History Bump

1. On page 179, Connors alludes to rhetoric as being an emotional discipline because people are easily influenced. In addition to this, on page 201 he believes that women remained part-time in the discipline because they were nurturers, and it was easy to raise a family. Do you believe that rhetoric is an emotional discipline and only those who pursue it do so because they are able to “nurture” others? Do you run your classroom as a nurturing environment? Do you think of your class as a laboratory?

2. Connors, to some degree, mentions promotions and tenure. Do you believe that the system that’s in place today is the most reasonable way to govern tenure and promotions? Is it fair, why or why not? How would you modify it?

3. Since history shows us that the “underclass” bears the brunt of the work when it comes to teaching composition-rhetoric courses, it seems that these people are treated unfairly. How is this not discriminatory practice in an environment that claims to embrace difference (diversity)? And what does this say about the “privilege” that possessing a PhD carries?