* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *

LINGUIST List 24.3291

Fri Aug 16 2013

FYI: CFP: Keeping Pace

Editor for this issue: Damir Cavar <damirlinguistlist.org>

Date: 14-Aug-2013
From: Joanne Addison <Joanne.Addisonucdenver.edu>
Subject: CFP: Keeping Pace
E-mail this message to a friend

Call for Proposals

Chapters for an edited collection entitled Keeping Pace: Conducting, Disseminating, and Reviewing Literacy Research at the Speed of Technology
Joanne Addison, University of Colorado Denver and Sharon James McGee, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, editors

As noted in a recent Inside Higher Education column,

To keep up with the breakneck pace of developments in online education, higher education researchers must be nimble and sometimes make do with 'dirty' and quickly gathered data. Otherwise weighty discussions about student learning might get lost in all the hype around massive open online courses and other digital innovations. (Fain, 1 May 2013)

When considering the pace of change set by digital education and disruptive technologies in general, we think that this notion is correct: Sometimes quick and dirty research results are necessary whether one is researching online, digital, or print based literacy practices. But "quick and dirty" doesn’t mean "sloppy and shallow." In other words, research results gleaned quickly must also be rigorous and replicable, valid and verifiable.

In this collection, we seek articles that would provide a "manual" of how we in rhetoric, writing, and literacy studies might conduct research that is responsive to the current pace of change. Our goal is not to supplant the importance of longitudinal research but rather to begin discussions and provide models for "quick and dirty" literacy research that is rigorous, valid, and immediately useful to various stakeholders. At the same time, we are concerned with the ways to disseminate results quickly, especially through a reimagined process of "peer review." Questions that might be addressed by articles include, but are not limited to, these:

• What is to be gained from quick or responsive research? What is to be lost?
• What methods lend themselves to reliable, valid, and responsive results?
• What models can you share of research you have already completed, discussing its successes and shortfalls?
• How might we reimagine the process of "peer review" to ensure the rigor of our results?
• What might a move toward open access not just to results but also to data mean for literacy studies?
• What is to be gained from quick or responsive research? What is to be lost?
• How might we as a field disseminate results quickly?

We welcome abstracts from researchers who conduct data-driven research in literacy studies broadly, including Rhetoric and Composition, Linguistics, ESL, English, Education, and other fields.

250 word abstracts due by September 30th. Full manuscripts of (20-30 pgs) due by December 31. Send abstracts to Joanne Addison (joanne.addisonucdenver.edu) and Sharon James McGee (sjmcgeesiue.edu). Please use "Keeping Pace Abstract" in the subject line.

Linguistic Field(s): Applied Linguistics
Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue

Page Updated: 16-Aug-2013

Supported in part by the National Science Foundation       About LINGUIST    |   Contact Us       ILIT Logo
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.