[Reading-hall-of-fame] Re: FW: Dr. Roger Farr Passing

Sat Aug 3 17:32:02 BST 2019

Thanks Dave and Tim. During my years in the field, Roger was truly a mentor
of mine—probably without ever knowing it.  I value to this day the example
he set whenever we interacted with one another!  Thank you Roger🙏

On Saturday, August 3, 2019, Rasinski, Tim <trasinsk at kent.edu> wrote:

> David - Love your tribute to Roger Farr.    It reminds me that some of the
> most important work we do, in addition to our own scholarly pursuits, is to
> mentor others in our field.
>
> I think all us owe a debt of  gratitude to those who have taken the time
> to mentor us.
>
> Timothy Rasinski, PhD
> Kent State University
> trasinsk at kent.edu
> 330-672-0649
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk [
> reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk] on behalf of P
> Pearson [ppearson at berkeley.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 11:52 PM
> To: Douglas Ray Reutzel
> Cc: reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk; jmconner at iu.edu
> Subject: [Reading-hall-of-fame] Re: FW: Dr. Roger Farr Passing
>
> All week, I have been thinking about what I could say to mark the passing
> of Roger Farr, a long time friend, colleague, and sparring partner when it
> came to matters of assessment.  And then I remembered something I had
> written about Roger and his RRQ co-editor, Sam Weintraub, when I was a new
> assistant professor at Minnesota.  It was in a 2013 issue of the Journal of
> Education when it was so ably edited by our RHF colleague, Lee Indrisano.
>
> Lee asked me and one of my doctoral advisees, Kate Frankel, to write a
> commentary about collaborative research for JE.  I agreed, as did Kate.  In
> that journal appears my 1974 RRQ dissertation article (all about syntactic
> and semantic complexity) and a piece by Kate. Those two articles are
> accompanied by s commentary with 3 stories—my story, Kate’s story, and our
> story.  My story is about how that 1974-75 piece came into being, and the
> major role that Roger and Sam played in seeing it through to publication. I
> think it is the best tribute I could pay to Roger and his legacy to the
> field. Here is the critical segment:
>
> “The article reprinted here was published in Reading Research Quarterly in
> the journal’s 1974–75 publication year. It was based on my dissertation,
> which was completed in 1969. By my calculations, that is a five-year gap
> between completion and publication. Why such long time lag? Was I just too
> lazy or too busy with new courses and the other duties of an assistant
> professor to pursue publication? Not really! While I might have been busy,
> I surely wasn’t lazy when it came to trying to get the work published. In
> early 1970, I submitted it to the Journal of Educational Psychology,
> received a revise and resubmit recommendation; revised, resubmitted, and
> was rejected. That nearly two-year ordeal brought me to early 1972.
>
> After four months of wallowing in dejection and self-doubt, I summoned up
> the grit needed to revamp it and send it off to RRQ. Predictably, I
> received another revise and resubmit; revised, resubmitted, and yet another
> revise and resubmit. That cycle of revising and resubmitting, all the while
> in close interaction with the editors, Roger Farr and Sam Weintraub, went
> on for another 18 months until they were satisfied that the manuscript was
> not only technically sound but rhetorically effective. Even though Roger
> and Sam put me through the revision wringer, I am forever grateful for
> their focused and helpful feedback and their undying patience with a
> struggling young researcher. They could have easily “written me off ” after
> the first round of reviews (reviewers wanted a lot of changes!), but they
> didn’t. They stayed with me through what seemed like an endless stream of
> revisions. But in the end, there emerged a product in which both the author
> and the editors could take a modicum of pride.
>
> I am both fond and proud of this article, but for different reasons.
>
> Fond of it because it embodies what I aspire to do in reporting
> research—establish a strong relationship between theory and research. I
> have always thought that the most important role for research was to
> provide an empirical database to evaluate which among two or more competing
> theories of a mental, social, or pedagogical process provides the best
> account of the evidence available. An index of the article’s impact is that
> Robert Ruddell and his various co-editors of Theoretical Models and
> Processes of Reading selected it to appear in multiple editions of their
> influential volume. Bob once told me that it was precisely the theory
> evaluation focus of the article that led to his decision. By the way, when
> you read this 39-year-old piece, think about it in light of all the
> emphasis we are placing on text complexity these days.
>
> Proud of it because of the process that led to its publication. Even the
> rejections, the revisions, the resubmits, and the numerous requests by the
> editors to fine-tune the piece in its final stages were important to the
> process—for they taught me three important lessons. First, stamina,
> endurance, and belief in oneself are the pathway to scholarly success.
> Second, you can always use a little help from your friends—and your
> editors. I would never have published the piece without Roger and Sam’s
> support and faith in me as an emerging scholar. Third—and this follows from
> the second— you can learn a lot more about your own writing once you learn
> how to examine it from the perspective of those who read it, even criticize
> it. So now, whenever I receive a negative review (and I still get them!), I
> allow myself a day to wallow in self-pity and accuse the reviewers of
> ignorance or mean-spiritedness. Then I shift gears and ask, “If I had been
> sitting where they were sitting and looking at this manuscript through
> their lens, might I have reached the same conclusion?” And if the answer to
> that question is, “Yes,” or even “Maybe,” then I have to ask myself an even
> more important question, “What do I have to learn from this review— and how
> can I use the feedback to make this an even better manuscript?” It might be
> the scholarly equivalent of “turning the other cheek” and learning from
> one’s missteps. Those three lessons have served me well. I hope they can be
> of help to others!“
> Thanks you, Roger!!!!
> From:Frankel, K. K., & Pearson, P. D. (2013). Reflections on becoming a
> researcher.  Journal of Education, 193(1), 31-34. Reprinted without
> permission!
>
> ps:  Ken Goodman had to put up with my rantings and ravings about picky
> editors and getting things into print during the 4 year period of
> rejections from 1970-74.  I often leaned on him (accosted him is more like
> it--at IRA) to provide moral support for my sagging ego and sense of
> self-worth.  Thanks, Ken.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 9:50 AM Douglas Ray Reutzel <Ray.Reutzel at uwyo.edu
> <mailto:Ray.Reutzel at uwyo.edu>> wrote:
>
>
> From: Douglass Reutzel <ray.reutzel at uwyo.edu<mailto:ray.reutzel at uwyo.edu>>
> Date: Friday, July 26, 2019 at 10:48 AM
> To: "reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>" <
> reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> reading-hall-of-fame-bounces at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>>
> Subject: Dr. Roger Farr Passing
>
> Dear Reading Hall of Fame Colleagues:
>
> Probably all of us remember the multitude of contributions that Dr. Roger
> Farr made to literacy. I am sad to convey to you that he passed away.  I
> received the following email from Jennifer Conner:
>
> Dear Dr. Reutzel,
>
> As the president of the Reading Hall of Fame, I wanted to let you know
> that Roger Farr, who was inducted in 1986, passed away on Wednesday of this
> week. He had a stroke about two months ago, but recovered fairly well from
> it. A few weeks ago, though, he developed a blood infection, and his health
> deteriorated quickly. He is survived by his wife, Joyce. Roger was a dear
> friend, colleague, and mentor of mine.
>
> Thanks,
> Jenny
>
>
> --
> Jennifer Conner, Ph.D.
> Division Head, Division of Education
> Associate Professor of Literacy, Culture, and Language Education
> Indiana University-Purdue University of Columbus (IUPUC)
> 4601 Central Ave.
> Columbus, Indiana 47203
> 812.348.7278
> jmconner at iu.edu<mailto:jmconner at iu.edu>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
> attachment.
>
> Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
> necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored
> where permitted by law.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Reading-hall-of-fame mailing list
> Reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk<mailto:
> Reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk>
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/reading-hall-of-fame
>
>
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> P. David Pearson
> Evelyn Lois Corey Emeritus Professor of Instructional Science
> and Professor of the Graduate School
> Graduate School of Education
> 4220 Berkeley Way West #1670
> University of California, Berkeley
> Berkeley CA 94720-1670
> GSE Office: 510 543 6508
> email:  ppearson at berkeley.edu<mailto:ppearson at berkeley.edu>
> other e-mail:  pdavidpearsondean at gmail.com<mailto:
> pdavidpearsondean at gmail.com>
> website for presentations:  www.scienceandliteracy.org<htt
> p://www.scienceandliteracy.org>
> website for publications:  www.pdavidpearson.org<http://
> www.pdavidpearson.org>
> *******************
> Home:  851 Euclid Ave
> Berkeley, CA  94708 -1305
> iPhone:  510 543 6508
> ****************************************
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
> attachment.
>
> Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
> necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored
> where permitted by law.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Reading-hall-of-fame mailing list
> Reading-hall-of-fame at lists.nottingham.ac.uk
> http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/reading-hall-of-fame
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and
> attachment.
>
> Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not
> necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored
> where permitted by law.
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/private/reading-hall-of-fame/attachments/20190803/796ee8e1/attachment-0001.html>