Disciplinary Alignment--You Are What Conference You Attend

Although it is possible--and in some cases necessary--to develop multiple disciplinary alignments, being recognized as a viable member of multiple fields is not an easy feat. Given the persisting influence of the disciplinary division of labor (Matsuda, 1999), it is important to develop a solid footing in at least one of the main disciplinary contexts. 

One of the most obvious manifestations of disciplinary alignment is conference attendance. If you specialize in second language writing in the United States, that means you would regularly and actively participate in CCCC, AAAL or TESOL as your home conference--in addition to attending the Symposium on Second Language Writing. 

The choice of the conference has implications for what you read, who you associate with, and what kind of jobs you will apply for (and get). 

In any case, working in a transdisciplinary field such as second language writing is not easy because you need to read not just everything that's related to second language writing but read widely in one or more of the related fields. 

CFP: Symposium on Second Language Writing 2014

Call for Proposals

The 13th Symposium on Second Language Writing
"Professionalizing Second Language Writing"
November 13-15, 2014
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA

The 2013 Symposium Organizing Committee seeks proposals for 20-minute presentations that address various topics within the field of L2 writing—broadly defined.

Any topic related to second language writing theory, research, or teaching is welcome; we especially encourage proposals that seek to challenge the status quo in the field by introducing new topics as well as new theoretical and methodological approaches.

As with all previous Symposium iterations, we are interested in L2 writing issues in any second or foreign language for any age groups in personal, academic, professional and civic contexts. Given the theme of the Symposium, we particularly encourage proposals that address issues of second language writing as a profession.

Proposals must include both a 50-word summary and a 500-word abstract (including references). To submit your proposal, please use the online proposal submission form available at:

http://bit.ly/19m8NgO

Proposals must be received by 23:59:59 on June 1, 2014 (Arizona Time; Mountain Standard Time; UTC-0700). Proposals will be peer reviewed by a panel of experts. Notification of acceptance will be sent out by July 30, 2014.

For more information about SSLW 2014, please visit our website at:

http://sslw.asu.edu/2014

We look forward to receiving your proposal!

Paul Kei Matsuda, Founding Chair

19th Annual Linguistics/TESOL Symposium at ASU

Call for Papers

19^th Annual Graduate Linguistics/TESOL Symposium

March 1, 2013

The deadline for submitting applications is January 18, 2013. 

Location:

TBA

ASU Tempe Campus

This event features presentations by graduate students in many areas

related to linguistics and TESOL:

English: Rhetoric, Composition and Linguistics, MTESOL, English Education, & Applied Linguistics

School of International Letters and Cultures

School of Human Evolution and Social Change

School of Historical, Philosophical, andReligious Studies

Psychology, Education, and MORE!

On any aspect of linguistics and language learning, including but not limited to:

Linguistics andTESOL:

● Theoretical Linguistics                ● Psycholinguistics                          ● Second Language Writing

● Historical Linguistics                  ● Syntax                                             ● English as a Foreign Language

● Phonology                                     ● Morphology                                     ● Bilingual Education

● Semantics                                     ● Discourse Analysis                                    ● Language Policy

● Sociolinguistics                            ● Pragmatics                                      ●Interdisciplinary Linguistics

● Applied Linguistics                      ● English as a Global Language

● World Englishes                           ● Computer-Assisted Language Learning

Please use the attached form to send a 50 word summary for the symposium program, a 150 to 200 word abstract, and your name, program, and university affiliation to the following e-mail address by January 18, 2013

Email: ASULinguisticsTESOL@gmail.com

Organizing Committee: ASULinguisticsTESOL@gmail.com

• Juval Racelis, Juval.Racelis@asu.edu
• Kendra Beeley, Kendra.Beeley@asu.edu
• Meredith Moss, Meredith.Moss@asu.edu

=========

19^th Annual Graduate Linguistics/TESOL Symposium

Friday, March 1, 2013

PROPOSAL FORM

(Please complete all fields I-VI)

I. Title of Proposal:

II. a. FIRST presenter (who serves as the contact person and must keep other presenters informed):

Full name:

Institutional Affiliation (do not use acronyms):

City, Province/State, Country:

E-mail address:

b. Second Presenter (if applicable):

Full name:

Institutional Affiliation (do not use acronyms):

City, Province/State, Country:

E-mail address:

c. Third Presenter (if applicable):

Full name:

Institutional Affiliation (do not use acronyms):

City, Province/State, Country:

E-mail address:

III. Proposal summary (50-words maximum):

IV. Abstract (150-200 words):

V. Area of research:

VI. Audiovisual equipment needs:

All proposals must be submitted by January 18, 2013. All applicants must submit proposals electronically. Send the complete proposal form as an attachment to:

ASULinguisticsTESOL@gmail.com

Subject Line: PRESENTATION SUBMISSION

Please do NOT submit duplicate proposals.

What is TESOL?

Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) is an interdisciplinary professional field for teachers of the English language. The acronym TESOL is a catch-all term that originated in the 1960s United States to describe the English language teaching profession, including English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL), among other distinctions.

In North America, TESOL was also the name of a professional organization (TESOL, which became TESOL, Inc., and TESOL: International Association) that was established in 1965 to facilitate the professionalization of English language teachers and the development of shared knowledge base.

CFP: New Directions in Critical Theory: Revolution, Regression, Revision

New Directions in Critical Theory: Revolution, Regression, Revision

2012 Conference Call for Proposals

The University of Arizona

Tucson, Arizona

April 13-14, 2012

From southwest U.S. to Midan Tahrir, there has been a renewed public attention to how perceptions of space and place impact how knowledge is created, presumed, deconstructed, and reconstructed. In localized contexts, systems of knowledge – sustained, broken, and at work – move within various discourse communities. Our goal for this conference is to begin to connect discussions across the disciplines about revolution, regression, and revision. We define these concepts broadly so as to span across the possibilities and restrictions of interactions among, between, and across several contexts and spaces. And central to our inquiry is the question of how we interact with this vivid dynamic within and across disciplines, communities, and institutions.

In keeping with the spirit of the New Directions conference, we encourage multimodal, multigenre, and multidisciplinary presentations and papers - from creative performances to scholarly modes. New Directions 2012 will connect scholars, teachers, researchers, students, artists, activists, and community organizers. The conference is open to many participants, audiences, and subjects, as a way to facilitate collaboration and movement in our understandings of our work andpursuits.

Possible topics might include but are not limited to:

• Zones of conflict and contact
• Discourse analyses
• Digital spaces
• Health
• Youth, education, environment
• Legislation implementation & policy passage
• Creative meditations
• Methodological critiques
• Pedagogical approaches

Please direct inquiries to Alan Chu at ndconf@gmail.com.

Proposals are due by March 15, 2012.

To register for the 2012 New Directions conference, please visit: http://english.arizona.edu/index_site.php?id=780 (As of January 31, this website has not been updated. Check back later for more information.)

Choosing Reputable Outlets for Academic Work

In academia, it matters where your present or publish your work. Presenting at conferences and publishing with presses that have established strong reputation in the particular field is important when it comes to hiring, tenure and promotion. Publishing with presses that are less then reputable does not make your academic credentials stronger; in some cases, it can hurt your reputation as a researcher.

Being able to distinguish reputable venues from questionable outlets is part of disciplinary knowledge, and sometimes it is difficult for novice scholars--or experienced scholars outside your field--to tell the difference. (That's why tenure and promotion cases often involve external reviewers who are experts in the field.) But there are some signs to help identify which venues are reputable or at least acceptable. Below are some questions to consider. (The greater the number of affirmative answers, the better; even the most reputable of outlets do not necessarily meet all of these criteria.) 

For conferences: 

• Is the conference affiliated with a major professional organization in the field? 
• Is the conference affiliated with universities or research institutes that have good reputations in the field?
• Is the conference being organized by well-established members of the field?
• Does the conference feature keynote, plenary and invited speakers who are well-established in the field?
• Does the conference have many sessions that are interesting to members of the field who are studying similar topics?
• Is the conference attended by active members of the field who publish on topics that are reputable?
• Does the conference either have a peer review process for proposals or invite only well-established or cutting-edge researchers?

For journals:

• Is the journal edited by well-established members of the field?
• Does the journal have editorial board members who are well established in the field? 
• Does the journal have an editorial review process that involves reviewers who are experts on the topic?
• Does the journal include articles by authors who are well-established members of the field? 
• Are articles in the journal cited frequently and widely in other reputable journals?

For publishers:

• Does the publisher have a booth at major professional organizations in the field?
• Does the publisher have a book series or a journal dedicated to the field or its subfields?
• Does the publisher regularly publish books written or edited by well-established members of the field? 
• Does the publisher solicit contributions primarily from established members of the field or people who are doing cutting-edge work that is being recognized by established members of the field?
• Does the publisher require an editorial review process coordinated by well established members of the field?
• Does the publisher involve well established members of the field in reviewing submissions?
• Does the publisher have an acquisition editor who specializes in your field and is somewhat knowledgeable about the field?
• Are publications from the publisher being cited in other reputable publications or mentioned in conference presentations? 

Here are some red flags to watch out for:

• The publisher emails you out of the blue to invite you to publish your conference papers, theses and dissertations as a book.
• The publisher emails you out of the blue to invite you to edit a book.
• The publisher offers contracts without an editorial review process. 
• The publisher actively solicits contributions from novice researchers and graduate students without a strong track record.
• The publisher does not involve well established members of the field in the editorial review process.
• The publisher has not published at least a few books or journals in the field. 
• The publisher (or journal) has not published at least a few works by well established members of the field. 
• The publisher may mention something along the line of "I can tell you are an expert" without mentioning anything specific or establishing their own credentials. 

These guidelines are only suggestive; there are some new publishers who are beginning to establish themselves in a new field, and doing so by building a system for rigorous editorial review involving experts in the field. Even the publishers that have a few of these red flags may be legitimate publishers and businesses—although being a legitimate business is not the same as being a legitimate or high quality venue for academic publishing. 

"Use your judgment" is probably not a good piece of advice because the judgment requires expert knowledge of the field that novice researchers often don't have. But if you are surprised to have received a solicitation email, that should tell you something. When in doubt, check with your thesis/dissertation advisor or other people who are well established in the field. 

If you don't know who they are, start reading everything. 

Choosing Reputable Outlets for Academic Work

In academia, it matters where your present or publish your work. Presenting at conferences and publishing with presses that have established strong reputation in the particular field is important when it comes to hiring, tenure and promotion. Publishing with presses that are less then reputable does not make your academic credential stronger; in some cases, it can hurt your reputation as a researcher.

Being able to distinguish reputable venues from questionable outlets is part of disciplinary knowledge, and sometimes it is difficult for novice scholars—or experienced scholars outside your field—to tell the difference. (That's why tenure and promotion cases often involve external reviewers who are experts in the field.) But there are some signs to help identify which venues are reputable or at least acceptable. Below are some questions to consider. (The greater the number of affirmative answers, the better, but keep in mind that even the most reputable of outlets do not necessarily meet all of these criteria.) 

For conferences: 

• Is the conference affiliated with a major professional organization in the field? 
• Is the conference affiliated with universities or research institutes that have good reputations in the field?
• Is the conference being organized by well-established members of the field?
• Does the conference feature keynote, plenary and invited speakers who are well-established in the field?
• Does the conference have many sessions that are interesting to members of the field who are studying similar topics?
• Is the conference attended by active members of the field who publish on topics that are relevant?
• Does the conference either have a peer review process for proposals or invite only well-established or cutting-edge researchers?

For journals:

• Is the journal edited by well-established members of the field?
• Does the journal have editorial board members who are well established in the field? 
• Does the journal have an editorial review process that involves reviewers who are experts on the topic?
• Does the journal include articles by authors who are well-established members of the field? 
• Are articles in the journal cited frequently and widely in other reputable journals?

For publishers:

• Does the publisher have a booth at major professional organizations in the field?
• Does the publisher have a book series or a journal dedicated to the field or its subfields?
• Does the publisher regularly publish books written or edited by well-established members of the field? 
• Does the publisher solicit contributions primarily from established members of the field or people who are doing cutting-edge work that is being recognized by established members of the field?
• Does the publisher require an editorial review process coordinated by well established members of the field?
• Does the publisher involve well established members of the field in reviewing submissions?
• Does the publisher have an acquisition editor who specializes in your field and is somewhat knowledgeable about the field?
• Are publications from the publisher being cited in other reputable publications or mentioned in conference presentations? 

Here are some red flags to watch out for:

• The publisher emails you out of the blue to invite you to publish your conference papers, theses and dissertations as a book.
• The publisher emails you out of the blue to invite you to edit a book.
• The publisher offers final contracts without an editorial review process. 
• The publisher actively solicits contributions from novice researchers and graduate students without a strong track record.
• The publisher does not involve well established members of the field in the editorial review process.
• The publisher has not published at least a few books or journals in the field. 
• The publisher (or journal) has not published at least a few works by well established members of the field. 
• The publisher may mention something along the line of "I can tell you are an expert" without mentioning anything specific or establishing their own credentials. 

These guidelines are only suggestive; there are some new publishers who are beginning to establish themselves in a new field, and doing so by building a system for rigorous editorial review involving experts in the field. Even the publishers that have a few of these red flags may be legitimate publishers and businesses—although being a legitimate business is not the same as being a legitimate or high quality venue for academic publishing. 

"Use your judgment" is probably not a good piece of advice because the judgment requires expert knowledge of the field that novice researchers often don't have. But if you are surprised to have received a solicitation email, that should tell you something. When in doubt, check with your thesis/dissertation advisor or other people who are well established in the field. 

If you don't know who they are, start reading everything. 

TESOL Doctoral Forum in Philadelphia

Two of my doctoral advisees, Kacie Marie Kiser and Joseph Ernest Mambu, will be presenting at this year's TESOL Doctoral Forum in Philadelphia. Way to go, Kacie and Joseph!

Mark James's Publication

Mark A. James, a colleague of mine at ASU, just published a piece in the Journal of Second Language Writing.

James, M. A. (2010). An investigation of learning transfer in English-for-general-academic-purposes writing instruction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 19(4), 183-206. 

Congratulations, Mark!

CFP: 2011 Symposium on Second Language Writing in Taiwan

Please circulate this call for papers widely. Proposals on any topic related to second language writing is welcome. (The theme is mostly for plenary speakers.)

Symposium on Second Language Writing 2011
Taipei, Taiwan, June 9-11, 2011

Call for Proposals

The 2011 Symposium Organizing Committee seeks proposals for 20-minute presentations that address various topics within the field of L2 writing—broadly defined. Any topic related to second language writing theory, research, or teaching is welcome; we especially welcome proposals that seek to challenge the status quo in the field by introducing new topics as well as new theoretical and methodological approaches.

As with all previous nine Symposium iterations, we are interested in L2 writing issues in any second or foreign language for any age groups in personal, academic, professional and civic contexts. Given the theme of the Symposium, we particularly encourage proposals that address the issue of writing for scholarly publication from a critical perspective.

To submit your proposal, please use the online proposal submission form available at: http://sslw.asu.edu/2011/openconf/ . Proposals must include both an abstract (limited to 300 words, including references) and a proposal summary (50 words).

Proposals must be received by 23:59:59 on November 15, 2010 (Taipei Time; GMT+08:00). Proposals will be peer reviewed by a panel of experts. Notification of acceptance will be sent out by the end of December 2010.

For more information about SSLW 2011, please visit: http://sslw.asu.edu/2011/ .

We look forward to receiving your proposal!

Paul Kei Matsuda and Tony Silva, Chairs
Yichun Liu and Yuching Jill Yang, Associate Chairs
Wu-chang Vincent Cheng and Chiou-lan Chern, Local Chairs

Job Ad: Assistant Professor in Applied Linguistics and TESOL

Assistant Professor in Applied Linguistics and TESOL

Required: Ph.D. in applied linguistics, TESOL or closely related field by the time of appointment; university or college level teaching experience appropriate to rank; ability to develop and teach graduate and undergraduate courses in applied linguistics and TESOL; ability to advise master’s and doctoral students; and a demonstrated and compelling promise of ongoing, high-quality scholarship in any area of applied linguistics and TESOL.

Desired: Expertise in one or more of the following areas: sociocognitive SLA; corpus analysis; genre analysis; pedagogical grammar; qualitative research methodology; sociocultural theory; language testing.

Applicants must send: Cover letter, curriculum vitae and three letters of recommendation electronically to:  https://academicjobsonline.org/ajo/ASU/Department%20of%20English (no faxes or e-mails).  

Application Deadline: All documents must be received by November 15, 2010; if not filled, then every Monday thereafter until the search is closed. All applications will be acknowledged. A background check is required for employment. Arizona State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer committed to excellence through diversity. Women and minorities are encouraged to apply.

Mark A. James on Learning Transfer

Mark Andrew James, a colleague of mine at ASU, just published yet another study of learning transfer. The article, "'Far' transfer of learning outcomes from an ESL writing course: Can the gap be bridged?" appears in the most recent issue of the Journal of Second Language Writing.

Mark is also serving as the Associate Chair of the 2009 Symposium on Second Language Writing to be held in November at ASU.

Congratulations, Mark!

15th Annual Graduate Linguistics/TESOL Symposium

15th Annual Graduate Linguistics/TESOL Symposium
March 6th 2009

Featuring Keynote Speaker Carol A. Chapelle

Carol Chapelle is Professor of TESL/Applied Linguistics and Chair of the Cross-disciplinary Linguistics Program at Iowa State University. She has served as President of the American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL), Editor of TESOL Quarterly, and Chair of the TOEFL Committee of Examiners. She is current Co-Editor of the Cambridge Applied Linguistics Series of Cambridge University Press. She is widely recognized as the pre-eminent scholar in the field of CALL. See Carol Chapelle’s webpage: http://www.public.iastate.edu/~carolc/

Twin Palms Hotel
225 E. Apache Blvd
Tempe, AZ 85281
For venue information and directions:
http://www.twinpalmshotel.com/

This symposium is brought to you by:
Interdisciplinary Committee on Linguistics, Department of English, and
Graduate Scholars of English Association

My Video Self

So far, I haven't met anyone who isn't disturbed by their own recorded voice. It's understandable because it just doesn't match our self-image--it's not what we are used to hearing. After giving many talks using microphones, I came to accept my own physical "voice" as it is heard by others.

I can ignore the microphone pretty well. When Dwight Atkinson and I decided to record our usual conversation, we just carried our conversation as usual, and it came out pretty good and coherent when we had it transcried (by Steve Simpson--thanks, Steve!) verbatim with very little edits (Matsuda & Atkinson, 2008).

But I still can't get used to my own video voice. (Here, I'm using a slightly modified version of my own definition of voice as "the amalgamative effect of the use of discursive and nondiscursive features that language users [appropriate], deliberately or otherwise, from socially available yet ever-changing repertoires" [Matsuda, 2001, p. 40].)

When I give a lecture at other universities, some people ask if it would be OK to video-record my lecture. I usually say yes on two conditions. The first condition is that I get a copy of the video. (I usually don't watch it, but I want to have it for archival purposes.) The second is that they have to promise that they don't circulate it outside the institutional circle. This is partly to protect my intellectual property, but it also has a lot to do with the uncomfortable feeling of my "video-recorded voice" being circulated beyond my control. I know it's probably much closer than I think to what people are actually experiencing when I give a live talk. But still....

I don't like being video-recorded because I get too self conscious. I don't really get nervous when I give a talk--even when it's impromptu. But being video-recorded is an entirely different story. (I feel their pain when I ask my teaching mentees to have their own teaching video-recorded.)

But I'm not the kind of person to let these feelings hold me back when there is an exciting new opportunity. I have agreed to be video recorded several times to share my experties.

The first one I remember is when I had a video interview with a BYU production crew at TESOL. It was for a grant-funded project on second language instruction. I haven't seen the outcome, but if my clips weren't used, I wouldn't be surprised.

The second was a series on foreign language teaching, directed by Rick Donato at the University of Pittsburgh. I remember driving down to Boston to partipate in the production at the WGBH studio. (The person who did my make-up told me that she was the make-up artist for the famous Antique Roadshow.) I remember being really self-conscious, but I managed to get through it--thanks to the help of Rick and the great WGBH crew.

I guess this one is being widely circulated--there have been a number of sighting reports. Cindy Gannett told me once that she saw it on TV in Baltimore. More recently, a graduate student from IUP mentioned on Facebook that he watched it online. It's available at: http://www.learner.org/vod/vod_window.html?pid=2110.

Another video-recorded project is Take 20, produced by Todd Taylor for Bedford/St. Martin's Press. It was a compilation of a series of interviews, organized around 20 questions about the teaching of writing. It features 22 writing teachers, including:

• Linda Adler-Kassner
• Cheryl E. Ball
• Dave Bartholomae
• Patricia Bizzell
• Bill Condon
• Ellen Cushman
• Cheryl Glenn
• Brian Huot
• Erika Lindemann
• Andrea A. Lunsford
• Paul Kei Matsuda
• Don McQuade
• Christine McQuade
• Mike Palmquist
• Malea Powell
• Nedra Reynolds
• Mike Rose
• Jacqueline Jones Royster
• Raul Sanchez
• John Schilb
• Nancy Sommers
• Howard Tinberg

I thought it was a great idea, and I was happy to be part of this project. But because it was filmed during CCCC convention, I was sleep-deprived as usual. When I got to the hotel where Todd was filming the piece, I looked really tired--I was pale and my skin was dry as desert. I felt horrible, but my schedule for the rest of the conference was jam packed, so I wasn't even able to ask to be rescheduled. I was somewhat releaved when I saw the CD the following year--Todd had decided to go black-and-white. (Maybe everyone looked tired.)

I thought it was a great resource for teachers--to hear established writing teachers talk about their own experiences. But I just had to laugh everytime I came on the screen with a series of one-liners. I remember describing it as a "fortune-cookie" discourse. The transcripts read like this:

Matsuda: I tried to be very structured.
Matsuda: It's much more complex than it seems at first.
Matsuda: Janice Lauer.
Matsuda: Every student is different.

Aaaargh!!!

None of my substantive comments were included, it seemed. Of course not. I was tired--I thought I was going to fall asleep during the interview--and when I get tired, my cheeks get stiff. The chilly and rainy weather didn't help, either. And I didn't give straight foward answers to questions like "If you had to pick only one book for a writing teacher to read, what would it be?" I just don't believe in one book that's important for everyone--or even for me. Different books offer insights that we need at different times. Blah, blah, blah....

But the last question rescued me: "How do you approach difference?"

Matsuda: "In the next few years, writing teachers need to learn a lot more about language differences, and I'm not talking about just language differences in terms of language and gender, or language and social class. Those are important issues as well, but I think writing teachers need to expand their notion of language and spend some time seriously thinking about the issues of speakers of different varieties of English and speakers of different languages altogether. And I think in the past, because composition and ESL, for example, have been developing as separate disciplines, many people seem to think that it's okay for writing teachers not to know about language issues or students who come from different language backgrounds. And because the student population is becoming more and more complex, that's becoming less and less the case."

That was my favorite question, of course. I was also finally warming up. I even thought maybe I was asked to participate in this project just to answer this question.

As I left the room, I remember telling Todd that, if he needed to retake my interview, I'd be happy to drive down to the Bedford/St. Martin's Office in Boston or even to Chapel Hill. (I was still in New Hampshire at that time.)

OK. Enough rambling for tonight. If anyone is interested in my fortune-cookie discourse--I mean, if anyone is interested in this great resource, it's available at:

http://bedfordstmartins.com/take20/

References

Matsuda, P. K. (2001). Voice in Japanese written discourse: Implications for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1-2), 35-53.

Matsuda, P. K., & Atkinson, D. (2008). A conversation on contrastive rhetoric: Dwight Atkinson and Paul Kei Matsuda talk about issues, conceptualizations, and the future of contrastive rhetoric. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, & W. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 277-298). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Taylor, T. (Ed.). (2008). Take 20: Teaching writing. [CD-ROM] Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s Press.

The Problem of Multiple Identities, Part II

The problem of multiple identity is also multifaceted. If it's hard for people to imagine belonging to more than one discipline, it also seems hard for some people to understand that a researcher doesn’t have to be bound to a single mode of inquiry or a methodology.

In the last few months, I have had conversations with a few graduate students (who haven't taken my research methods course, of course) who made remarks that seemed to imply that I didn’t specialize in empirical research.

Well, yes, if it means that I don't do empirical research exclusively. But if that means I don't do empirical research, I don't know what to say. Perhaps I'm better known for my historical and philosophical inquiry, but I have published a fair share of empirical studies as well (e.g., Matsuda, 1999, 2001, 2002, Matsuda & Matsuda, 2001; Matsuda & Tardy, 2008; Tardy & Matsuda, 2009), using a range of methodological tools—from interviews and surveys as well as discourse analysis.

As a student of Janice Lauer who has always insisted that her students be proficient in multiple modes of inquiry--including philosophical, historical, empirical (qualitative and quantitative), and rhetorical (and to this list I would add narrative)--I'm not comfortable with the assumption that it's OK for people to stick to a single mode of inquiry.

Like Tony Silva, I firmly believe that all researchers in my fields should familiarize themselves with various theoretical and methodological tools and incorporate those that would best address the research question at hand. I thought I made that clear in the introduction to Second Language Writing Research (Matsuda & Silva, 2005) but I guess not everyone reads everything—sigh.

I do realize that many people have their favorite modes of inquiry and methodological tools that they rely on. It's also natural that people are drawn to certain research questions that lend themselves to the mode of inquiry one is most familiar with.

But as researchers, we need to develop a rich repertoire of theoretical and methodological tools if not to use them all then to understand and, if necessary, critique contributions by other researchers.

As Dwight Atkinson says in his chapter in Second Language Writing Research, “do try.”

The Problem of Multiple Identities

The problem of multiple identities in academia has been an important driving force behind my work. (It all boils down to the issue of identity and power, it seems.)

Over the last 15 years, I have been fighting the pervasive perception in some of my fields (i.e., applied linguistics, composition and rhetoric) about multidisciplinarity--that it's not possible to be a full-fledged member of more than one discipline. Back when I was in graduate school, if I said I was specializing in second language writing, people in rhetoric and composition often thought I was really a second language specialist who happens to be coming to CCCC; some people in applied linguistics also thought that I was an "L1" compositionist who happens to be coming to applied linguistics conferences. (This has not been much of an issue in TESOL for some reason—perhaps because L2 writing was already well-established there?)

It didn't seem to occur to many of them that I was actually starting out in both fields at the same time.

This is one of those tacit cultural assumptions in academia that is hard to challenge because people don't seem to realize that they have those assumptions nor are they able to articulate what their own assumptions are or why they came to those conclusions. It may be because some people in those fields are not used to working in multiple disciplines that the notion of being multidisciplinary was unimaginable. (People who cross those disciplinary boundaries often seem to keep quiet about their other disciplinary identities). It may also be related to the institutional practices that require people to identify their "tenure home" and to align their professional activities with the job description when they got hired. Whatever the case may be, challenging unarticulated assumptions is one of the hardest things to do intellectually.

This was one of the most intriguing and disturbing dissonances that I decided to make fighting monodisciplinarity one of my professional missions. How did I do that?

• I went to all the major conferences—AAAL, CCCC and TESOL—on a regular basis. I have tried not to miss any except when the schedule overlapped or when there was a family situation that required my attention.
• I got myself elected or appointed to various committees, such as the Executive Committee and Nominating Committee, and to other leadership positions.
• I published my work in journals in multiple fields and subfields. My goal was to establish a tenurable record in each discipline so I didn’t have to worry about tenure requirements—I didn’t want to shift my attention away from what I considered to be the most important research issue or problem.
• I articulated the unarticulated assumption. I explicitly pointed out the problem of monodisciplinarity through my research and placed them in high profile journals to change the perception in both fields.
• I helped make L2 writing an integral part of composition studies by institutionalizing the cause.
• I took positions in departments where my multidisciplinary expertise would be valued.
• I refused to choose one discipline or another as my primary discipline and insisted that I belonged to both.

After more than a decade of hard work, the world seems to be a better place—at least to people who specialize in second language writing. But sometimes I still get remarks—even from close friends who know my work well—that seem to imply that I’m more X than Y or that I should choose one over the other.

Old habits die hard, I guess.

College English Conference, 11th April. Abstracts due soon

From: smithsgj@gmail.com [mailto:smithsgj@gmail.com] On Behalf Of simon smith
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:53 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients
Subject: To all English teachers: College English Conference, 11th April. Abstracts due soon

Dear Colleagues

I am writing to you, on behalf of the Conference Organizing Committee, about National Chengchi University's College English Conference, to be held on 11th April 2009. The deadline for abstract submissions, 2nd February, is coming up quite soon.

Information about the conference, including CFP, may be found at http://flc.nccu.edu.tw/Conference/3rd/. The conference is being organized in collaboration with the Language Teaching and Research Center, National Chiao-tung University, and features ESL writing scholar Professor Paul Kei Matsuda, of Arizona State, as keynote speaker.

We'd be most grateful if you could pass on the details of the conference to colleagues and friends who might be interested.

We have tried to think of suggested topics which are stimulating, and in many cases original. Contributions within the broad compass of our theme College English: Opportunities and Challenges for Teaching and Learning are however all welcome.

The conference aims to provide a stimulating and rewarding academic forum for presentation and discussion of English teaching in colleges and universities, including Freshman English programs.

We look forward to receiving your abstract in the next few days.

Best wishes
Simon Smith

(for Organizing Committee)

----

歡迎以中文回信

Simon Smith, PhD

Assistant Professor
Foreign Language Center
National Chengchi University

Brock Brady is the new TESOL President Elect

Congratulations, Brock! I look forward to your leadership as TESOL moves toward a new era.

Congratulations to Tanita Saenkhum!

Tanita Saenkhum, one of my doctoral advisees specializing in second language writing at ASU, has received the Albert H. Marckwardt Travel Grant to attend TESOL 2009 in Denver, Colorado.

Congratulations, Tanita. Well done!

SSLW 2009 Call for Proposals

The Call for Proposals for the 2009 Symposium on Second Language Writing, to be held at Arizona State University on November 5-7, 2009, is now available in PDF format.

http://sslw.asu.edu/2009/sslw2009cfp.pdf

Please distribute widely!

Paul

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Paul Kei Matsuda, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of English
Director of Writing Programs

Arizona State University
Department of English
Box 870302
Tempe, AZ 85287-0302 USA

Paul.Matsuda@asu.edu
http://matsuda.jslw.org/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Founding Chair, Symposium on Second Language Writing
http://sslw.asu.edu/

Editor, Parlor Press Series on Second Language Writing
http://www.parlorpress.com/slw.html

Web Administrator, Journal of Second Language Writing
http://www.jslw.org/