From the Editors’
Fresh off a lesson in how easy
it is to take for granted the work of the past editors of the Inkshed
Newsletter, we’ve become aware of a number of items that we’d
previously been blissfully unaware of and think merit some discussion.
- Should we establish and
publicize a formal review policy? This would give those of our community
who desire and need it an option that they could request; a note explaining
that the manuscript in question had been reviewed in this way would
be attached to the published article.
- Should we re-establish
a print edition? Have you read the Newsletter lately? Would you be more
likely to read it more thoroughly or at all if it came to you rather
than you going to view or print it? The editors are of two minds about
this, and we’d be interested in hearing what others have to say
- When authors quote student
work, should the names of the students be changed to preserve anonymity?
- Is it e-mail or email?
How about inkshedders or Inkshedders? /Potayeto/ or /potahto/ (we’ll
defer to the PEI members on this one)?
Email the CASLL list with your comments or, better still, take a position
and write a short piece for the Newsletter.
This issue contains words worth your time. Jim Gough writes about reading,
and specifically about how the writing and reading dynamic has evolved
in his Women and Philosophy course. Wendy Kraglund-Gauthier leads us towards
zen-like insights waiting for students at the Saint Francis Xavier writing
center. Margaret Procter explains why Gerald Graff would call Chicago
students (and others) clueless. Carl Leggo explores the alphabet as a
scaffolding strategy in three poems. Russ Hunt takes another kick at the
Microsoft can, with Amanda Goldrick-Jones contributing her own dent or
We hope you’ll peruse two other items as well: Wendy Kraglund-Gauthier’s
invitation to participate in a research study, and the call for papers
for Inkshed 22.