Abstract
As of July 1st, 2017, I will be ending my tenure as Editor of Written Communication, a position I’ve held since the spring of 2004. It has been a rewarding experience, and over the past 13 years, I have learned a great deal from authors, reviewers, and members of the WC Editorial Board.
To the authors whose work I have had the honor of shepherding through the editorial process: Thank you for your courage and willingness to subject your work to the scrutiny of your peers. It is not always easy to read honest and direct responses to your scholarship, but I appreciate the ways in which you have taken feedback and used it to advance your thinking, your arguments, and your contributions to the field.
To the international audience of Written Communication: The value of the journal is contingent on the high expectations of its readership. WC readers, who come from myriad disciplines, backgrounds, and cultures, have always been willing to extend themselves, to read outside their own comfort zones, their own familiar spaces, in order to advance literacy and writing scholarship. Many—no, most—readers have built on both the work and spirit of WC. The end effect is a journal that remains fluid and responsive to on-the-ground thinking, while also pushing scholarship to be competitive, provocative, and relevant.
To members of the Editorial Board and reviewers: In every way the success of Written Communication is due to your dedication and hard work. As many of you inherently know, your commitment to the field of writing studies has sustained both me, and the journal, over the past dozen years. Your willingness to be frank, honest, and forward-thinking in your reviews has been instrumental in maintaining the rigor and relevance of WC articles.
To the Production editors and staff at Sage Publishing: Thank you for making the production process as smooth and pain free as possible. The Production Department at Sage has been open to new ideas and has pushed us to think carefully about the publication and circulation of academic scholarship as research moves into the 21st century.
To the Department of English at Kent State University and the College of Liberal Arts at the University of Minnesota: Thank you for the support that has allowed me and my editorial staff to run a major research journal. Thank you, as well, for understanding that the systematic, regular publication of a research journal is a vital form of scholarship.
To Written Communication’s fine Editorial Assistants: Hunter Stephenson, Onur Azeri, John Oddo, Joe Bartolotta, Abigail Bakke, and Kira Dreher. You have all been amazing—keeping me honest, pushing my thinking, and keeping WC in touch with what was happening in our field, particularly “on the ground” in doctoral education and in writing pedagogy. Working with each of you has been fun; I think our colleagues (at both Kent State and the University of Minnesota) were sometimes amazed by the laughter emanating from the WC office.
Each editorial assistant has brought unique contributions to the journal. Hunter was a workhorse and source of stability when the journal was going through difficult times, especially surrounding Witte’s death. Onur, who was also a major support for me after Steve’s death, brought a pragmatic yet idealistic perspective to the editorial process. John helped me to articulate and implement methodological precision both for the journal and for individual articles. Joe shepherded WC between two institutions, helped to recast operations in a new context, and moved the journal from being international in word to being international in fact. Abi led efforts to increase WC’s online presence and developed brilliant ways to manage the ever-increasing submission numbers. She and Kira spearheaded the effort to gather and curate WC articles for use in the classroom. Kira also went above and beyond in helping to guide the journal through its current transition, and for that, the new editor and I are grateful.
It is with great confidence that I look forward to Chad Wickman’s editorship of Written Communication. Chad will bring a combination of professional experience, intellectual rigor, and discerning editorial perspective to his stewardship of the journal. And he will look to continue the high quality of work that readers have come to expect from WC since its founding in 1984.
~Christina Haas
Professor Emeritus of Writing Studies, University of Minnesota
In the “Editor’s Note” for the inaugural issue of Written Communication, Stephen P. Witte and John A. Daly describe their excitement in launching a new journal. Their aim was both clear and ambitious: they wanted to make WC “a major and respected outlet for original scholarship on writing.”
Witte and Daly believed that, in publishing Written Communication, they were initiating a process by which a new journal begins to mature, to realize its potential and—perhaps—acquire respect in both the academic and nonacademic communities it aims to serve. This is a process that involves not only providing a regular outlet for original work and thought on writing in any of its many dimensions, but a process that also encourages such work through its editorial procedures and the challenges posed in the articles it publishes.
The first issue represents the originality of research and the diversity of theoretical and methodological approaches that Witte and Daly highlight in their editorial note. Indeed, contributions from scholars like Anne Haas Dyson, Andrea A. Lunsford and Lisa S. Ede, and Linda Flower and John R. Hayes represent a standard of quality that helped Written Communication earn its reputation as a major research publication. WC remained dedicated to its founding vision throughout the two decades that Witte served as editor, a period during which many influential scholars (too many to mention here) contributed their work to the journal and, individually and collectively, shaped the trajectory of writing studies as a field of inquiry.
Written Communication has continued to expand its reach and strengthen its impact under Christina Haas’s leadership. It has also evolved in response to a growing community of international writing researchers and a shifting landscape of scholarly publishing. The regular publication of special issues, for instance, has drawn attention to a range of foci, including methodologies for the study of written communication; writing and new media; writing and medicine; writing and cognition; writing in global context; writing, ritual, and religion; and narrative in writing research. These issues represent timely and forward-looking scholarship, and they have pushed the field’s thinking about written communication as an object of study and a situated activity. Haas has further added to the journal’s repertoire by publishing online resources for teaching and learning about methodology; and, through a series of podcasts, WC has provided an outlet for diverse authors and writers to amplify their voices. Altogether, Haas’s work on behalf of the journal, and the field, has been substantial.
The editorial vision moving forward will strive to be consistent with the journal’s history. In particular, WC will continue to provide an outlet for research that examines writing in its many dimensions; it will publish special issues on topics that represent critical problems and questions for the study of writing; it will maintain rigorous standards for submission, review, and publication; it will publish articles that are theoretically nuanced and methodologically precise; it will invite submissions that represent a variety of cultural perspectives and scholarly approaches; and it will attempt to reach, and be accessible to, an international audience of scholars, practitioners, and writers. Above all, the journal will seek to honor the diverse needs of authors, reviewers, readership, and the writing studies community, understood in broad and inclusive terms.
In the final line of their inaugural “Editor’s Note,” Witte and Daly suggest that “Written Communication’s success, or failure, depends on the quality of submissions it receives.” Quality of submission will always be an indicator of WC’s strength as a journal; yet the success of any journal also depends on reviewers and editorial board members who are committed to a substantive and efficient review process. With these ends in mind, the editorial staff for WC will be adopting a digital platform for manuscript submission and review. The principal aim of making this change, and other, gradual changes, is to facilitate an editorial process that results in the best possible research being published—and that continues to make Written Communication a vital outlet for scholarship on writing and literacy.