Heidi A. McKee

“YOUR VIEWS SHOWED TRUE IGNORANCE!!!”: (Mis)Communication in an online interracial discussion forum

Abstract In this article I focus on the dynamics of interracial electronic communication by studying the asynchronous posts made by 75 students from across the country to an online Affirmative Action/Diversity discussion forum. Drawing from my textual analysis of the posts and from my interviews with the most active participants—five students from four institutions—I examine the misunderstandings that arose in this interracial discussion, situating the causes and consequences of the students’ discourse within both the local context of the electronic forum and within wider cultural patterns. I show that flaming cannot be easily identified as destructive communication because posts that seem to be violent attacks intended to shut down dialogue may be attempts by writers to educate other, and posts that do not seem to be violent attacks may actually perpetuate an “othering” that is more destructive to interracial communication than online shouting. I conclude by suggesting strategies for facilitating more productive electronic discussions about race and racism.

Changing the Process of Institutional Review Board Compliance.

The CCCC Guidelinesfor the Ethical Treatment of Students and Student Writing in Composition Studies written by Paul Anderson, Davida Charney, Marilyn Cooper, Cristina Kirklighter, Peter Mortensen, and Mark Reynolds provides a common frame to help composition specialists as we navigate and discuss the various ethical dilemmas we face while conducting research. As a graduate student involved in my own qualitative research, I find the Guidelines beneficial, and I am committed to following them, including the first guideline that calls for composition researchers to comply with all Institutional Review Board (IRB) policies.1 However, in the past two years I have submitted proposals for the same study to eleven IRBs at colleges and universities across the country. While I strongly support the need for obtaining IRB approval, I believe as a discipline and as individuals we need to work to revise the IRB process. As it is now practiced at many institutions, the IRB process positions composition researchers and composition research in potentially problematic ways. In fall 2000 when I began my research into the Intercollegiate E-Democracy Project, a national online project where students across the country discuss various social and political issues, I knew I had to mail consent forms to