotype instead, producing writing that is uninteresting, disengaged, and ineffective. This project argues that there are various processes an actor might choose to create each character he portrays on stage or in film, and that understanding these processes could help the student writer develop his own author character during the writing process, thus producing more effective texts and enabling a more fruitful process for future writing. Method Acting is one of the unique processes which make use of multiple influences and experiences that contribute to the forming and presentation of the self. A clear parallel may be found between the process a method actor goes through to create and present his character within the context of a play or film and the process an expository writer (journalist to essayist) goes through to create and present his text. Little has been written of this parallel thus far, and it may be useful to evaluate its potential for integration into the traditional implementation of the writing process, as well as the pedagogies used in composition and research courses. Advisors/Committee Members: Drew, Julie.

▼ In short, the writing process is affected by brain chemistry. Hormonal shifts, manic and depressive brain states, and even one’s level of endorphins produce good or bad moods that affect brain chemistry, which in turn influences the creative impulse. Altering brain states can serve to inspire prolific writing as well as to close a writer down—blocking her ability to communicate her ideas, frozen in panic. For example, a manic, or “high,” elevates one’s ability to write while the counterbalancing “low” or depressed brain tends to deflate the enthusiasm a smooth flow of ideas requires. The creative impulse is useful in motivating a writer. It is a valuable channeling of energy that, when neglected, may produce anxiety and psychological, even physical detriments. The physical brain helps one see the organic nature of creativity and, in doing so, consider ways to prepare the body to write. Advisors/Committee Members: Svehla, Lance M.