RE: ParaPro vs English Instr

[Clifford Barnett <bhcb@loki.cc.pdx.edu>]

On Thu, 15 Dec 1994, Julia N. Visor wrote:

> It helps to have our center interests represented in English Dept faculty
> meetings and on English Dept committees, like the Writing Committee.  The
> down side is that no matter how generous the English Dept chair has been
> over the past few years in praise of our activities, the faculty in the
> English Department and in the College of Arts and Sciences are rather
> provincial about what counts for promotion and tenure.

Recently, someone wrote (ADE?) about the advantages and 
disadvantages of maintaining historical ties to the English Department 
--anybody remember this?  In any case , I recall agreeing for the most 
part with the conclusions which suggested that WCs who wished to survive 
and thrive in the coming decade should let loose the departmental 
lifeline.  There is, of course, a certain amount of stability that comes 
along with being attached to the English Department--as someone else 
mentioned in an earlier post, academic budgets are less subject to cuts 
than say student services or administrative services.  Nevertheless, 
depending on one department for financial support can be quite limiting 
(true, many WCs actually get their funding from various sources--but 
usually from only one department--such is our case here where we're 
funded both through the English Department and through the generosity of 
the Provost.  Being under the Provost's wing is intoxicating in some 
ways--we've expanded this past year with increases both in staffing and 
personnel.  (The Administrator is now three quarter time in the LAB and 
I am now full time instead of half time--I being the office person come 
tutor come major domo . . .).  But as we all know, Provosts are 
political appointees and as goes the king, so goes the nation.  

Another issue probably more important here is the signal WCs and their 
parent English Departments send out to the rest of the academy; namely, 
that we are the keepers and teachers of good writing--a kind of academic 
chauvinism.  Moreover, not only do WCs need to let the rest of the 
academy know that we don't want to be the keepers, we also need to let 
the rest of the academy know that the English Department shouldn't be 
left holding the bag both financially and pedagogically.  It seems that 
the entire university should share this responsibility.

So, what do you think?

Cliff Barnett
Portland State University 
bhcb@loki.cc.pdx.edu