• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

It Goes Without Saying: Infrastructure as Rhetorical Theory for Navigating Transition in Writing Program Administration Jonathan M. Adams Dissertation submitted to the faculty of The Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Rhetoric and Writing James Dubinsky Carolynn Commer Derek Mueller Katrina M. Powell 5/10/2021 Blacksburg, Virginia Keywords: Writing Program Administration, Infrastructure, Rhetorical Theory Copyright 2020 Jonathan M. Adams i It Goes Without Saying: Infrastructure as a Rhetorical Theory for Addressing Periods of Transition in Writing Program Administration Jonathan M. Adams SCHOLARLY ABSTRACT Writing program administrators (WPAs) work in constant negotiation with institutional forces outside of individual control, where the concerns of infrastructure impact writing programs continuously. In periods of transition, where new WPAs are entering a program, or the institution itself is shifting around the established program of a seasoned WPA, the ability to understand and rhetorically act in concert with one’s infrastructure can often determine the success of a writing program. In this dissertation, I conduct a mixed-methods examination of the phenomenon of WPA infrastructure, situating infrastructure as a rhetorical lens for understanding writing program administrators’ work as they face moments of transition in their career. Through a combination of meta-analysis of a subcorpus of WPA lore and stimulated recall interviews with current WPAs in the field, I form a picture of the phenomenon of infrastructural rhetoric and promote its use as a holistic lens to rhetorically engage with complex institutional systems. ii It Goes Without Saying: Infrastructure as a Rhetorical Theory for Addressing Periods of Transition in Writing Program Administration Jonathan M. Adams GENERAL AUDIENCE ABSTRACT A writing program administrator (WPA) is an individual who oversees, manages, and implements a writing program on a college campus. Whether they are the organizer of a writing center or the administrator for a first-year writing program, often their job is to direct the vision and resources of the college to achieve goals in writing knowledge. Throughout their operations, WPAs must work within the constraints set down by their institution, colleagues, and physical space. However, while WPAs are often well prepared by their training and education to deal with teaching and writing issues, interactions with these surrounding “infrastructural” constraints often leave WPAs feeling blindsided. In this dissertation, I explore moments of WPA breakdown in their engagements with larger institutional forces. I do this both through a detailed examination of a wide range of personal accounts from WPAs, as well as a series of interviews with members of the field. After finding patterns in these breakdowns and gaining a deeper understanding of WPA work, I work within the accounts of these WPAs to conceptualize the term infrastructural rhetoric to understand institutional forces as relational components essential to persuasion. iii For my son, Emerson, who reminds me daily that life is made better by enthusiastic conversations. iv Acknowledgements My dissertation is the result of a community of support around my work. To all the members of this community, I am eternally grateful. I begin by thanking James Dubinsky for believing in my work at every stage of the process. Your careful reading and guidance helped shape the project and my writing into what it is today. Your support in my research and life went beyond what was asked for by the dissertation and made all the difference in my education and growth as a person. I will always try to emulate with my future students the compassionate education you have given me. I am profoundly grateful for your help. I thank my committee members—Derek Mueller, Katrina Powell, and Carolyn Commer—who, throughout my education, have been supportive and thought provoking, defining who I am as a scholar. Derek, our afternoon discussions throughout the pandemic helped me to find my way in key moments of uncertainty in both my research and my career; Katrina, your questions and writings helped frame the ethics of my work; And Carolyn, your insights and feedback throughout my education at Virginia Tech are responsible for the success of my scholarship today. Thank you all for agreeing to serve on my committee. To the WPAs who took time out of their schedules to collaborate with me on this project, I thank you. I learned so much about myself and our field by reading and listening to your advice and expertise. I hope that someday I can repay you for the gift you have given me. I would especially like to thank K.K.J., T.J.K., C.B., C.W., and S.J.C. All of you quite literally made this project possible. I also need to thank Katie Beth Brooks, Brandon West, Czander Tan, Maggie Fernandes, and the rest of my graduate school peers who acted as a sounding board—offering support, editing, and guidance throughout this process. Through days and nights of writing and digital tabletop conversations, you were glue that held my infrastructure together. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, who, second only to God, has made all things in my life possible. You have been the grounding force in my theories and research since day one, and I will never find a better confidant or friend. If anyone deserves recognition for pulling me back from some truly unwieldy approaches in my thinking and writing, it is you. Thank you. v Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 The Difficulties of a Transitioning WPA ................................................................................................. 3 WPAs as Management Professionals ....................................................................................................... 6 Issues Arising from Avoiding the Managerial .......................................................................................... 9 Problem Statement .................................................................................................................................. 12 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................................................................... 13 Research Questions................................................................................................................................. 14 Research Objectives ............................................................................................................................... 15 Chapter Outline....................................................................................................................................... 15 Chapter I — Infrastructure as a Rhetorical Concern and a Phenomenological Term for Research ............ 19 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Writing Program Administration as a Research and Career Focus ........................................................ 21 The Growth of WPA Administrative Concern ....................................................................................... 23 Phenomenological Terminology ............................................................................................................. 31 Chapter II — A Phenomenological Approach to Understanding WPA Infrastructure ............................... 51 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 51 Phenomenological Definitions................................................................................................................ 52 Phenomenology as a Rhetorical Methodology ....................................................................................... 55 Project Methodology .............................................................................................................................. 57 The Elasticity of Infrastructural Breakdown .......................................................................................... 58 Methods .................................................................................................................................................. 60 Limitations .............................................................................................................................................. 69 Chapter III — What Goes Without Saying? ............................................................................................... 71 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 71 Findings Related to Infrastructural Breakdown ...................................................................................... 73 Taxonomic Consolidation ....................................................................................................................... 78 Benefits Resulting from Taxonomy........................................................................................................ 89 Chapter IV — Talking About Infrastructure ..............................................................................................

Load more

  195

Copy Link