Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College | Bryn Mawr College Research

Roper, Rebecca

Learning with Champions: GenAI Champions Project Ireland

Killoran, Bridie

Guiding Growth through Change: Developing a Staff Development Career Pathway in a Transforming University

Suarez, Fatima

Montes, Veronica

Estrada, Emir

Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierrette

Relational Mentoring in Troubled Times

Ginsberg, Sarah M.

Morrison, Shanna R.

Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education 
Volume 1 
Issue 45 Teaching and Learning Together at 
Eastern Michigan University 
Article 3 
January 2025 
Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course 
(Re)Design Learning Community 
Sarah M. Ginsberg 
Eastern Michigan University 
Shanna R. Morrison 
Eastern Michigan University 
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe 
 Part of the Higher Education and Teaching Commons 
Let us know how access to this document benefits you. 
Recommended Citation 
Ginsberg, Sarah M. and Morrison, Shanna R. "Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course 
(Re)Design Learning Community," Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education: Iss. 45 (2025), 
https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss45/3 
 
 
SHIFTING ROLES AND PROCESSES IN A COLLABORATIVE COURSE (RE)DESIGN LEARNING 
COMMUNITY 
 
Sarah M. Ginsberg, Ed.D., CCC-SLP, F-ASHA, Professor of Communication Sciences and 
Disorders; Faculty Associate Director, Bruce K. Nelson Faculty Development Center, Eastern 
Michigan University 
 
Shanna R. Morrison, B.S., Graduate Student in Communication Sciences and Disorders, Eastern 
Michigan University, Expected Graduation Date Winter 2025  
 
 
Introduction 
  
In the summer of 2023, I (Sarah, the faculty member) was given the opportunity to lead a 
learning community (LC) to guide faculty-student partners in the process of redesigning a course 
that the faculty member had taught previously and that their student partner had taken. The 
faculty partners were asked to choose a course that would also be taught in the term that began 
January 2024 so that they could design a small scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) 
study around the process and the course. This LC was to be an element in our broader TaLT 
effort, which our Faculty Development Center Director, Jeff Bernstein, and I had been working 
on for the past year. You may have already read Jeff Bernstein’s and Liv Overbee’s piece at the 
beginning of this issue introducing the TaLT initiative and its goals, so we won’t review them 
here, but we will refer you to their introduction for further background.  
 
As a long-time faculty member, I have engaged in collaborative course (re)design (CCRD; 
Ginsberg & Mead; 2021) as I have come to call it, for almost all of the courses that I teach in the 
Communication Sciences and Disorders Program at Eastern Michigan University. This process is 
grounded in the work of Felten, Bovill, and Cook-Sather (2011, 2014) and Cook-Sather (2008) 
and engages students as partners in the design and development of classroom instruction. I 
distinguish CCRD from their work only in the sense that, in my process, I am always redesigning 
a course with the benefit of having taught the course several times prior to engaging in the 
faculty-student collaboration process. This isn’t because I believe it to be more beneficial or 
superior to using the collaborative process prior to teaching a course. Instead, it is just the way 
opportunities have become available, the way it has been feasible for me to approach it.  
 
Having engaged in the CCRD process numerous times, I am comfortable working with students 
as partners and with relinquishing control over aspects of my teaching. This is in large part 
because I trust my student partners, whom I believe to be smart, capable, and insightful people 
who can improve teaching and learning in my courses. I started this process from the premise 
that faculty are only 50% of the equation in higher education and that working together will 
always make me a better teacher. As comfortable as I was working with students who had taken 
classes with me, I realized I needed to find a student-partner with whom to develop this LC. This 
was a slightly different approach than I had taken previously, where the students and I had a 
starting point in common. I reached out to Shay, explaining what I was inviting her to do, and 
asked if she would like to be my student-partner. Shay had been a student in one of my courses, 
but we had not worked together outside of the classroom, nor did we have much of a 
1
Ginsberg and Morrison: Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course (Re)Design
 
 
relationship. I asked Shay based on what I had seen in the course: she was a smart person, a hard 
worker, and seemed kind with a good sense of humor. I thought she might be someone I would 
enjoy working with.  
 
I (Shay, the student partner) received an email from Sarah at the beginning of Summer 2023 with 
the subject line “want to work on a project?” I was surprised to hear from Sarah as I had not kept 
in contact with her after being in her course the previous fall. From that course, I remember her 
ability to show that she was more than a professor; she was human, too. Sarah checked in with 
students at the beginning of classes, asked for feedback on class activities, and was able to put 
her students at ease during what were very stressful times for many. I was intrigued by her email, 
so we set up a Zoom call to discuss the plans for the LC.  
 
I excitedly agreed to be her student partner in this endeavor, but also had some reservations 
about the role I would play. Throughout my educational experience, I had limited interactions 
with faculty beyond the classroom. Even more, I knew next to nothing about SoTL, the CCRD 
process, or student-faculty partnerships themselves. Although I trusted my ability to be a good 
partner and figure things out along the way, I questioned how I would be able to meaningfully 
contribute with a limited knowledge base in these areas and how comfortable I would feel 
sharing my input and constructive feedback with a faculty member. If I hadn’t already shown 
these concerns in some way through my disconcerted facial expressions on the call, Sarah knew 
this about me. She sent me a number (in the range of 20-25) of articles and book chapters about 
SoTL, student-faculty partnerships, and implementation science to read over the next couple 
months, after I agreed to do this work. I was undoubtedly a bit overwhelmed at first, but as I took 
in the new information I was learning and jumped into the process, I became invested in 
cultivating my relationship with Sarah and creating the basis for what would be an effective and 
purposeful LC. 
 
 
The Partnership Process 
 
In the course of running our LC, we were not only going to be tasked with supporting the seven 
faculty-student pairs in the CCRD process. We were also giving them foundational materials to 
develop a small SoTL project that would capture data from their redesigned course. We don’t 
know if it occurred to us initially, but it became apparent at the beginning of the LC in the fall of 
2023 that we would not only need to work together in a partnership, but that this partnership 
should be a model for what student-faculty partnerships might look like for our LC participants, 
most of whom had never engaged in these types of collaborations before outside of research.  
 
Tasked with running and collecting data on the LC, as partners we needed to 1) develop a 
working relationship/partnership; 2) develop an LC; and 3) design our research study, all within 
about 2 months. This felt like a “where do we even begin??” process when we first met. We have 
now spent the past year together, having run the LC, collected the data (primarily in the form of 
focus groups and reflection papers) from participants, and analyzed the data. We can see that our 
process, in hindsight, very much mirrored what the participants described as their own 
partnership evolution and process. The lessons we have learned appear to have some universality 
2
Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 45 [2025]
https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss45/3
 
 
in our community of student-faculty partnerships, so we will share them with you here in the 
form of guidance to support your own work. 
 
1.  Determine that you and your partner have shared goals.  
As you begin working with your partner, it will take some time, discussion, and exploration of 
not only the process, but also what the expected outcome is. What do you both want to have 
happen in the process or to be the final outcome? One of our participants noted that “everybody 
is here for the same reason” and that helps keep the focus on the process and the outcome. 
 
2. Be aware of shifting roles and responsibilities. 
Some of our LC participants reflected on how, at the beginning of the partnership process, there 
were issues of control and being willing to “let go” (the faculty) and questioning if they were 
knowledgeable enough to contribute meaningfully (the students). We felt this in our partnership, 
as well. We recognize that at the onset of a partnership, the faculty partner will have more 
insights and expectations about processes and outcomes than the student partner likely does. 
There is an imbalance. As a colleague from a previous TaLT LC commented, students need to 
learn the language of teaching and learning first in order for us all to be able to move the 
collaborations forward. The faculty partner needs to support the student partner to bring them up 
to speed on the language of teaching and learning. In the beginning, the responsibility feels like it 
is mostly the faculty’s. Over time, our participants noted, and we would agree, there was a shift 
in who was responsible for the work. For us, following the initial learning curve, the work 
became more evenly distributed. Student partners in our LC came to realize very quickly that 
they are the “expert on being a student in that course” and they have significant contributions to 
make to the partnership and the process. In the end, the process might “shift quite a bit” from 
what you originally thought and you are “working really well together,” as one of our 
participants said. 
 
3. Learn to trust your partner.  
It is easier said than done, we recognize, but learning to trust your partner in the collaboration 
process is essential. For us, this meant taking some time to get to know each other on a personal 
level and developing the relationship beyond a rigid focus on our project. One of our faculty 
members described that in their partnership, they “got on great” and that the student-faculty 
relationship had “gotten very close.” While this might not be everyone’s style and it isn’t 
necessary to become close with your partner, for us it was helpful in building trust. It is 
important to realize that when engaging in a new partnership such as CCRD, everyone is putting 
themselves out there and taking a little bit of a risk. Learning that we can trust each other and 
safely explore ideas together, without fear of judgment or disrespect, can further support the 
quality of the work that comes out of the partnership.  
 
4. Cultivate flexibility. 
As the collaborative process unfolded over time, we realized that we needed to make changes, 
sometimes in real time, sometimes as we were planning ahead. Our participants noted the 
importance of flexibility in both the process and in the relationship. For one team, their original 
plan for a course failed on the eve of the semester beginning, through no fault of their own. They 
worked together to “make it happen” and found that, while it was “scary,” it was also a good 
outcome. They not only improved their course, but they learned how much they could rely on 
3
Ginsberg and Morrison: Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course (Re)Design
 
 
each other. We have had the same experience in our partnership. When one of us just couldn’t 
figure out how to do something (Sarah’s brain could not wrap itself around a problem), the other 
identified a way to move forward (thank goodness for Shay’s insights) and a new solution was 
identified.  
 
Challenges will come up in partnerships. They may be challenges presented by the task at hand, 
they may be challenges in the workload the partners are juggling, but when you have worked 
together to establish a trusting relationship, you can be flexible, lean into your partnership, and 
enjoy a good outcome. 
 
 
Conclusion 
 
As we continue to reflect on the evolution of our partnership and the experiences of the LC, we 
look forward to instilling some of the lessons learned into our future endeavors. During the Fall 
of 2024, we led another LC that focused solely on the CCRD process (no SoTL piece). We 
aimed to continue to model what a beneficial and rewarding partnership looks like for the new 
LC participants by helping them cultivate their own partnerships and reminding them to trust in 
one another, especially when challenges arise. I (Shay) have been surprised by some of the 
insights and support I have brought to my partnership with Sarah. It has positively altered how I 
view my own abilities and how I approach interactions with other faculty members. I now 
recognize that we all strive to create better teaching and learning opportunities, and that the best 
way to do that is through vulnerable and trusting collaboration. For me (Sarah), this process has 
really moved my student partnership work to a new level, from a single course redesign, to 
developing and implementing new work. I have felt a deepened appreciation for the opportunity 
to work collaboratively on what has been a large, multi-faceted project. I am sure that it would 
not have gone as well had I done it alone. As we have worked through the above points together 
in this past year, I have learned even more about student-faculty collaborations. We hope to 
ignite interest within other faculty members and students to form collaborative partnerships that 
will build upon a foundation of trust, shared goals, and flexibility. 
 
 
References 
 
Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., & Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, 
course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for 
Academic Developers, 16(2), 133-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2011.568690 
 
Bovill, C., Felten, P., & Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Engaging students as partners in learning and 
teaching (2): Practical guidance for academic staff and academic developers. Proceedings from 
ICED Conference 2014: Educational Development in a Changing World. Stockholm, Sweden. 
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271200592_Engaging_Students_as_Partners_in_Learni
ng_and_Teaching_2_Practical_guidance_for_academic_staff_and_academic_developers 
 
4
Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 45 [2025]
https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss45/3
 
 
Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. (2024). The elective classification 
for community engagement. https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/elective-
classifications/community-engagement/ 
 
Cook-Sather, A. (2008). “What you get is looking in a mirror, only better”: Inviting students to 
reflect (on) college teaching. Reflective Practice, 9(4), 473-483. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623940802431465 
 
Ginsberg, S. M. & Mead, L. H. (2021). Collaborative Course (Re)Design. In J. C. Friberg, C. F. 
Visconti, & S. M. Ginsberg (Eds.) Evidence-Based Education in the Classroom: Examples from 
Clinical Disciplines. Routledge. 
 
 
5
Ginsberg and Morrison: Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course (Re)Design


English

Shifting Roles and Processes in a Collaborative Course (Re)Design Learning Community

Persinger, Autumn

Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education 
Volume 1 
Issue 45 Teaching and Learning Together at 
Eastern Michigan University 
Article 12 
January 2025 
Faculty Support and Connections to Support a Unique College 
Experience 
Autumn Persinger 
Eastern Michigan University 
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe 
 Part of the Higher Education and Teaching Commons 
Let us know how access to this document benefits you. 
Recommended Citation 
Persinger, Autumn "Faculty Support and Connections to Support a Unique College Experience," Teaching 
and Learning Together in Higher Education: Iss. 45 (2025), https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/
iss45/12 
FACULTY SUPPORT AND CONNECTIONS TO SUPPORT A UNIQUE COLLEGE EXPERIENCE 
 
Autumn Persinger, Undergraduate Student, School of Social Work, Eastern Michigan University 
 
 
My presentation at Flipping the Script, “Insights and Perspectives on the Disabled Student Life,” 
focused on what life was like living on campus as someone who has a physical mobility 
disability. I covered that being disabled can impact classroom accessibility, accommodations, 
and advocacy. I provided certain definitions of the disability spectrum along with the Americans 
with Disabilities Act definition and more. Along with that, I shined a light on the Disability 
Resource Center (DRC) and their services. During the presentation, I made sure to incorporate 
personal experiences that I have encountered throughout campus. For example, I mentioned my 
experience of advocating for emergency evacuation plans for disabled individuals. I also 
provided pictures of daily obstacles I have encountered during my travel to class, like cars 
parked on the middle of the sidewalk. My goal of this presentation was to shine light on what is 
not talked about often enough while spreading awareness and insight on disability information. 
My hope was that faculty in attendance would learn from my experiences, and, in response, 
expand their knowledge around disabilities.  
 
Having faculty attend this presentation was truly meaningful, as they were willing to show their 
support for my college journey. Listening to first-hand stories from people with disabilities is 
valuable because it allows an avenue for disabled people’s voices to be heard and considered. 
The faculty who attended my presentation are better prepared to change their learning 
environment into one that is more accessible and inclusive. One of the attendees at my 
presentation was Chief Lige of Eastern Michigan University’s (EMU’s) Department of Public 
Safety, who has been a significant ally and advocate for me. This presentation has enhanced his 
awareness on campus-wide issues, and it was meaningful that he showed his support through this 
process. Having Chief Lige attend my presentation was meaningful because it showed care and 
support for my unique experience. His attendance stuck out to me particularly as I discussed 
ongoing advocacy for emergency evacuation plans for disabled individuals, a project on which 
we worked together.  
 
After my presentation, many other faculty approached me with their own personal experiences 
and those of previous students. This was especially meaningful to me because it showed that my 
story made an impact on faculty. Even though I was just one person who shared her experience, 
faculty can now utilize their newfound knowledge of what I encounter on a day-to-day basis to 
eliminate pre-existing prejudice, stereotypes, barriers, and stigmas on campus. Faculty can also 
connect and pass on this knowledge to help spread awareness as an ally.  
 
While having the honor to participate in the Flipping the Script conference, I have learned a few 
things along the way. First off, I learned that it is such a valuable resource having faculty listen 
to student voices. For example, if it wasn’t for faculty, then my story of living on campus as a 
disabled student would become lost. Since I have faculty support in my college experience, 
they’re willing to constantly learn to make the student environment as inclusive as possible while 
taking my experience into consideration. With that being said, I am honored to be considered 
when making adaptations to the educational environment.  
1
Persinger: Faculty Support and Connections to Support a Unique College Exper
 
Second, presenting has made a significant contribution to my perspective on spreading 
awareness and advocacy skills. As only a freshman in college at the time of my presentation, I 
was and still am learning on how to become the most effective disability advocate I can be. 
Finding the correct resources and information in order to advocate is essential. While prepping 
for the presentation content, I consulted the DRC to ensure that statistics were accurate in regards 
to the disabled population at Eastern Michigan University. Next, I made sure to provide the 
reality of experiences. While preparing my presentation, I included the reality of experiences and 
statistics, while also providing ways how faculty can help advocate and make change.  
 
In retrospect, I could have added more information on how to improve classroom accessibility 
and ways faculty can help advocate for students with disabilities, instead of focusing only on my 
experience. As a disability advocate, I have always been open to learning more about disability 
topics and, if I’m presenting at future conferences, I’m interested in including some other 
students’ perspectives as well. These additional perspectives could enrich future presentations 
and give more voice to experiences outside my own.   
 
Reflecting on this experience, and my future as an advocate, one challenge that I experienced in 
preparing and presenting for the Flipping the Script conference was the necessary time limit. I 
wanted to include an abundance of information that could not fit in the time constraint. With that 
being said, I had to ensure that I included the most important information with proper 
explanation while also including all my major talking points. Along with that, I also had to make 
sure I had a conversational tone while speaking without rushing. As I think about doing this 
again in the future, the experience of working within time constraints, and the need to be an 
engaging speaker and not rush my words, will be something valuable to take away from this 
experience.  
 
It was a privilege presenting at the Flipping the Script Conference and being able to share with 
faculty my unique college experience. Through this event, I was able to shine a light on what is 
not talked about often enough. With this, faculty can learn to help create a more inclusive 
learning environment for students by implementing adaptations. They can also share this 
newfound knowledge with others, which can open up another conversation for spreading 
disability awareness. While preparing the presentation, it has helped me grow as a disability 
advocate as well. Through what I learned by participating in the conference, I have gained skills 
that will continue to help me throughout my advocacy journey.  For anyone interested in learning 
more, my slides can be found here. I am also happy to speak more with faculty and interested 
others if people wish. The best way to reach me is by email apersing@emich.edu.  
 
2
Teaching and Learning Together in Higher Education, 45 [2025]
https://repository.brynmawr.edu/tlthe/vol1/iss45/12


Faculty Support and Connections to Support a Unique College Experience

Ellis, Cecilia

Lees, Callie

Momo Mochi, Mirta

Maskalane, Gunita

Beyond Tangible Outcomes: The Impact of Staff-Student Partnerships in Conflict Management Training

Aiyenitaju, Opeoluwa

Mosaku, Tunde

AI Skills Development through Industry-Academia Co-creation

Krolikowska, Ewa

Zigomo, Pamela

Hamblin, Jenny

Blomfield, Joe

Gater-Moray, Lauren

Co-creation through Pushing Boundaries: Reflections on Working with BA Events Management Students as Partners on a Final Year Module

Shen, Qinna

Creative Geography and Volcanic Mountains: Arnold Fanck’s \u3ci\u3eDie Tochter Des Samurai\u3c/i\u3e (1937) as Mountain Film

Kwa, Shiamin

Bryn Mawr College 
Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College 
East Asian Languages and Cultures Faculty 
Research and Scholarship East Asian Languages and Cultures 
2025 
Review of Typical Girls: The Rhetoric of Womanhood in Comic 
Strips, by Susan E. Kirtley 
Shiamin Kwa 
Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.brynmawr.edu/eastasian_pubs 
Let us know how access to this document benefits you. 
This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. 
https://repository.brynmawr.edu/eastasian_pubs/15 
For more information, please contact repository@brynmawr.edu. 
Anglia 143/1 (2025) 
Red. Bern 
 
 
*Corresponding author: Shiamin Kwa, Bryn Mawr College 
E-Mail: skwa@brynmawr.edu 
 
Susan E. Kirtley. 2021. Typical Girls: The Rhetoric of Womanhood in Comic Strips. Columbus, 
OH: Ohio State University Press, 268 pp., 59 illustrations, $134.95. 
 
Reviewed by Shiamin Kwa, Bryn Mawr College 
E-Mail: skwa@brynmawr.edu 
 
“What can be gleaned from reading newspaper comic strips created by women from the 1970s, 
1980s and 1990s?” (5). This is a question that Susan Kirtley seeks to answer over the course of 
seven chapters. The chapters have this in common: each chapter focuses on an individual working 
after 1975, each one a woman who writes about, and draws, women in a serialized comic. Each of 
these artists, as Kirtley shows, calls into question the possibility of codifying the “typical girls” that 
give the book its title. As Kirtley explains in her introduction, the book is meant to contribute to a 
feminist history that “is messy and complicated,” and her book seeks to present a survey of 
intersecting histories: comics, culture, and the role of the two in commenting on women’s rights in 
popular culture (19). Kirtley acknowledges the teleological vanguardist history of feminism used 
in other works focused on women in comics, seeking to collate artists within certain “waves” of 
feminism. This book, on the other hand, adopts an intersectional feminism “which recognizes the 
diverse standpoints of individual women” (19). 
The chapters, therefore, can be read independently of each other, especially given Kirtley’s 
stated approach based on methodology that blends archival research, close readings, and a variety 
of critical apparatuses. In the introduction, Kirtley states that she draws from Kenneth Burke’s 
articulation of “frames” in his 1937 book Attitudes Towards History. Her interest is in his use of 
the term “comic frame,” which, apart from allowing for the possibility of doublings in the subject 
matter (comics, naturally, but also the formal use of “frames” in the construction of many graphic 
narratives) functions in Burke’s program as a way to suggest possibilities for change. As Kirtley 
writes:  
 
Burke’s understanding of the comic ‘frame of reference’ provides an especially useful tool for better 
understanding the potential of comic strips to reflect the culture of the time and to argue for a better 
future…I assert that comic strips not only document the culture that creates them, but can inspire 
readers to turn their gaze from the strips onto their own lives, observing themselves and acting 
accordingly, and to do so in an optimistic and ‘charitable’ way, for ‘the comic frame of acceptance 
but carries to completion the translative act’ […] the poet, or in this case, comics creator, composes 
art from the raw matter of human connections and invites readers as critics to recognize truths and 
transform these insights into actions. Comic strips, with their optimism and their capacity for delight, 
offer readers a way of seeing the world that critiques in the spirit of change, rather than resignation. 
(6)  
 
Defining her critical work, then, as a rhetorical analysis of this group of artists, Kirtley makes a 
case for investigating the reach and effect of these individual series on their own terms rather than 
as part of a monolithic movement. The subjects of the first two chapters, Cathy Guisewite’s Cathy 
(Chapter One) and Lynn Johnston’s For Better or For Worse (Chapter Two), were two long-
running comics series created by white, cis-gendered women from North America that were widely 
syndicated and so well known that I, living on the other side of the world in Malaysia, shared in 
the consumption of those comic strips in the newspaper, like Kirtley evocatively describes herself 
doing in her own (presumably) North American girlhood home. Each of these chapters provides 
some historical background of the creators of these comics and focuses on certain thematic 
continuities in each, giving the researcher a long view of the development of a single character 
over the years and even decades. Both Guisewite’s Cathy and Johnston’s Elly provided a view of 
the trials and tribulations of a woman in the decades of a burgeoning feminism that asked questions 
about (white, middle-class, cis-gendered) women and the workplace, dating, family, marriage, and 
so on through the perspective of the title character.  
The question of audience, then, especially in the context of a book that makes the mutually 
constructing rhetorical relationship between reader and text a central focus, is settled by an equal 
attention to representing the diversity of serialized comics by women about women during the 
decades following the mid 1970s. Therefore, the audience is not strictly consistent across the 
chapters in Typical Girls. The audiences for the comics described in these first two chapters are 
more accommodating to a readerly “we” of contemporaries than the audiences of later chapters. 
Kirtley works to maintain a consistency across the chapters through other means, by providing the 
formal consistency of offering introductory materials that introduce a biography of each creator, 
highlights from their career, and contextualization, often in the creator’s own voice from published 
or personal interviews. 
Chapter Three discusses Lynda Barry’s Girls and Boys. Kirtley, an expert on Barry (her 
2012 book Lynda Barry: Girlhood through the Looking Glass, published by University of 
Mississippi Press, was awarded an Eisner Award in 2013), focuses on Barry’s early comics, as 
distinct from the later works for which Barry has earned greater renown. As Kirtley argues, by 
2016 when Barry was inducted into the “Will Eisner Hall of Fame,” Barry’s “work had progressed 
and changed greatly from these early endeavors. While hints of her interest in representing 
childhood, and particularly the experiences of girls, were evident in these nascent projects, her 
world expanded as she continued to produce works in other genres […] [that examined] race, class, 
gender, and passing, as well as sexual assault, even occasionally making a foray into politics” (135). 
Kirtley reads Barry’s early comics, however, as constituting “a punk community marked by the 
destruction of dominant narratives as well as a commitment to DIY authenticity” (134).  
Subsequent chapters continue Kirtley’s commitment to honoring the intersectional 
feminism that she seeks to analyze in her book. As she notes in the introductory remarks to Chapter 
4, Nicole Hollander’s Sylvia was not a natural subject to run from 1982 to 2012 in “many 
mainstream newspapers positioned next to the placid charm of Hi and Lois and Family Circus” 
(136). Kirtley posits that Sylvia’s appeal to mainstream audiences was its use of satire, and she 
argues that it is Hollander’s use of “Menippean satire” that “help[s] illuminate Sylvia’s 
contributions to the historical dialogue surrounding feminism as understood in popular culture” 
(137). In Chapter 5, Kirtley turns the focus to Alison Bechdel’s decades-running series Dykes to 
Watch Out For, applying a similar lens to the relationship between creator and audience, which 
changed with the increased fame of the creator that inspired a new attention to all of their work, as 
with Lynda Barry in Chapter 3. In the case of Bechdel, Kirtley concludes that the series serves as 
an archive of a counternarrative to a monolithic lesbian history but rather one that allows for a more 
flexible and diverse history. Chapter 6 focuses on Barbara Brandon-Croft’s Where I’m Coming 
From and the rather exceptional burden of vanguardism. As Kirtley notes, Brandon-Croft, who 
also had the distinction of being part of a father-daughter pair of successful published cartoonists, 
was induced to comment on this phenomenon: “We made our distinction as black cartoonists in 
the mainstream press independently – via different syndicates and creating separate comic strips. 
That’s pretty cool when you think about it” (192).  
Kirtley’s book thus ends on a note similar to where it starts, pointing out the ways that 
comics creators use rhetorical strategies to respond to the world around them and its expectations 
of them. In Brandon-Croft’s case it was “the exigent situation of a lack of Black female voices in 
popular culture at large and newspaper comic strips in particular” (196). And, playing once again 
on the connotations of “comic,” Kirtley praises Brandon-Croft’s use of style and, especially, wit to 
recalibrate the situation by asserting her place not only with a nationally syndicated comic strip, 
but by having her comics appear on the editorial pages (210), thus positioning herself as a political 
commentator engaged in public conversation. In her final Chapter 7, Kirtley returns again to the 
girl in 1984 eagerly waiting for the newspaper, often waking up the earliest to get the paper before 
everyone else in the family. Here, Kirtley cleverly weaves herself into her book’s argument, 
showing how the newspapers were a “constant reassuring presence in my life, and the comics in 
particular undoubtedly shaped my perceptions of self and society” (212). Pointing to both the 
universals and the particulars, as she closes out her book with a reading of Stone Soup, she ruefully 
comments on the still relative paucity of comics created by women about women in the forty 
intervening years. Yet, in her close readings of the comics across these pages, she finds that her 
criticism of their “resistan[ce] to change, reflecting a simulacrum of a conservative, homogeneous 
society that has never truly existed,” is still relevant today (234). Perhaps these thoughtful and 
careful readings will add their own rhetorical thrust to the stories she carefully read from the 
rustling newspaper pages many years ago, and encountered again in archival microfiche or 
computer screen in the twenty-first century, pushing more readers further into the world to ask 
what change they can advance.  


Review of \u3ci\u3eTypical Girls: The Rhetoric of Womanhood in Comic Strips\u3c/i\u3e, by Susan E. Kirtley

Bryn Mawr College

Not a member yet