Purdue Graduate Program in Rhetoric and Composition

Prospective Students

1) What would you say are the strengths of your program?

One of our strengths is our curriculum. The Purdue curriculum is both coherent and diversified. We view the needs of the field as great but know that a field needs to grow as a group. It is not sufficient for one voice to speak about French literary theory, another to do meta-analyses of technology uses in classroom, another to uncover new understandings of Roman rhetoric, another to develop new approaches to WAC, and another to work on sound compositions IF all those people cannot understand/appreciate the special work of the others. Thus, we build the curriculum with a core [where we introduce multiple approaches to issues and research -- field issues, history, philosophy/theory, and empiricism] and have students then go deep in a secondary area or two (one is required by the department but I advise people to take two secondary areas).

Another strength is our care for our students. The Purdue program is built around the students. As students begin the program they are placed in the same mentoring group and take coursework together; students study together for exams; there is post-prelim group to help them start their dissertations; there is a job group for those on the job market that meets weekly for feedback, advice, and support. They connect with more than their classmates through the Hutton Lectures; the program picnic; and the yearly reunion for grads at CCCC. Further, to ensure students are well-advised, we are trying out a yearly review.

I also think our balance is a strength. Purdue aims to produce graduates who balance theory and practice. So, it helps that it is a large university that has a variety of students to teach and graduate student appointments -- teaching for a variety of courses, writing center, OWL, technology support, mentoring new teachers, and assts for directors.

2) Can you tell me about the research projects your current Ph.D. candidates are involved in?

I assume you mean dissertations here, so I'll mention the projects of students who are on the job market --
Dana -- is looking at transfer of ideas from writing classes to other contexts
Juliette -- is working on how adoption is rhetorically represented online
Margaret -- is studying expert collaborations over time to examine how it changes as it matures
Meg -- is studying deliberative rhetoric in 17th century America, interested in how individuals who normally would not be allowed to speak (e.g., Native Americans) were empowered by the material conditions of colonial rule
Nathaniel -- is examining how rhetoric is needed to cultivate our interdisciplinary understandings of nature
Joy -- uses a case study to examine several groups working together to build a bicycle route -- Adventure Cycling's Underground Railroad Tour (developed by Adventure Cycling, the Pittsburgh Coalition for Minority Health, and a variety of volunteers who physically mapped the route)
Karen -- is working on peace rhetoric, interested in whether there can be a non-violent configuration of rhetorical argument [she uses Gandhi]
Jeremy -- is working on mapping theory and spread of ideas using Computers and Writing as the work he examines
Ryan -- is developing a more current working definition for irony, using Heideggarean thinking as he applies it to politicians' self-satire on comedy and talk shows
Jessica -- is working both on methodology for the analysis of student centered classrooms and for a more complete description of student centeredness

Some dissertation topics in their earlier stages include --
a historical study of The Catholic Worker (a socialist newsletter that flourished in the 1930s)
an addition to the OWL for GED work [two people are working on different parts of this -- one with curriculum building and one with students/usability, and both are working with the local reading academy]
a study of how wac programs use technology
a study of memory's place in college composition in the last third of the 20th century
a study of habit of mind and rhetoric in the enlightenment
a study of the relationship of citizenship and liberal arts in writing curricula
a study of early 20th c connections and disconnections between program/departments of rhetoric, english, speech, and communication
a study of trauma and web sites for grief

3) Are there any professors and/or graduate students that you can put me in touch with so I can ask them about their experiences with the program?

My assistant, Mark Hannah, [mhannah@purdue.edu] can put you in touch with students for email discussion, and and I encourage you to contact any of the faculty directly. Further, Mark is also happy to arranged a schedule for you should you want to visit campus.
I would also suggest you examine the program's web site at http://rc.english.purdue.edu [though if you are reading this, you have found the website].

Several other recent letters offered other questions that may interest you.

4) On the matter of job/career preparation: what do most graduates of your PhD program in Rhetoric/Composition do after they complete their degree? Also, do graduates tend to stay local or spread out across the country/world?

Most of our graduates become faculty at the college/university level. We focus on helping our students to prepare for the types of positions they want through mentoring along the way and a job group while they search for work. In the past four years our grads have taken jobs at: St. Joseph's U (Philadelphia), Indiana U (Bloomington), Eckerd College (Florida), Zayed U (Egypt), St. Louis U (Missouri), U of South Florida (Tampa), U of North Carolina at Wilmington, Illinois Institute of Technology (Chicago), Indiana U/Purdue U-Fort Wayne, UNLV (Nevada), Rose Hulman IT (Indiana), Lewis College (Chicago), Peking U (PRC), Saginaw Valley State College (Michigan), Michigan Tech U (Houghton), Clemson U (So. Carolina), St. Xavier U (Chicago), U Texas Pan American (Texas), and Utica C (New York). I encourage them to apply for a range of jobs and to figure out what is the best place for meeting their goals.

5) I guess I'm wondering: are your PhD candidates more akin to E.B. White (essayist/writer), William Strunk (scholar/literary editor), or some combination thereof (i.e. academics who also do non-academic writing)?

I think most of our grads would say they are scholars of and teachers of writing [or written discourse or rhetoric]. They also will have a focus related to their special interests: Sean is a publishing poet, Karl programs writing environments, Amy directs a writing program, Tarez studies women in the history of rhetoric, Jingfang does empirical research on workplace writing, Kristen rethinks the enthymeme, Paul revives casuistry to handle public argument, Huiling builds an international rhetoric of the epidemic, Julie studies risk and its communication, Alexis critiques fashion as rhetoric, Meredith studies mobile communication and writing, and so on. They are a bright, diverse group who I think will change the ways that we [by "we" here I mean the field] think about writing in its environments and for its growing purposes. In short, they do Purdue proud.

I hope that these comments address your concerns. Send more questions and comments as you think through your next step.

Patricia Sullivan

sullivanatpurdue@gmail.com

http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~psulliva

Program

The graduate program is structured to accommodate students' needs as maturing scholars and teachers.

Rhetcomp

@ Purdue

Prospective Students

Program

Other sections of the site: