Feminism is one of the major proponents and champions of inclusivity and activism; when used effectively in the classroom, it can offer new insights to composition. The field of feminist composition is still fairly new; however, it is always in flux as scholars continue to contribute various ways in which composition teachers can use feminism to the benefit of their own pedagogical practices as well as their students. Much feminist scholarship in composition studies offers new feminist compositionists (like me) ways to build their own pedagogical practices and ideas for assignments and methodologies to employ in the classroom. Scholars also offer insights on their effectiveness in scholars' own classrooms. Feminism is ideal for use in a composition classroom, as its values can be applied to activities and writing projects that will allow students to engage with questions of race, gender, and identity alongside civic engagement.
After reading Matthew Heard’s article, “What Should We Do With Postprocess Theory?,” I wondered how feminist pedagogy can be tied with postprocess theory. In his mixed-tactics approach, Heard blended more traditional pedagogical activities such as draft workshops and in-class writing activities with postprocess theory. This approach resulted in students not only improving their writing, audience assessment/addressing skills, and rhetorical skills, but also opened their worldview by having them engage with a community organization. In doing so, Heard made postprocess theory more accessible to the college classroom. My question is what would happen if feminism were added to the mix. I wonder how feminism can benefit the college composition classroom, the university, and the after-process movement. It is my contention that feminism, blended with Heard’s ideas on postprocess, can directly benefit the composition classroom by encouraging students and instructors to have discussions about the ways effective writing can effect change. I plan to use the scholarship I found most helpful in shaping the feminist composition field as well as what it has to offer in terms of pedagogy. As a budding feminist composition scholar, I plan to explore the ways feminist composition scholars working in this postprocess era can potentially use feminist and postprocess theories in the classroom to help future students with their writing and in their development as open-minded people who will speak up and out against whatever they feel is unjust. I hope to explore how feminist values and pedagogy can be applied to the postprocess composition classroom. I believe that it would encourage students to engage with organizations or issues they care about while at the same time attend to the traditional skills they need to learn in how to write, think, argue, and persuade well.
Flynn, Elizabeth A. “Composing as a Woman.” College Composition and Communication 39.1 (1988): 423-435. JSTOR. Web. 9 Oct 2015.
Gradin, Sherrie L. “Women in the Classroom: Feminism, Romanticism, and Social-expressivist Rhetorics.” Romancing Rhetorics: Social Expressivist Perspectives on the Teaching of Writing. Portsmouth: Boynton/Cook Publishers, 1995. Print. 125-149.
Greenbaum, Andrea. “‘Bitch’ Pedagogy: Agnostic Discourse and the Politics of Resistance.” Emancipatory Movements in Composition: The Rhetoric of Possibility. Albany: State University of NY Press, 2002. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 20 Oct 2015.
Heard, Matthew. “What Should We Do With Postprocess Theory?” Pedagogy 8.2 (2008): 283-304. Project Muse. Web. 30 Oct 2015.
Jarratt, Susan C. “Feminism and Composition: The Case for Conflict.” Contending with Words: Composition in Rhetoric in a Postmodern Age. Eds. Patricia Harkin and John Schib. New York: Modern Language Association of America, 1991. 105-123. Print.
Micciche, Laura R. “Writing as Feminist Rhetorical Theory.” Rhetorica in Motion: Feminist Rhetorical Methods and Methodologies.Eds. Eileen E. Schell and K.J. Rawson. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburg Press, 2010. 173-188. Print.
Ritchie, Joy and Kathleen Boardman. “Feminism in Composition: Inclusion, Metonymy, and Disruption.” College Composition and Communication 50.4 (1999): 585-606. JSTOR. Web. 11 Oct 2015.