Disabling Composition: Toward a 21St-Century, Synaesthetic Theory of Writing

Disabling Composition: Toward a 21st-Century, Synaesthetic Theory of Writing

Dissertation

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Melanie Yergeau

Graduate Program in English

The Ohio State University

2011

Dissertation Committee:

Brenda Brueggemann, Advisor

Cynthia Selfe, Advisor

H. Lewis Ulman Copyright by

Melanie Yergeau

2011 Abstract

My dissertation examines the ways in which composition pedagogies have, both in theory and in practice, systematically worked to exclude individuals with disabilities.

Persisting in composition studies is the ideological belief that traditional writing and intelligence are somehow inherently linked, that traditional literacy is central to defining one’s intellectual worth. This privileging of composing as print-based, I contend, masks the notion that writing is simply one among many systems of making and conveying meaning, that among our readers are those who cannot always access the messages delivered within print-based texts.

I argue that disability studies can enable us to reconceive the rhetorical triangle and what it means to compose. Disability studies allows us to perceive the ways in which traditional writing—and composition studies’ investment in traditional writing— normalizes and has been normalized by our understanding of “the” rhetorical triangle.

But disability studies also allows us to regard the ways in which multimodal composing normalizes and has been normalized by our understanding of “the” rhetorical triangle. In order to create the inclusive, radically welcoming pedagogy that so many teacher- scholars strive for, I suggest that we disable composition studies—what we think we know about composers, composing, and composition(s).

Disabling Composition presents three case studies in which we can re/vision this disabling move. In the first case study, I interrogate new media conceptions of

ii synaesthesia, which, in current scholarly literature, has become synonymous with multimodal composing and has been separated from its original, pathological position as a sensory impairment. This configuration of synaesthesia as a non-severe, non- pathological heuristic, I argue, embodies what I term the “rhetoric of shininess”—a concept that sounds wonderfully robust and inclusive in theory, but is often empty and exclusionary in practice. In the second case study, I use critical discourse analysis to explore how two recent usability-centric articles from Technical Communication

Quarterly and Computers and Composition assume an able-bodied audience and segregate disabled users into “accessibility” clusters. In the final case study, I analyze literacy narratives of three autistic writer-activists. These individuals, I argue, serve as one example of disabling composition at work, and they have much to teach us about our conceptions of audience.

In my final chapter, I consider universal design and how its principles of flexibility and equitability work in service of disabling composition. Here I emphasize the importance of accessibility to composition studies, of the ways in which our choices

—at conferences, in our syllabi, in our scholarly work—reflect who it is we value as audience members.

Finally, my dissertation is a born digital project. Though it is by no means fully accessible, it experiments with universal design and accessibility in its very form. I recognize that my audience likely contains individuals who work best with print-based texts, as well as individuals who work best with other modes of expression. Individuals who in other contexts might be considered able-bodied may, at many points, feel disabled

iii as they encounter this dissertation, something that I explore, trouble, and play with throughout.

iv Dedication

Dedicated to Rich

v Acknowledgments

First and foremost, I would like to thank Cindy Selfe, who has been my advisor since I first began at OSU. Cindy has been patient and unbelievably generous with her time—always allowing me to stop by her office and ask her, quite literally, 47 questions in rapid-fire succession. Her comments have always been challenging and rigorous, yet kind and encouraging, which is incredibly hard to find in a person. But my description here doesn’t do her justice. If I were forced to describe her in one word, I would need to use lots of (probably grammatically incorrect) hyphens: I-want-to-be-like-you-when-

I-"grow-up"-because-you-are-such-a-prolific-scholar,-such-a-thought-provoking-teacher,- but-,most-of-all,-such-a-good-person.

I’d also like to thank my dissertation co-chair, Brenda Brueggemann. I began my graduate school career with a focus in creative writing. It wasn’t until the end of my first year that I decided to become a compositionist—in large part because I read an essay in

JAC by Brenda. I remember thinking, “Wow. I want to do that!” I wasn’t sure if I wanted to “do” disability studies for-realsies when I first came to OSU, but taking 891 with

Brenda sealed the deal, as it were. Brenda has been an unbelievable role model, and I’m continually amazed by (and I’m continually taking mental and literal notes on) the ways in which she weaves disability into the classroom and other facets of academic life. In

vi many ways, Brenda has modeled for me what it means to simply be. (Hopefully that sounded profound and not cliché.)

I also want to thank Louie Ulman, the third member of my committee, and a wonderful mentor. In spring 2008 I shadowed his 269 class, and I’m forever in his debt for that experience, which has taught me so much about teaching and technology.

Throughout coursework, exams, and the writing of my dissertation, he has generously provided kind, but always challenging, feedback. I also want to thank Louie for his spreadsheets, which are just about the most awesome thing ever.

I would like to thank Lorelei Blackburn—I would not have survived graduate school without her. I’ve always looked forward to our IM and phone chats, not to mention our conversations about all things Star Wars and Leonard Nimoy. Lorelei has been a wonderful, patient co-mentor, someone who’s willing to talk with me at any point in any process.

Margaret Price, my mentor through the Disability Studies SIG at CCCC, rocks. I want to thank her for allowing me to send (literally) crazy emails, cryptic text messages, and obscurely written pink notecards. I’d also like to thank her for the never-ending supply of socks and Mentos. She has been kind, patient, awesome, and funny, and I wouldn’t have survived the job market and dissertation process without her.

Paul Heilker and John Duffy have also mentored me, and have given me a better understanding of academic publishing and what it means to be a good collaborator. Both are kind and gentle people who “get it.” Working with them has been a breath of fresh air.

vii There have been a number of people, at Ohio State and beyond, that I’d also like to thank here. The space I’ve allotted them doesn’t do them justice. I’d like to thank my dissertation writing group, Genevieve Critel, Paige Van Osdol, and Lauren Obermark; the friends I’ve made here in the RCL program, including Elizabeth Brewer, Katie DeLuca,

Katie Comer (we’re alive!), Erika Strandjord, Nick Hetrick, Jen Michaels, Cate Sacchi,

Jen Herman, Annie Mendenhall, Julia Voss, and others who I know I’m forgetting to mention; folks from Aspirations and the Nisonger Center, including Tom Fish, Jeff

Siegel, Angela Denny, Renee Devlin, and Pat Cloppert. I’d also like to thank the many wonderful mentors who’ve graciously “shown me the ropes” at one point or another:

Scott DeWitt, Eddie Singleton, Jenny McKeel, Beverly Moss, Michael Harker, Cheryl

Ball, Hugh Burns, Patrick Berry, Gail Hawisher, Karl Stolley, Amy Spears and the DMP,

Susan Delagrange, and Sue Webb.

This massively long thank you wouldn’t be complete without a shout out to my aut pride friends and colleagues: Noranne Kramer, Justin Rooney, Stephanie B., Jeffrey

Strasser, Rachel Klippenstein, Jessica Roeder, Ben Chinn, Hillary Spears, Whitney

Brooks, and Kristin Rohrbeck. Also, a big thank you to Ari Ne’eman, Scott Robertson,

Meg Evans, Paula Durbin-Westby, Elesia Ashkenazy, Sarah Pripas, Ralph Savarese,

Summer O., Sara Biggs Chaney, Katie Miller, Kassiane Sibley, Julia Rodas, Chris Foss,

Sharon da Vanport, and the Live Journal Asperger community. You have all helped me keep my blood pressure in check.

To members of the Disability Studies SIG— including Amy Vidali, Cindy

Lewiecki-Wilson, Sushil Oswal, Franny Howes, Stephanie Kerschbaum, Jay Dolmage,

viii Bre Garrett, and Michael Salvo—our conversations have been invaluable, and I appreciate all that you do.

To my friends and mentors at DePaul: Peter Vandenberg, Carolyn Goffman, Sarah

Bowman, Darsie Bowden, Christine Skolnik, Anne Bartlett, Craig Sirles, Shaun Slattery,

Chris Tardy, Lesley Kordecki, Jan Hickey, Colby Cuppernull, Katie Wozniak, and Grete

Scott—thanks for sending me down the rhet-comp path.

To Liz Coughlin: My office is worse than yours. This makes me proud, indeed!

To Rich: You put up with me daily. And you also will hold no judgment over this final thank you—to the Electric Light Orchestra. What would this acknowledgments page be without the Electric Light Orchestra?

ix Vita

1984...... Born, Manchester, NH

2002 ...... A.A. Liberal Arts, New Hampshire

Technical Institute

2005...... B.A. Writing, Geneva College

2007...... M.A. Writing, DePaul University

2007 to present ...... Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of

English, The Ohio State University

Publications

Heilker, P., & Yergeau, M. (2011). Autism and rhetoric. College English, 73(5), 485-497.

Yergeau, M. (2010). Circle wars: Reshaping the typical autism essay. Disability Studies

Quarterly, 30(1). Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/1063/1222

Yergeau, M. (2009). aut(hored)ism. Computers and Composition Online. Retrieved from

http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/dmac/

Yergeau, M., Wozniak, K., & Vandenberg, P. (2008). Expanding the space of f2f: Writing

centers and audio-visual-textual conferencing. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric,

x Technology, and Pedagogy, 13(1). Retrieved from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/

13.1/topoi/yergeau-et-al/index.html

Fields of Study

Major Field: English

xi Table of Contents

Abstract ...... ii

Acknowledgments ...... vi

Vita ...... x

Instructions ...... xiii

References ...... 1

Media bibliography ...... 16

Appendix A: Foregrounding and Backgrounding ...... 20

xii Instructions

My dissertation is a multimodal, born-digital text: essentially, it is in website form. I composed this project in HTML and CSS and used a variety of web authoring programs, including Dreamweaver, iWeb, and Wordpress. My project can be viewed with web browsers such as Safari, Firefox, or Internet Explorer (8 and higher).

To begin reading, please download yergeau_diss.zip. Once you open the file, the contents should unzip into a folder: open the folder, and from there double-click on index.html. My dissertation splash page should load in your preferred web browser.

The splash page (pictured below) functions like a table of contents page. Because this is a webtext project, I have labeled my chapters as nodes. To view a chapter/node, simply click on the desired link (e.g., node 1, node 2).

xiii Each node/chapter is its own self-contained website. You can click on hyperlinks in an order of your choosing, i.e., you can read this dissertation linearly or rhizomatically.

All hyperlinks are internal to this dissertation, unless they are marked with a white pop-

up arrow (pictured left)—in which case, the links go to an external site.

Some links have up and down arrows attached to them (pictured left). These links are internal to my dissertation—clicking on them will reveal drop-down boxes with additional text, video, and/or images.

My bibliographies and appendices are in PDF form. You can read these in the pages that follow or download them from the dissertation splash page.

If you have any questions or need to view my dissertation in an alternative format, please contact me at [email protected].

xiv References

Adler, P.S., & Winograd, T.A. (1992). Usability: Turning technologies into tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Alan, M. (2008). I wish my kids had cancer: A family surviving the autism epidemic. Publish America. Alexander, J. & Gibson, M. (2004). Queer composition(s): Queer theory in the writing classroom. JAC, 24(1), 1-21. Andrea’s Buzzing About. (2007, June 6). Ooh, shiny! [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://qw88nb88.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/ooh-shiny/ Andrus, J. (2011). A legal discourse of transparency: Discursive agency and domestic violence in the technical discourse of the excited utterance exception to hearsay. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20(1), 73-91. Anonymous, J. (2010). Literacy narrative of an autistic person. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1561 Anson, C.M. (1999). Distant voices: Teaching and writing in a culture of technology. College English, 61(3), 261-280. Asher, J.E., Aitken, M.R.F., Farooqi, N., Kurmani, S., & Baron-Cohen, S. (2006). Diagnosing and phenotyping visual synaesthesia: A preliminary evaluation of the revised test of genuineness (TOG-R). Cortex, 42, 137-46. Attwood, T. (2007). The complete guide to Asperger’s Syndrome. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley. Autism Diva. (2006, October 29). Autism Speaks and GRASP: Speak without understanding [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://autismdiva.blogspot.com/ 2006/10/autism-speaks-and-grasp-speak-without.html Autism Hub: The very best in autism blogging. Retrieved from http://www.autism- hub.co.uk Autism Speaks. (2006). “New Decade” fundraiser brings in over $2M. Retrieved from http://www.autismspeaks.org/sponsoredevents/new_decade_for_autism.php Autism Speaks. (2010). What is autism? Retrieved from http://www.autismspeaks.org/ whatisit/index.php

1 Autistic Bitch from Hell. (2006, December 9). High functioning is an insult, too [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://autisticbfh.blogspot.com/2006/12/high-functioning-is- insult-too.html Autistic Bitch from Hell. (2008, December 17). Michael John Carley and Autism Speaks: The collaboration thickens [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// www.wrongplanet.net/article379.html Autistic Self Advocacy Network. Change.org. Retrieved from http://www.change.org/ autisticadvocacy Autreat. (2002). DSM IV diagnostic criteria for autism. Retrieved from http:// www.autreat.com/dsm4-autism.html Baggs, A. (2004). Curebie bingo. Retrieved from http://www.autistics.org/library/bingo/ card-blank.jpg Baggs, A. (2005). Getting the truth out. Retrieved from http://gettingthetruthout.org Baggs, A. (Performer). (2006, October 28). Reply to Autism Speaks and GRASP “Articles of Understanding” [Video file]. Retrieved from http:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhnsEJRJgeA Baggs, A., Schwarz, P., Smith, J., & Tisoncik, J. (n.d.). Who can call themselves autistic? Retrieved from http://www.autistics.org Baker, A.D. (2007). Recognizing Jake: Contending with formulaic and spectacularized representations of autism in film. In M. Osteen (Ed.), Autism and representation (pp. 229-243). New York: Routledge. Banissy, M.J., & Ward, J. (2007). Mirror-touch synesthesia is linked with empathy. Nature neuroscience, 10(7), 815-816. Banks, A.J. (2005). Race, rhetoric, and technology: Searching for higher ground. Mahwah, NJ and Urbana, IL: Lawrence Erlbaum-NCTE. Baron-Cohen, S. (1997). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Boston: MIT. Baron-Cohen, S. (2008). Theories of the autistic mind. The Psychologist, 21(2), 112-116. Baron-Cohen, S. (2003, April 17). They just can’t help it. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2003/apr/17/research.highereducation Baron-Cohen, S., Leslie, A.M., & Frith, U. (1985). Does the autistic child have a theory of mind? Cognition, 21, 37-46. Bartholomae, D. (1985/2003). Inventing the university. In C. Glenn, M.A. Goldthwaite, & R. Connors (Eds.), The St. Martin's guide to teaching writing (pp. 403-417). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's.

2 Beaufort, A. (2007). College writing and beyond: A new framework for university writing instruction. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Berlin, J. (1988). Rhetoric and ideology in the writing class. College English, 55(5), 477-494. Bizzell, P. (1982/1997). Cognition, convention, and certainty. In V. Villanueva (Ed.), Cross-talk in comp studies (pp. 365-389). Urbana: NCTE, 1997. Blommaert, J., & Bulcaen, C. (2000). Critical discourse analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology, 29, 447-466. Bolter, J.D., & Grusin, R. (2000). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bowie, J. (2009). Beyond the universal: The universe of users approach to user-centered design. In S. Miller-Cochran & R.L. Rodrigo (Eds.), Rhetorically rethinking usability (pp. 135-163). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Brandt, D. (2001). Literacy in American lives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brewer, E. (2010). A new rhetoric of mental illness: How the Icarus Project creates a chance for a credible ethos. Paper presented at the Rhetoric Society of America Conference. Broderick, A.A., & Ne’eman, A. (2008). Autism as metaphor: Narrative and counter narrative. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(5-6), 459-476. Brottman, Mikita. (2005, September 16). Nutty professors. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Nutty-Professors/2488 Brueggemann, B.J. (1999). Lend me your ear: Rhetorical constructions of deafness. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press. Brueggemann, B.J. (2001). An enabling pedagogy: Meditations on writing and disability. JAC: Journal of Advanced Composition, 21(4 ), 791-820. Brueggemann, B.J. (2009). Deaf subjects: Between identities and places. New York: NYU Press. Brueggemann, B.J., Chrisman, W.L., Kapferer, A., Lupo, M. & Pattonet, B. (2002). Performing (everyday) exceptionalities: A web-text on disability in drama and performance art. Kairos, 7(1). Retrieved from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/7.1/ coverweb/brueggemann/ Brueggemann, B.J., et al. (2001/2006). Lessons in becoming visible. In Peter Vandenberg, Sue Hum, and Jennifer Clary-Lemon (Eds.), Relations, locations, positions: Composition theory for writing teachers. Urbana, IL: NCTE, pp. 500-534. Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action. Berkeley: University of California Press.

3 Carley, M.J. (2006). Articles of understanding: GRASP, and the word “cure.” Retrieved from http://grasp.org Carley, M.J. (2008a, Dec. 17). A favor [Online posting]. GRASP archives. Retrieved from http://grasp.org Carley, M.J. (2008b). Asperger’s from the inside out: A supportive and practical guide for anyone with Asperger’s Syndrome. New York: Perigee. Carliner, S. (2003). Characteristic-based, task-based, and results-based: Three value systems for assessing professionally produced technical communication products. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 83-100. Cat in a Dog’s World. (2009, November 6). An autistic by any other name part II [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://autisticcats.blogspot.com/2009/11/autistic-by-any- other-name-part-ii.html Center for Universal Design. (1997/2008). Retrieved from http://www.ncsu.edu/www/ ncsu/design/sod5/cud/index.htm Chaotic Idealism. (2009, May 28). Supercrip mythology and lowered expectations [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com/63915.html Chew, K. (2007, March 8). Acceptance vs. cure [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// www.autismvox.com/acceptance-vs-cure Clark, J.E. (2010). The digital imperative: Making the case for a 21st-century pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 27(1), 27-35. Clarke, J., & van Ameron, G. (2007). “Surplus suffering”: Differences between organizational understandings of Asperger's syndrome and those people who claim the “disorder.” Disability and Society, 22(7), 761-76. Collins, T. (2008). Tutor column: Helping writers with Asperger’s Syndrome. The Writing Lab Newsletter, 32(9), 14-15. Conference on College Composition and Communication. (1974). Students’ right to their own language. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions Cooper, J. (1977). Reflections on clinical social work. Clinical Social Work Journal, 5(4), 303-315. Cooper, M. (1986/2006). The ecology of writing. In Peter Vandenberg, Sue Hum, and Jennifer Clary-Lemon (Eds.), Relations, locations, positions: Composition theory for writing teachers. Urbana, IL: NCTE, pp.181-197. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2000). Designs for social futures. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 203-234). Couser, G.T. (1997). Recovering bodies: Illness, disability, and lifewriting. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

4 Couser, G.T. (2001/2008). Conflicting paradigms: The rhetorics of disability memoir. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann (Eds.), Disability and the teaching of writing (pp. 190-198). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Couser, G.T. (2002). Signifying bodies: Life writing and disability studies. In S.L. Snyder, B.J. Brueggemann, & R. Garland-Thomson (Eds.), Disability studies: Enabling the humanities (pp. 109-117). New York: Modern Language Association. Davis, L.J. (1995). Deafness and insight: The deafened moment as a critical modality. College English, 57(8), 881-900. Davis, L.J. (1997). Constructing normalcy: The bell curve, the novel, and the invention of the disabled body in the nineteenth century. The disability studies reader (pp. 9-28). New York: Routledge. Davis, L.J. (2002). Bending over backwards: Disability, dismodernism, and other difficult positions. New York: NYU Press. Davis, L.J. (2010). Lennard Davis’ literacy narrative. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/974 Devitt, A.J. (2006). Generalizing about genre: New conceptions of an old concept. In Peter Vandenberg, Sue Hum, & Jennifer Clary-Lemon (Eds.), Relations, locations, positions: Composition theory for writing teachers (pp. 84-102). Urbana, IL: NCTE. Devitt, A. J., Bawarshi, A., & Reiff, M.J. (2003). Materiality and genre in the study of discourse communities. College English, 65(5), 541-558. DeVoss, D., McKee, H., & Selfe, R.J. (Eds.). (2009). Technological ecologies and sustainability. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Doherty, H. (2010, May 10). Discussing intellectual disability and autism invokes hostility: The Laurence Arnold example [Web log post]. Retrieved from http:// autisminnb.blogspot.com/2010/05/discussing-intellectual-disability-and.html Dolmage, J. (2006) The teacher, the body. College Composition and Communication, 58 (2), 267-277. Dolmage, J. (2008). Mapping composition: Inviting disability in the front door. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann (Eds.), Disability and the Teaching of Writing (pp. 14-27). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Dolmage, J. (2009). Disability, usability, universal design. In S. Miller Cochran & R.L. Rodrigo (Eds.), Rhetorically rethinking usability (pp. 167-190). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Dolmage, J., & Lewiecki-Wilson, C.; Heilker, P.; Jurecic, A. (2008). Comment and response: Two comments on “Neurodiversity.” College English, 70(3), 314-325. 5 Duffelmeyer, Barbara B. (2002). Critical work in first-year composition: Computers, pedagogy, and research. Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture, 2(3), 357-374. Duffy, J. (2010, April). Of voices in the fortress: Autism, rhetoric, and the notion of “mindblindness.” Paper presented at the Department of English Corbett Lecture, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Dunn, P.A. (1995). Learning re-abled: The learning disability controversy and composition studies. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Heinemann. Dunn, P.A. (2001). Talking, sketching, moving: Multiple literacies in the teaching of writing. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Heinemann. Dunn, P.A., & Dunn De Mers, K. (2002). Reversing notions of disability and accommodation: Embracing universal design in writing pedagogy and web space. Kairos, 7(1). Retrieved from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/7.1/coverweb/ dunn_demers/index.html Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience addressed/Audience invoked: The role of audience in composition theory and pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 35, 155-171. Eyman, D. (2009). Usability: Methodology and design practice for writing processes and pedagogies. In S. Miller-Cochran & R.L. Rodrigo (Eds.), Rhetorically rethinking usability (pp. 213-228). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Oxford: Polity Press and Blackwell. Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T.A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, volume 2 (pp. 258-284). London: Sage. Flower, L., Hayes, J.R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986/1999). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. In L. Ede (Ed.), On writing research: The Braddock essays, 1975-1998 (pp. 191-228). Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1999. Fortune, R. (2005). “You’re not in Kansas anymore”: Interactions among semiotic modes in multimodal texts. Computers and Composition, 22, 49-54. Fulkerson, R. (2005). Composition at the turn of the twenty-first century. College Composition and Communication, 56(4), 654-87. Garland-Thomson, R. (2002). The Politics of staring: Visual rhetorics of disability in popular photography. In S.L. Snyder, B.J. Brueggemann, and R. Garland- Thomson (Eds.), Disability studies: Enabling the humanities (pp. 56-75). New York: Modern Language Association. Garland-Thomson, R. (2002/2008). From The Politics of staring: Visual rhetorics of disability in popular photography. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann

6 (Eds.), Disability and the teaching of writing (pp. 216-223). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Gibson, W. (1966). Tough, sweet, and stuffy: An essay on modern American prose styles. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Giummarra, M.J., & Bradshaw, J.L. (2009). Synaesthesia for pain: Feeling pain with another. In J. Pineda (Ed.), Role of mirroring in social cognition (pp. 287-307). New York: Humana Press. Glenn, C. (2004). Unspoken: A rhetoric of silence. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Grandin, T. (1996). Thinking in pictures. New York: Vintage. Greenbaum, A. (2011). Nurturing difference: The autistic student in professional writing programs. Journal of the Assembly for Advanced Perspectives on Learning, 16, 40-47. Haddon, M. (2004). The curious incident of the dog in the night-time. Canada: Anchor. Heilker, P. (2008). Autism and rhetoric. Conference on College Composition and Communication, New Orleans. Heilker, Paul, & King, Jason. (2010). The rhetorics of online autism advocacy: A case for rhetorical listening. In Stuart Selber (Ed.), Rhetorics and technologies: New directions in writing and communication. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press. Heilker, P., & Yergeau, M. (2011). Autism and rhetoric. College English, 73(5), 485-497. Hershey, L. (2003). From poster child to protester. Retrieved from http:// www.cripcommentary.com/frompost.html Hochel, M., & Milan, E.G. (2008). Synaesthesia: The existing state of affairs. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25(1), 93-117. Hoopman, K. (2006). All cats have Asperger Syndrome. Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley. Huckin, T. (2002a). Critical discourse analysis and the discourse of condescension. In E.L. Barton and G. Stygall (Eds.), Discourse studies in composition (pp. 155-177). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Huckin, T. (2002b). Textual silence and the discourse of homelessness. Discourse & Society, 13(3), 347-372. Horner, B. (2000). Terms of work for composition: A materialist critique of writing. Albany: SUNY Press. Graff, H.J. (1991). The literacy myth: Cultural integration and social structure in the nineteenth century. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

7 Imrie, R. (1998). Oppression, disability, and access in the built environment. In T. Shakespeare (Ed.), The disability reader: Social science perspectives (pp. 129-146). London: Cassell. Jack, J. (2010). What are neurorhetorics? Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 40(5), 405-410. Jansari, A.S., Spiller, M.J., & Redfern, S. (2006). Number synaesthesia: When hearing “four plus five” looks like gold. Cortex, 42(2). 253-8. Jung, J. (2007). Textual mainstreaming and rhetorics of accommodation. Rhetoric Review, 26(2), 160-78. Jurecic, A. (2006). Mindblindness: Autism, writing, and the problem of empathy. Literature and Medicine, 25(1), 1-23. Jurecic, A. (2007). Neurodiversity. College English, 69(5), 421-442. Kadosh, R.C., Henik, A., & Walsh, V. (2009). Synaesthesia: Learned or lost? Developmental Science, 12(3), 484-491. Kalb, C. (2008, March 24). Mysteries and complications: Autism is everywhere—once again. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/id/123474/output/ print Kim, L.S., & Blasini, G. (2001). The performance of multicultural identity in U.S. Network television: Shiny, happy Popstars (holding hands). Emergences, 11(2), 287-307. Kirby, K. (1993). Thinking through the boundary: The politics of location, subjects, and space. boundary 2, 20(2), 173-189. Kress, G. (2000). Design and transformation: New theories of meaning. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 153-161). Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. New York: Routledge. Kress, G. (2005). Gains and losses: New forms of texts, knowledge, and learning. Computers and Composition, 22, 5-22. Kress, G., & Van Leuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold. Larsen, R.B. (1986). Three syns. Journal of Teaching Writing, 5(2). 307-314. Lindblom, K., & Dunn, P.A. (2003). The roles of rhetoric in constructions and reconstructions of disability. Rhetoric Review, 22(2), 167-8. Linton, S. (1998). Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: NYU Press. Lunsford, A. (1979/1997). Cognitive development and the basic writer. In Victor Villanueva (Ed.), Cross-Talk in Comp Theory: A Reader. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

8 Lynch, D. (1998). Rhetorics of proximity: Empathy in Temple Grandin and Cornel West. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 28(1), 5-23. Marback, M. (2009). Embracing wicked problems: The turn to design in composition studies. College Composition and Communication, 61(2), 397-419. Mauk, J. (2003). Location, location, location: The ‘real’ (e)states of being, writing, and thinking in composition. College English 65(4), 368-388. McCarthy, J. (2007). Louder than words: A mother’s journey in healing autism. New York: Dutton. McKean, T.A. (2007). A danger in speaking. Retrieved from http:// www.thomasamckean.com/articles/speaking.htm McRuer, R. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York: NYU Press. Micciche, L. (2010). Writing as feminist rhetorical theory. In E.E. Schell & K.J. Rawson (Eds.), Rhetorica in Motion. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Miles, A., Tofts, D., Amerika, M., Weight, J., Ednie-Brown, P, & Yuille, J. (2003). Violence of text: An online academic publishing exercise. Kairos, 8(1). Retrieved from http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/8.1/coverweb/vot/votfront/frontmain.html Miller, S. (1997). Technologies of self?-formation. Journal of Advanced Composition, 17 (3), 497-500. Miller-Cochran, S., & Rodrigo, R. (Eds.). (2009). Rhetorically rethinking usability. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Mitchell, J. (2010, January 2). An email from Alex Plank [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://autismgadfly.blogspot.com/2010/01/email-from-alex-plank.html Moran, M. (2009, August 21). APA disputes critics of DSM-V process. Psychiatric News, 44(16). Retrieved from http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/44/16/4.1.full Mulvenna, C.M., & Walsh, V. (2006). Synaesthesia: Supernormal integration? TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 10(8), 350-352. Murray, S. (2010). Autism functions/The function of autism. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1). Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org/article/view/1048 Nelson, M.E. (2006). Mode, meaning, and synaestheis in multimedia L2 writing. Language, Learning, & Technology, 10(2), 56-76. Nelson, M.R., & Hitchon, J.C. (1999). Loud tastes, colored fragrances, and scented sounds: How and when to mix the senses in persuasive communications. J&MC Quarterly, 76(2), 354-372. The New London Group. (2000). In Bill Cope and Mary Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9-39). London: Routledge.

9 New Republic. (2010). ASAN protest. Retrieved from http://the- newrepublic.blogspot.com/2010/04/asan-protest-at-ohio-state-university.html North, S.M. (1987). The making of knowledge in composition: Portrait of an emerging field. Albany: SUNY Press. Osteen, M. (Ed.). (2008). Autism and representation. New York: Routledge. Palmeri, J. (2006). Disability studies, cultural analysis, and the critical practice of technical communication pedagogy. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(1), 49-65. Paré, A. (2006). Genre and identity: Individuals, institutions, and ideology. In Peter Vandenberg, Sue Hum, & Jennifer Clary-Lemon (Eds.), Relations, locations, positions: Composition theory for writing teachers (pp. 138-155). Urbana, IL: NCTE. Perkins, B. (2009). “You just don’t understand”: Teaching the Asperger’s student. Paper presented at the Conference on College Composition and Communication, San Francisco, CA. Perl, S., Hawisher, G., Berry, P., Lee, H., Skjulstad, S., & Selfe, C. (2010). Digital composing: Remaking stories of literacy, research, and life. Computers and Composition Online. Retrieved from http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/ digitalcomposing/ Pinto, P. (Forthcoming, 2011). Between the lines: A critical discourse analysis of disability policy in Portugal. Disability Studies Quarterly. Porter, J.E. (1986). Intertextuality and the discourse community. Rhetoric Review, 5(1), 34-47. Porter, J.E. (2009). Recovering delivery for digital rhetoric. Computers and Composition, 26(4), 207-224. Powell, Timothy B. (Ed.). (1999). Beyond the binary: Reconstructing cultural identity in a multicultural context. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Prendergast, C. (2001). On the rhetorics of mental disability. In James C. Wilson & Cynthia Lewiecki-Wilson (Eds.), Embodied rhetorics: Disability in language and culture. Southern Illinois University Press, pp. 45-60. Price, M. (2007). Accessing disability: A nondisabled student works the hyphen. College Composition and Communication, 59(1), 53-76. Price, M. (2008). Writing from normal: Critical thinking and disability in the composition classroom. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann (Eds.), Disability and the Teaching of Writing (pp. 56-73). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.

10 Price, M. (2009). Access imagined: The construction of disability in conference policy documents. Disability Studies Quarterly, 29(1). Retrieved from http://www.dsq- sds.org/article/view/174/174 Price, M. (2011, February 7). It shouldn’t be so hard. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2011/02/07/ margaret_price_on_the_search_process_for_those_with_mental_disabilities Price, M. (2011). Mad at school: Rhetorics of mental disability and academic life. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Ramachandran, V.S., & Hubbard, E.M. (2003). The phenomenology of synaesthesia. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10(8), 49-57. Ratcliffe, K. (2005). Rhetorical listening: Identification, gender, whiteness. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press. Reynolds, N. (1998). Composition’s imagined geographies: The politics of space in the frontier, city, and cyberspace. College Composition and Communication, 50(1), 12-35. Rich, A. (1987). Notes toward a politics of location. Blood, bread, and poetry: Selected prose 1979-1985 (pp. 210-232). London: Virago. Robertson, S.M., & Ne’eman, A. (2008). Autistic acceptance, the college campus, and technology: Growth of neurodiversity in society and academia. Disability Studies Quarterly, 28(4). Rogers, R. (2002). Through the eyes of the institution: A critical discourse analysis of decision making in two special education meetings. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 33(2), 213-237. Rogers, S. (2010, June 23). Intervening in the ﬁrst three years of life. Paper presented at the Nisonger Autism Institute, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Rogers, S. & Vismara, L. (2008). Evidence-based comprehensive treatments for early autism. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 37(1), 8-38. Rose, I. (2005, October). Autistic autobiography: Introducing the field. Paper presented at Autism and Representation: Writing, Cognition, Disability Conference, Cleveland, OH. Retrieved from http://www.cwru.edu/affil/sce/Representing %20Autism.html Rose, I. (2008). Autistic autobiography or autistic life narrative. Journal of Literary Disability, 2(1), 44-54. Rosinski, P., & Squire, M. (2009). Strange bedfellows: Human-computer interaction, interface design, and composition pedagogy. Computers and Composition, 26, 149-163. Sagiv, N., & Ward, J. (2006). Cross-modal interactions: Lessons from synaesthesia. Progress in Brain Research, 155, 263-275. 11 Salvo, M.J. (2001). Ethics of engagement: User-centered design and rhetorical methodology. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(3), 273-290. Sarrett, J. (2011). Trapped children: Popular images of children with autism in the 1960s and 2000s. Journal of Medical Humanities, 1-13. Savarese, R. (2007). Reasonable People: A memoir of autism and adoption. New York: Other Press. Sawyer, D. (Performer). Good Morning America: Autistic and proud [Video file]. Retrieved from http://autism.change.org/videos/view/ good_morning_america_neurodiversity_segment Scenters-Zapico, J. (2010). Generaciones’ narratives: The pursuit and practice of traditional and electronic literacies on the U.S.-Mexico borderlands. Logan, UT: Computers and Composition Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Schuler, A. (2003). Beyond echoplaylia: Promoting language in children with autism. Autism, 7(4), 455-469. Scott, J.B. (2008). The practice of usability: Teaching user engagement through service- learning. Technical Communication Quarterly, 17(4), 381-412. Schwarz, P. (2008). Film as a vehicle for raising consciousness among autistic peers.In M. Osteen (Ed.), Autism and representation (pp. 256-270). New York: Routledge. Seelman, K.D. (2005). Universal design and orphan technology: Do we need both? Disability Studies Quarterly, 25(3). Retrieved from http://www.dsq-sds.org/ article/view/584/761 Selfe, C.L. (1999). Technology and literacy in the twenty-first century: The importance of paying attention. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Selfe, C.L., & Hawisher, G. (2004). Literate lives in the information age: Narratives of literacy from the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Selfe, C.L., & Selfe, R.J. (1994). The politics of the interface: Power and its exercise in electronic contact zones. College Composition and Communication, 45(4), 480-504. Shin, D., & Cimasko, T. (2008). Multimodal composition in a college ESL class: New tools, traditional norms. Computers and Composition, 25, 376-395. Sibley, K. (n.d.). The rettdevil’s rants. Retrieved from http://rettdevil.blogspot.com Siebers, T. (2002). Tender organs, narcissism, and identity politics. In S.L. Snyder, B.J. Brueggemann, and R. Garland-Thomson (Eds.), Disability studies: Enabling the humanities (pp. 40-55). New York: Modern Language Association. Siebers, T. (2008). Disability theory. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Siebers, T. (2010). Disability aesthetics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

12 Simner, J., Harrold, J., Creed, H., Monro, L., & Foulkes, L. (2009). Early detection of markers for synaesthesia in childhood populations. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 132, 57-64. Sinclair, J. (2008). Don’t mourn for us. Retrieved from http://web.syr.edu/~jisincla/ dontmourn.htm Singer, A.T. (2006). Cure is not a four-letter word. Retrieved from http://grasp.org Slatin, J. (2001). The art of the ALT: Toward a more accessible web. Computers and Composition, 18, 73-81. Sloane, S.J. (1999). The haunting story of J: Geneaology as a critical category in understanding how a writer composes. In G. Hawisher & C. Selfe (Eds.), Passions, pedagogies, and 21st century technologies (pp. 49-65). Logan, UT: Utah State University Press. Smith, S. (2010). Beyond the dissertation monograph. MLA – From the President. Retrieved from http://www.mla.org/blog&topic=133 Sohn, K.K. (2006). Whistlin’ and crowin’ women of Appalachia: Literacy practices since college. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Solomon, A. (2008, May 25). The autism rights movement. New York Magazine. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/news/features/47225/ Spinuzzi, C. (2001). “Light green doesn’t mean hydrology!”: Toward a visual-rhetorical framework for interface design. Computers and Composition, 18, 39-53. Stolley, K. (2011). How to design and write web pages today. Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood. Sullivan, P. (1989/2009). Human-computer interaction perspectives on word processing issues. In S. Miller-Cochran & R.L. Rodrigo (Eds.), Rhetorically rethinking usability (pp. 15-34). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Sun, H. (2006). The triumph of users: Achieving cultural usability goals with user localization. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 457-481. Swarts, J., & Slattery, S. (2009). Usability testing in the writing classroom: Testing across a continuum of instrumentality. In S. Miller-Cochran & R.L. Rodrigo (Eds.), Rhetorically rethinking usability (pp. 191-212). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Swedo, S. (2009). Report of the DSM-V Neurodevelopmental Disorders Work Group. Retrieved from http://www.psych.org/MainMenu/Research/DSMIV/DSMV/ DSMRevisionActivities/DSM-V-Work-Group-Reports/Neurodevelopmental- Disorders-Work-Group-Report.aspx Tammet, D. (2006). Born on a blue day: Inside the extraordinary mind of an autistic savant. New York: Free Press.

13 Tajiri, Y. (2001). Beckett and synaesthesia. In A. Moorjani & C. Veit (Eds.), Samuel Beckett: Endlessness in the year 2000 (pp.178-185). New York: Rodopi. Thierry, L. (Performer). (2006, August 8). Good Morning America: Documenting truth about autism: Honest confessions from parents raising autistic children [Video file]. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=2286327 Thierry, L. (Director), Solomon, E. (Director), & Alison Singer (Performer). (2006). Autism every day [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.autismspeaks.org/ sponsoredevents/autism_every_day.php

U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). 20th Anniversary of Americans with Disabilities Act: July 26. U.S. Census Bureau News. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/newsroom/ releases/archives/facts_for_features_special_editions/cb10-ff13.html Vandenberg, P., Hum, S., & Clary-Lemon, J. (Eds.). (2006). Relations, locations, positions: Composition theory for writing teachers. Urbana, IL: NCTE. Vitanza, V. (2008). Writing the tic. Kairos, 12(3). Retrieved from http:// kairos.technorhetoric.net/12.3/topoi/gallery/index.html Vidali, A. (2008). Discourses of disability and basic writing. In C. Lewiecki-Wilson & B.J. Brueggemann (Eds.), Disability and the Teaching of Writing (pp. 40-55). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Walters, S. (2010). Toward an accessible pedagogy: Dis/ability, multimodality, and universal design in the technical communication classroom. Technical Communication Quarterly, 19(4), 427-454. Ward, J., Banissy, M.J., & Jonas, C.N. (2008). Haptic perception and synaesthesia. In M. Grunwald (Ed.), Human haptic perception: Basics and applications (pp. 259-265). Berlin: Birkhauser. Ward, J., Simner, J., & Auyeung, V. (2005). A comparison of lexical-gustatory and grapheme-colour synaesthesia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(1), 28-41. Ward, J., Thompson-Lake, D., Ely, R., & Kaminski, F. (2008). Synaesthesia, creativity, and art: What is the link? British Journal of Psychology, 99, 127-141. Weiss, G. & Wodak, R. (Eds.). (2003). Critical discourse analysis: Theory and interdisciplinarity. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Williams, D. (1992). Nobody nowhere: The extraordinary autobiography of an autistic. New York: Avon. Williams, D. (2009, March 10). Political correctness in 3 different autism worlds [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://blog.donnawilliams.net/2009/03/10/political- correctness-in-3-different-autism-worlds-by-donna-williams/ Wilson, J.C. (2008). Weather reports from the autism front: A father’s memoir of his autistic son. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.

14 Wilson, J.C., & Lewiecki-Wilson, C. (Eds.). (2001). Embodied rhetorics: Disability in language and culture. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Wing, L. (1981). Asperger’s Syndrome: A clinical account. Psychological Medicine, 11, 115-29. Witte, S.P. (1999). Topical structure and revision: An exploratory study. In L. Ede (Ed.), On writing research: The Braddock essays, 1975-1998 (pp. 132-155). Urbana, IL: NCTE. Wodak, R. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J.F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp.197-213). London: Sage. Wrong Planet. (2007). Mother talks about killing her autistic daughter and herself [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=C7NTfZzS9b8&feature=related Wysocki, A., et al. (2004). Writing new media: Theory and applications for expanding the teaching of composition. Logan: Utah State University Press. Yergeau, M. (2009). aut(hored)ism. Computers and Composition Online. Retrieved from http://www.bgsu.edu/cconline/dmac/index.html Yoder, Stephen A. (2008, July 7). My semester with an Asperger syndrome student. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/views/ 2008/07/07/yoder Young, G.S., Merin, N., Rogers, S.J., & Ozonoff, S. (2009). Gaze behavior and affect at 6 months: Predicting clinical outcomes and language development in typically developing infants and infants at risk for autism. Developmental Science, 12, 798-814. Young, M. (2004). Minor re/visions: Asian American literacy narratives as a rhetoric of citizenship. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. Zdenek, S. (2009). Accessible podcasting: College students on the margins in the new media classroom. Computers and Composition Online Retrieved from http:// seanzdenek.com/?page_id=22 Zunshine, L. (2006). Why we read fiction: Theory of mind and the novel. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.

15 Media Bibliography

What follows are credits for all media used in my dissertation—video, still image, and audio. I’ve listed items according to the order they appear in my dissertation. Unless noted in this bibliography, all other media were created by me.

For nodes 1 and 2, I used and modified iWeb and Wordpress templates, respectively; nodes 3, 4, and 5 were designed and hand-coded by me.

Node 1 Note: I used iWeb for this node’s design.

Printophilia Encyclopedia Britannica Films (Producer). (1947). Making books. Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/MakingBo1947 Synthetic design. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects.

Dissertation teaser A film lesson in general science / Development of communication. (1927). Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/Communic1927 Anonymous, J. (2010). Literacy narrative of an autistic person. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1561 Bailie, B. (2009). Literacy through the Hardy Boys. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/149 Books: From manuscript to classroom. (n.d.). Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http:// www.archive.org/details/books_from_manuscript_to_classroom Chinn, B. (2008). Benzion Chinn’s literacy narrative. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1006 Coronet Instructional Films (Producer). (1950). Understand your emotions. Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/Understa1950 Davis, L. (2010). Lennard Davis’ literacy narrative. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/974

16 Heilker, P. (2009). The Eli way. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/219 Encyclopedia Britannica Films (Producer). (1947). Making books. Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/MakingBo1947 Marcantonio, J. (2008). Literacy narrative of a librarian. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1009 Pathescope Productions (Producer). (n.d.). Symptoms in schizophrenia. Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/Symptoms1940

Space as designed, designing space Designer synth. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects.

Disabling “the” rhetorical triangle

Books: From manuscript to classroom. (n.d.). Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http:// www.archive.org/details books_from_manuscript_to_classroom Catwalk long. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects. Chaise lounge short. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects.

Usability & accessibility Breakbeat long. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects. Breakbeat short. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects. Porter, J.E. (2009). Recovering delivery for digital rhetoric. Computers and Composition, 26(4), 207-224.

Autism 2.0 Anonymous, J. (2010). Literacy narrative of an autistic person. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1561 Autistic Bitch from Hell. (2010). Whose planet is it anyway? Retrieved from http:// autisticbfh.blogspot.com/ Borealis. Apple Inc., iLife sound effects. Books: From manuscript to classroom. (n.d.). Prelinger archives. Retrieved from http:// www.archive.org/details/books_from_manuscript_to_classroom Chinn, B. (2008). Benzion Chinn’s literacy narrative. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1006

17 Davis, L. (2010). Lennard Davis’ literacy narrative. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/974 Heilker, P. (2009). The Eli way. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/219 Parsons, S. (2008). Literacy narrative of a librarian. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1004

Node 2 Note: I modiﬁed a Wordpress template (Nanoplex) for this nodeʼs design.

Shiny identities Q&A with Temple Grandin [Image]. (2010, June 25). Retrieved from http://civileats.com/ 2010/06/25/qa-with-temple-grandin/ Kanazawa, S. (2008). Male brain vs. female brain II: What is an extreme male brain? What is an extreme female brain? [Image of Rain Main]. Retrieved from http:// www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200803/male- brain-vs-female-brain-ii-what-is-extreme-male-brain-w

Node 3

Node 4

What is autism? Anonymous, J. (2010). Literacy narrative of an autistic person. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1561 Cochran, N. (2010). Autism in fiction and everything in between. Retrieved from http:// daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1132 Rooney, J. (2010). Justin’s literacy narrative. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/ 2374.DALN/1545

18 Autistics online Anonymous, J. (2010). Literacy narrative of an autistic person. Digital archive of literacy narratives. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1561 Aspies for freedom. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/ Autistic Bitch from Hell. (2009, June 11). Autistic parents: Not such rare birds [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://autisticbfh.blogspot.com/2009/06/autistic-parents-not- such-rare-birds.html Cochran, N. (2010). Autism in fiction and everything in between. Retrieved from http:// daln.osu.edu/handle/2374.DALN/1132 I Can Haz Cheezburger. (2010, May 21). Too busy talking on the phone to feed me? Retrieved from http://icanhascheezburger.com/2010/05/21/funny-pictures-feed- me-i-fix-that/ I Can Haz Cheezburger. (2010, May 22). World dominashun training class. Retrieved from http://icanhascheezburger.com/2010/05/22/funny-pictures-a-lock-on-it/ Rooney, J. (2010). Justin’s literacy narrative. Retrieved from http://daln.osu.edu/handle/ 2374.DALN/1545 Smalley, J. (Producer). (2010, April 30). The autism puzzle [Television series episode]. Columbus, OH: NBC 4. Retrieved from http://www.wcmhblogs.com/autism/ comments/the_autism_puzzle_april_edition/ Tammet, D. (2006). Born on a blue day: Inside the extraordinary mind of an autistic savant. New York: Free Press. Tammet, D. (Performer). (2007). The boy with the incredible brain [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbASOcqc1Ss

19 Appendix A: Foregrounding and Backgrounding

While reading Shannon Walters’ “Toward an Accessible” pedagogy, I coded statements that, I contend, foreground ability (and often, whether explicitly or implicitly, background disability in the process). As I discuss in Node 3, Walters argues that technical communication instructors should bring universal design and accessibility into the classroom. Walters’ primary argumentative strategy, however, is this: universal design and accessibility benefit everyone, disabled and nondisabled alike.

In the below quotes, there are some examples that more obviously fit under this foregrounding/backgrounding umbrella than others. For example, Walters writes that her students identified as able-bodied—and, at several points, her argumentative strategy involves getting those able-bodied students invested in accessibility-as-topic (e.g., #13, “persuade students to understand how disability pertains to them and their audiences,” p. 435).

Additionally, there were points where I had to determine whether or not universal design itself should be considered a foregrounding construct, given that it focuses on inclusion of all, regardless of dis/ability. This notion, to me, is something that extends beyond Walters’ piece, and would represent an interesting topic to explore further and in future projects. In the case of this analysis, I made my UD inclusion decisions based on the context in which universal design appeared. That is, if UD’s focus on universals was placed in contrast with other ways of designing (i.e., designing for disabled people), I included it in this list. .

1. flexible in meeting disabled and nondisabled users’ needs (p. 428) 2. fundamentally alter pedagogies for disabled and nondisabled students and for the diverse audiences for which students learn to write (p. 428)

3. encouraging more comprehensive understandings of disability and ability (p. 429)

4. scholars leave unaddressed how disabled and nondisabled students and their audiences might benefit from the study of disability (p. 429)

5. practices designed for students with disabilities benefit all students (p. 432)

20 6. UDL comprehensively changes curricula and pedagogies to include the widest range of students, both disabled and nondisabled (p. 432)

7. the importance of including everyone (qtd Dolmage, 2008, p. 25) (p. 432)

8. a broad examining of how all technologies are assistive for all users (p. 433)

9. guide students—disabled or not—to consider the needs of users, readers, and audiences of a wide range of abilities (p. 433)

10. make disability relevant for increasingly wider audiences (p. 433)

11. more attentive to broader notions of accessibility (p. 433)

12. not one student identified as disabled at the outset (p. 435)

13. persuade students to understand how disability pertains to them and their audiences (p. 435)

14. I consider disability and ability to be part of the same overarching system (p. 436)

15. the study of disability necessarily includes the study of ability (p. 436)

16. offer students and users with a wide range of dis/abilities (p. 437)

17. inherently accommodating to the material needs of users, audiences, and students of dis/abilities (p. 437)

18. communicating with audiences of different abilities (p. 438)

19. Impairment-specific accommodations also elided the benefits that nonimpaired audiences or users may reap from alternative modes (p. 440)

20. disabled users with varying levels of impairment, nondisabled users with varying levels of abilities or learning styles (p. 44)

21. broad ranges of ability and use in the design of products (p. 440)

22. results in better design for everyone, average or not (p. 440)

23. but it also makes it easier to use for everyone (p. 440)

24. provide the same means of use for all users (qtd, Center for Universal Design) (p. 440)

25. Students, most of them nondisabled, remarked that they believed these devices and technologies would be helpful to them (p. 441) 21 26. so they, too, could benefit from outlining software in Inspiration Pro, even though it is ostensibly design for students with learning disabilities (p. 441)

27. even though they are primarily designed for those who are visually impaired (p. 441)

28. Students with attention disorders or those who simply stay up late to study (p. 442)

29. explore how other audiences might benefit from their accommodations, making their projects more universally accessible (p. 443)

30. blurring of boundaries between assistive technologies and technologies in general (p. 443)

31. this student began noticing ways in which she, a nondisabled user, benefits from accessibility (p. 443)

32. becoming aware of how wider audiences benefit from accessibility and UD (p. 443)

33. is not only inaccessible for users with disabilities but also not fully usable for users without disabilities (p. 444)

34. this more universal approach (p. 445)

35. an emphasis that can accommodate a wider range of people, independent of impairment (p. 445)

36. more universal audiences (p. 445)

37. Similarly, nondisabled persons may be limited by this same product (p. 445)

38. or people who work in noisy environments (p. 445)

39. the usability and accessibility of Web spaces for people with disabilities and varying abilities (p. 445)

40. trouble the boundary between normal and assistive technologies (qtd. Palmeri, 2006, pp.58-59) (p. 445)

41. provide the same means of use for all users (p. 445)

42. equality among disabled and nondisabled users (p. 446)

22 43. equality for the widest range of users (p. 446)

44. text-equivalents for nontext content “could also benefit nondisabled people” (p. 447)

45. how porous definitions of disabled and nondisabled had become for the class (p. 447)

46. a much wider audience (p. 448)

47. “This helps people with cognitive disorders but also anyone who likes things to just be simple and clear cut” (p. 448)

48. Students argued for the benefits of accessibility for students with and without disabilities (p. 449)

49. an accessible pedagogy for disabled and nondisabled students (p. 450)

50. wider audiences (p. 450)

51. more accessible to the widest range of people—disabled, nondisabled, temporarily able-bodied, and everyone in between (p. 451)