As schools began the frantic switch to fully remote education while the COVID-19 pandemic escalated in the United States, the Facebook group Pandemic Pedagogy rapidly became a worldwide interdisciplinary hub for navigating online instruction. Autoethnographic reflection on the development of that group leads to analysis of key issues emerging from discourse among the members. Critical examination of the home as a learning environment and concerns about synchronous online learning suggest broader systemic inequities that affect online education. Two areas of crisis rise to prominence: digital divides based on disparities in access, skill, and technological features; and the reassertion of neoliberal approaches to education. Original poems within this essay immerse readers in the tensions and disruptions that infuse education during the pandemic. The traumas inflicted by the pandemic can stimulate more vigorous practice of communal, carebased, collaborative resilience through reimagining the nature and purpose of communication instruction.

No abstract

During her lifespan as a survivor, Gizella could qualify as a human catalog of Holocaust experiences: Lodz ghetto, Red Army spy, tortured by the Gestapo, inmate at Majdanek death camp, left for dead amid a pile of corpses, then a Displaced Persons camp. Her presentations passionately narrated vivid vignettes that leapt randomly across places and times. Gizella sutured together her pastiche of recollections into an emotionally compelling patchwork.The metaphor of suturing describes an ongoing, often provisional, process of creatively recrafting personal and collective identity after extreme disruption. Suturing operates on several levels. Expressively, suturing describes the narrative path of this essay, juxtaposing distinctive individual testimonies to illustrate the

Demarcating the Domain of Rhetoric The discoveries of science and technology are accelerating. The choice of how to regulate and react to scientific and technological innovations relies heavily on the notion of risk. The emergence nature contemporary science and technology (i.e., complex systems that are not reducible to the simple physical and chemical processes from which they arose) confounds risk studies (Goodenough & Deacon, 2006). Indeed, whether to embark on a particular path of scientific inquiry or proceed with a technological development depends on the ability to calculate the amount of risk associated with the endeavor. We are, however, ill-equipped to resolve the demands of risk analysis with certainty. The greater the negative risk, the greater our reticence to proceed. The very term "calculate," however, invests risk with a far greater degree of objectivity and precision than actually present in the conduct of science or policymaking. Sandman's (1993) famous definition of risk as "the sum of hazard plus outrage" positions emotion (albeit only one species of it) placed squarely alongside the calculus of threat probability-much as Aristotle, who brought emotion into the charmed circle of internally artful means of persuasion, declared rhetoric the counterpart (antistrophe) of dialectic. Research on the significance of affective forces in determining how people perceive risk (Slovic, 2000, 2010) creates ample opportunities for rhetorical studies to complement social scientific research on cognition of risk. What Can Rhetorical Approaches to Risk Offer? The field of communication is no stranger to the realm of risk, but most attention has focused on risk management, often approached as crisis communication (e.g., Venette, 2006). This area of study concentrates on how to package and present phenomena to audiences in ways that accomplish the rhetor's intent, which is usually to steer audience perceptions in a particular direction or to protect the interests of stakeholders. Risk management thus operates within a compliance

No abstract