«A Dissertation Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of ...»
COLLABORATIVE DISSERTATIONS IN COMPOSITION: A FEMINIST
DISRUPTION OF THE STATUS QUO
Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies and Research
in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Laura M. Mangini
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
© 2015 Laura M. Mangini
All Rights Reserved
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Schol of Graduate Studies and Research Department of English We hereby approve the dissertation of Laura M. Mangini Candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy _________________ ____________________________________
Gian S. Pagnucci, Ph.D.
Distinguished University Professor, Advisor _________________ ____________________________________
Patrick Bizzaro, Ph.D.
Professor of English _________________ ____________________________________
Sharon K. Deckert, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of English _________________ ____________________________________
Michele Eodice, Ph.D.
Associate Provost University of Oklahoma
Randy L. Martin, Ph.D.
Dean School of Graduate Studies and Research iii Title: Collaborative Dissertations in Composition: A Feminist Disruption of the Status Quo Author: Laura M. Mangini Dissertation Chair: Dr. Gian S. Pagnucci Dissertation Committee Members: Dr. Patrick Bizzaro Dr. Sharon K. Deckert Dr. Michele Eodice This is a cooperative research study that investigates the lack of collaborative dissertations in the field of composition. This is the cooperative text to Sabatino Mangini’s dissertation, titled Composition and the Cooperative Dissertation Study: Our Collaborative Resistance. Ultimately, my research partner, Sabatino Mangini, and I are exploring the research question: “How does a collaborative dissertation challenge the status quo in the field of composition?” This primary research question produced several secondary questions as well involving the nature and rigors of the collaborative dissertation. Within this dissertation, I use a feminist rhetoric framework and a narrative inquiry methodology. Together as researcher-participants, Sabatino and I collaboratively respond to the question: When two people collaborate on a composition dissertation, what experiential data can they construct via a narrative inquiry?
To answer our research questions, we felt we could gain a better understanding of the resistance through engaging in research with higher education administrators/gatekeepers, recent Ph.D. graduates, and collaboration advocates. Through our conversations with our participants, we have come closer to gaining a better understanding of the resistance toward collaborative dissertations.
I once read that the phrase “seven year itch” derived from a 19th and 20th century punishment for anti-social behavior. I’ve always been a pretty introverted person, so it seems apropos that this dissertation has taken nearly seven years for me to complete. I could never call this dissertation punishment, however, as it has enabled me to think about collaboration in newer and more profound ways. Sabatino and I could not have completed this cooperative project without those who have traversed the rocky path of resistance to collaboration before us, and we are especially indebted to Michele Eodice and Kami Day and Andrea Lunsford and Lisa Ede. We could never have envisioned this project without your work.
Of course, I would like to thank the graduate school at Indiana University of Pennsylvania, as well as my committee, Gian, Pat, Sharon, and Michele. Without gatekeepers like you granting us the space, change would never happen. Thank you for trusting Sabatino and me with such a responsibility.
I am grateful for my family and Sabatino’s family for always rooting for us.
Especially to my mom, Sandra Gower: you have never doubted that I would complete this dissertation (and according to you, change the world along with it). You are my cheerleader and my best friend. Thank you for never wavering. This is for all of those who have listened to us talk about this dissertation for years. Thank you! Sara Deegan, thank you for being such a good friend and support system throughout the final stretch when I sometimes doubted myself.
Last, and most importantly, my loves, Sabatino and Elyse. For Elyse. Thank you, my baby girl, for always driving me to finish this dissertation and to show you that
were born, I was inspired by you and your future sibling(s). Between your cries and your colic and your spirit and love, you have still motivated me to be better and to work harder. Thank you (“shank shooo”). Mommy loves you. Sabatino, you have been my partner in life, love, and scholarship for nearly seven years. We started this project as friends and through the journey have started a life and a family together. I look forward to our collaboration in life, forever. Oh the places we will go!
INTERTEXT SITUATING OUR QUALITATIVE DISSERTATION STUDY.......... 1 Welcome to the Conversation
Understanding a Unique Layout
Arriving at a Unique Dissertation—a Collaborative Introduction.......... 6 Origins of Our Study
Relevance of Our Study
Tentative, Qualitative Definition of Terms
Establishing Exigency for Further Research
Delimitations of Our Study
Implications of Our Study
Benefits of Our Present Study
INTERTEXT NEGOTIATING OUR FRAMEWORK(S)
Annotated Bibliography Entry: Narrative Inquiry
Research Journal Entry: October 24, 2012
TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The Foundation of Our Research
A Social Constructionist Epistemology
Feminist Rhetorical Theory
Narrative Inquiry as a Methodology
Dissertation as Genre
Dissertation as Resistance
Origins and History of Collaboration
A Similar Journey
Another New Beginning: Research on Collaborative Dissertations..... 70
INTERTEXT HOW WE TALK AND WRITE TOGETHER
Research Journal December 17, 2012
“Epiphanies” February 16, 2011
THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Issues, Settings, and People
Participants and Contexts
Recent Ph.D. in Composition Graduates
Theories, Beliefs, and Prior Research Findings
Establishing Relationships With our Participants
Selection of Settings, Participants, Times and Places of Data Collection
Trustworthiness (or Validity)
INTERTEXT ENACTING OUR RESEARCH
“Process Journal” Excerpt
Reflective Journal Entry
FOUR DATA DIALOGUE AND ANALYSIS
Methodology: Narrative Inquiry
Situating Ourselves as Researcher-Participants
Data Collection: Methods
Data Analysis: Constructing Our Process and Product for the Reader
Authorship in the Data Dialogue
Question: What is Your Understanding of Collaborative Writing Processes and Products?
Question: How has Collaboration Impacted Your Professional Career, in Terms of Publication, Scholarship, Tenure and Promotion?
Question: Tell us About Your Dissertation as it Relates to Your Process of Choosing and Pursuing Your Dissertation Topic.............. 147 Question: Let’s Talk a bit More About the Emotional Impact of Being an Isolated Doctoral Student.
Question: Upon Completion of Your Dissertation Writing, how Have you Enacted Collaboration in Terms of Your own Writing or Pedagogy?
Question: How Does Your Collaborative Writing Process Work?
Question: What are Some of the Arguments that Support a Collaborative Dissertation in a Ph.D. Composition Studies Program?
Question: How Would Writing a Collaborative Dissertation Affect Issues of Motivation or Lack/loss of Motivation in Dissertation Writing?
Question: What are Some of the Material and Philosophical Concerns That may Arise When two Ph.D. Students Collaborate on a Dissertation?
Question: How Does Composition’s Position/location in the Academy Affect the Ways in Which we View Collaboration?.......... 194 Question: What are the Professional Implications/risks of Writing a Collaborative Dissertation?
Question: In What Ways Should a Composition Dissertation System Adapt to a Graduate Student Population that Brings Myriad Histories and Literacies to Their Research Studies?
Question (Primary Research Question): How Does a Collaborative Dissertation Challenge the Status quo in the Field of Composition?. 209
INTERTEXT INTERPRETING THE DATA
FIVE INTERPRETATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Primary Research Question: How Does a Collaborative
Dissertation Challenge the Status quo in the Field ofComposition?
Challenges Composition’s Disciplinary Location in the Humanities and Social Sciences
Challenges the Dissertation System’s Dominant Ideologies.............. 232 Challenges the Conventions of the Dissertation Genre
Challenges the Narrative of Risk as it Relates to a Nontraditional Dissertation
Challenges Notions of Collaboration at the Dissertation Level.......... 246 Challenges the Purpose of a Dissertation
Secondary Research Question: When two People Collaborate on a Composition Dissertation, What Experiential Data can They Construct via a Narrative Inquiry?
Our Collaboration Problematizes Co-researcher Negotiation............ 254 Our Collaboration Problematizes Motivation and Being Unmotivated
Our Collaboration Problematizes our Sense of Social Belonging
Our Collaboration Problematizes Knowledge Transfer
Our Collaboration Problematizes Postpartum Depression................. 272 Our Coupled Collaboration Problematizes Understandings of Collaboration
INTERTEXT THE COMPOSITION DISSERTATION COOPERATIVE.............. 282
The Dissertation Cooperative
Collaborative Action Plan
1 Participants: Collaboration Advocates
2 Participants: Administrators
3 Participants: Recent Ph.D. in Composition Graduates
4 Comparison of Actual Manual Transcription to Transcription Software............112 5 Our Participant Member Locations in the Three Participant Groups..................125
1 A graphic representation of cooperative, co-authored, and collaborative within the context of our dissertation study
2 Our notes from February 24, 2012 as we attempted to make sense of our theoretical perspectives, methodological approaches, and methods
3 An example of how our readings and marginal notes interact with our conversations
Our newer visualization of our research framework as of 2013
4 5 A visual representation of our research framework
6 A visual representation of the differences in the ways in which Laura and Sabatino pre-write/write
7 First draft of potential themes and categories for Chapter 4
8 Series of text conversations to negotiate themes and categories for Chapter 4
9 One version of our Table of Contents
10 Screenshot of Creswell's (2006) description of procedures for narrative research (p. 56)
11 Epiphany about adding our own story to our participants' stories via Creswell (2006)
12 “Anxiety”: Laura's self-photo taken pre-interview
13 One of many correspondences via email to schedule interviews with participants
14 Another attempt to schedule interview
15 The error message Sabatino sent to me when installing Call Recorder on his laptop
This is a dissertation study unlike others that exist in the field of composition. The scholarship, however, is an extension of an ongoing conversation regarding collaboration in our field. This dissertation has emerged as a cooperative effort between two doctoral students, not one. It is a dissertation written cooperatively by two college professors, by a woman and a man, by a husband and a wife, by two friends, by two scholars. It is a dissertation that required a combined effort to resist the status quo. It was not an easy task that followed the beaten path for a traditional “get it done” dissertation. We acknowledge how our dissertation committee and our institution’s graduate school have worked with us to negotiate a space for this study—which has strengthened our belief that this research is necessary and important.
We would be remiss not to state our indebtedness to those whose collaborative conversations have attempted to pave the rocky road that is collaborative academic work.
Of course there are others, but without academic pairs such as Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford (1988), Claude Hurlbert and Michael Blitz (1991), Kathleen Blake Yancey and Michael Spooner (1998), and Kami Day and Michele Eodice (2001), we would not have had the space to take these chances.