Pub Date : 2025-04-22DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102935
Eric J. York
Current approaches to questions regarding the lifespan of digital projects are overly materialistic and insufficiently describe important factors of survivability, especially for those in the humanities. Rather than employing such a naïve approach, the author illustrates the primarily discursive issues of ambiguity, representation, and flexibility by examining key time periods in the lifespans of six digital humanities projects: periods of growth, of decline, and of stagnancy. The author develops a framework for better considering issues of scalability, continuity and sustainability in digital projects by applying the concepts of responsible rhetoric and emergent agency (Cooper, 2011), arguing that such rhetorically informed understandings are vital for maintaining digital projects in the humanities.
{"title":"Failing machines: Applied rhetorics for scalability, continuity, and sustainability of digital projects in the humanities","authors":"Eric J. York","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102935","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102935","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Current approaches to questions regarding the lifespan of digital projects are overly materialistic and insufficiently describe important factors of survivability, especially for those in the humanities. Rather than employing such a naïve approach, the author illustrates the primarily discursive issues of ambiguity, representation, and flexibility by examining key time periods in the lifespans of six digital humanities projects: periods of growth, of decline, and of stagnancy. The author develops a framework for better considering issues of scalability, continuity and sustainability in digital projects by applying the concepts of responsible rhetoric and emergent agency (Cooper, 2011), arguing that such rhetorically informed understandings are vital for maintaining digital projects in the humanities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102935"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143859252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-04-09DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102933
Zhaozhe Wang , Chaoran Wang
How can posthumanism help us reframe AI-mediated literacy practices? And what implications does such reframing have for cultivating AI literacy in language and literacy education? This article explores these two imperative questions through a case study analyzing two multilingual undergraduate students’ meaning-making and meaning-negotiation intra-actions with AI technologies in a writing classroom. The case study reveals a productive tension between these students’ experiments with posthumanist literacy and their entrenched humanistic assumptions. Ultimately, through the case study, the authors hope to demonstrate that reframing and re-engaging with AI literacy through a posthumanist lens may offer students and educators a relational approach to developing and cultivating AI literacy.
{"title":"A posthumanist approach to AI literacy","authors":"Zhaozhe Wang , Chaoran Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102933","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102933","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>How can posthumanism help us reframe AI-mediated literacy practices? And what implications does such reframing have for cultivating AI literacy in language and literacy education? This article explores these two imperative questions through a case study analyzing two multilingual undergraduate students’ meaning-making and meaning-negotiation intra-actions with AI technologies in a writing classroom. The case study reveals a productive tension between these students’ experiments with posthumanist literacy and their entrenched humanistic assumptions. Ultimately, through the case study, the authors hope to demonstrate that reframing and re-engaging with AI literacy through a posthumanist lens may offer students and educators a relational approach to developing and cultivating AI literacy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102933"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143800641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-20DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102924
Shyam Pandey
Activist groups, particularly PETA and Animal Justice, leverage multimodality in online advocacy to effectively communicate their organizational missions and updates across diverse communication platforms. This study uses a content analysis approach to examine the official websites of two prominent international animal rights organizations, PETA and Animal Justice, with the aim of understanding how they utilize multimodality to emotionally engage their audiences. The analysis of sample news reports, featured stories, photographs, and video materials collected from 50 web pages of these organizations’ official sites reveals three key findings: the use of multimodal combinations and synergetic blending, the application of rhetorical appeals, and an emphasis on a call to action. The subsequent discussion and conclusion highlight the significance of adopting a multimodal approach in the current technological landscape, illustrating how PETA and Animal Justice, as non-profit and non-academic entities, effectively convey their messages persuasively through online advocacy and multimodality. This study contributes to multimodal theory by demonstrating how the combination of visual, textual, and auditory elements enhances emotional engagement in digital advocacy—a domain that has received limited scholarly attention.
{"title":"Rhetoric in action: A multimodal and rhetorical analysis of PETA and animal justice online advocacy","authors":"Shyam Pandey","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102924","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102924","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Activist groups, particularly PETA and Animal Justice, leverage multimodality in online advocacy to effectively communicate their organizational missions and updates across diverse communication platforms. This study uses a content analysis approach to examine the official websites of two prominent international animal rights organizations, PETA and Animal Justice, with the aim of understanding how they utilize multimodality to emotionally engage their audiences. The analysis of sample news reports, featured stories, photographs, and video materials collected from 50 web pages of these organizations’ official sites reveals three key findings: the use of multimodal combinations and synergetic blending, the application of rhetorical appeals, and an emphasis on a call to action. The subsequent discussion and conclusion highlight the significance of adopting a multimodal approach in the current technological landscape, illustrating how PETA and Animal Justice, as non-profit and non-academic entities, effectively convey their messages persuasively through online advocacy and multimodality. This study contributes to multimodal theory by demonstrating how the combination of visual, textual, and auditory elements enhances emotional engagement in digital advocacy—a domain that has received limited scholarly attention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102924"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143680938","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-11DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102923
Matt Manierre, Lisa Propst, Alex Cohen, JoAnn Rogers
AI based tools such as ChatGPT have presented many challenges to educators since they entered the scene in 2022. We present our effort to coexist with ChatGPT in the classroom, developing an exercise for first year writing students to use ChatGPT while revising papers. The effectiveness of this activity was determined using pretest/posttest surveys (n = 64 and 53) and one- page reflective essays. Survey results indicated that students had largely positive appraisals of the different elements of the exercise, describing them as useful without reducing their appreciation of writing as an essential skill for the future. Yet, student writing self-efficacy also did not improve after working with ChatGPT. Qualitative responses were often positive but students frequently reported frustrations with ChatGPT rewriting work when told not to and providing only generic feedback. We offer our exercise as a means to engage students in critical thought about ChatGPT's uses, limitations, and implications for academic integrity. We suggest ways to iterate on this tool and to incorporate it in future work but emphasize that students must be taught to use AI tools with considerable skepticism.
{"title":"Coexisting with ChatGPT: Evaluating a tool for AI-based paper revision","authors":"Matt Manierre, Lisa Propst, Alex Cohen, JoAnn Rogers","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102923","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102923","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>AI based tools such as ChatGPT have presented many challenges to educators since they entered the scene in 2022. We present our effort to coexist with ChatGPT in the classroom, developing an exercise for first year writing students to use ChatGPT while revising papers. The effectiveness of this activity was determined using pretest/posttest surveys (<em>n</em> = 64 and 53) and one- page reflective essays. Survey results indicated that students had largely positive appraisals of the different elements of the exercise, describing them as useful without reducing their appreciation of writing as an essential skill for the future. Yet, student writing self-efficacy also did not improve after working with ChatGPT. Qualitative responses were often positive but students frequently reported frustrations with ChatGPT rewriting work when told not to and providing only generic feedback. We offer our exercise as a means to engage students in critical thought about ChatGPT's uses, limitations, and implications for academic integrity. We suggest ways to iterate on this tool and to incorporate it in future work but emphasize that students must be taught to use AI tools with considerable skepticism.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102923"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143593427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-08DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102925
Elise Silva
In this paper, I explore first-year students' self-reported preferences for choosing source material in a digital, research-based writing setting. I argue that widespread skepticism towards online information has led to an "objectivity bias," where students prefer sources perceived as neutral and objective. Through qualitative interviews, I report that this bias may result in an overreliance on data-driven and empiricist sources, often at the expense of valuable personal narratives and experiential knowledge. I highlight the role of digital platforms and search algorithms in shaping these preferences and discuss the implications for teaching information literacy.
{"title":"Objectivity bias in first-year research writing: The impact of perceived neutrality in an age of mistrust","authors":"Elise Silva","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102925","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102925","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this paper, I explore first-year students' self-reported preferences for choosing source material in a digital, research-based writing setting. I argue that widespread skepticism towards online information has led to an \"objectivity bias,\" where students prefer sources perceived as neutral and objective. Through qualitative interviews, I report that this bias may result in an overreliance on data-driven and empiricist sources, often at the expense of valuable personal narratives and experiential knowledge. I highlight the role of digital platforms and search algorithms in shaping these preferences and discuss the implications for teaching information literacy.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102925"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143579167","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-07DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102926
Maggie Fernandes, Megan McIntyre
In this piece, we offer critical interface analyses of two process surveillance interfaces, a term we use to describe personal writing tools that track students’ writing process via edits, revisions, and inserted text. Specifically, we examine: Draftback, a Google extension that predates ChatGPT-3, and Grammarly Authorship, a new beta feature for Grammarly users. Situated in scholarly conversations in digital cultural rhetorics, writing studies, surveillance studies, and user experience design, we analyze how these process surveillance interfaces reinscribe normative values for writing as product (rather than process) and facilitate feelings of suspicion, anxiety, and defensiveness for users. This analysis has implications both for instructors seeking to teach with tools like Draftback and Authorship to verify “responsible” GenAI use and instructors seeking to implement punitive anti-AI policies. Though Draftback and Grammarly Authorship are different kinds of process surveillance interfaces, they pose similar threats to writing process instruction when used for academic integrity purposes by either students or instructors. Namely, we find three issues associated with three process surveillance interfaces; namely, these tools promote 1) product over process; 2) normative constructions of embodiment and time; and 3) adversarial student-instructor dynamics.
{"title":"Drafting defensively, documenting authorship: An analysis of Draftback and Grammarly Authorship","authors":"Maggie Fernandes, Megan McIntyre","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102926","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102926","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this piece, we offer critical interface analyses of two process surveillance interfaces, a term we use to describe personal writing tools that track students’ writing process via edits, revisions, and inserted text. Specifically, we examine: Draftback, a Google extension that predates ChatGPT-3, and Grammarly Authorship, a new beta feature for Grammarly users. Situated in scholarly conversations in digital cultural rhetorics, writing studies, surveillance studies, and user experience design, we analyze how these process surveillance interfaces reinscribe normative values for writing as product (rather than process) and facilitate feelings of suspicion, anxiety, and defensiveness for users. This analysis has implications both for instructors seeking to teach with tools like Draftback and Authorship to verify “responsible” GenAI use <em>and</em> instructors seeking to implement punitive anti-AI policies. Though Draftback and Grammarly Authorship are different kinds of process surveillance interfaces, they pose similar threats to writing process instruction when used for academic integrity purposes by either students or instructors. Namely, we find three issues associated with three process surveillance interfaces; namely, these tools promote 1) product over process; 2) normative constructions of embodiment and time; and 3) adversarial student-instructor dynamics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"76 ","pages":"Article 102926"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143570575","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102922
Greg Hlavaty, Heather Lindenman, Travis Maynard
This article examines how first-year composition students navigate digital attention ecosystems while writing. It presents findings from a qualitative focus group study in which undergraduate students participated in writing and reflection activities. The findings indicate that students are immersed in a “horizontal attention ecosystem,” in which all online tasks, communications, and media feel equally worthy of their attention. Although students attempt to manage their physical-digital writing environments strategically, the intrusive nature of current technology hinders their ability to focus, especially on academic writing assignments. When completing academic assignments, students report relying on self-restrictive measures and approaching writing as a solitary act, contrasting with writing studies’ understanding of writing as a social act. This article suggests pedagogical approaches that privilege embodied writing strategies and encourage writing-oriented social interactions between students.
{"title":"All the attention, all the time: How first-year students experience writing in a horizontal digital ecosystem","authors":"Greg Hlavaty, Heather Lindenman, Travis Maynard","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102922","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102922","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This article examines how first-year composition students navigate digital attention ecosystems while writing. It presents findings from a qualitative focus group study in which undergraduate students participated in writing and reflection activities. The findings indicate that students are immersed in a “horizontal attention ecosystem,” in which all online tasks, communications, and media feel equally worthy of their attention. Although students attempt to manage their physical-digital writing environments strategically, the intrusive nature of current technology hinders their ability to focus, especially on academic writing assignments. When completing academic assignments, students report relying on self-restrictive measures and approaching writing as a solitary act, contrasting with writing studies’ understanding of writing as a social act. This article suggests pedagogical approaches that privilege embodied writing strategies and encourage writing-oriented social interactions between students.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 102922"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143550341","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102911
Fei Victor Lim , Øystein Gilje , Emilia Djonov
{"title":"Editorial for special issue: Digital multimodal composing in the era of artificial intelligence","authors":"Fei Victor Lim , Øystein Gilje , Emilia Djonov","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102911","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102911","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 102911"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143609809","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102919
Jason Tham
{"title":"Letter from the editor","authors":"Jason Tham","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102919","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2025.102919","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 102919"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143609807","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102912
Jason Tham
{"title":"Celebrating Dr. Kristine Blair's Legacy at Computers and Composition","authors":"Jason Tham","doi":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102912","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.compcom.2024.102912","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35773,"journal":{"name":"Computers and Composition","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 102912"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143609808","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号