- Write Ups
- Further Discussion
- Fadde and Sullivan Email (Part One)
- Fadde and Sullivan Email (Part Two)
- Professional Writing Review Essay
- Readings for Next Week’s Write Up
Write Ups
Resources for Further Discussion
Miller questions:
- What is positivism? Why is it a problem for technical writing? Why does positivism lead us to devalue the traditional humanities course?
- What does Miller identify as the most problematic dimension of a non-rhetorical approach to scientific communication?
- Miller identifies 4 problems for technical writing pedagogy that stem from the positivist tradition. How do we avoid them?
- How does Miller–writing in 1979–describe the epistemology that is replacing positivism?
- What does it mean to teach technical writing from a communalist perspective? Why might some students reject a communalist approach to teaching writing?
- How can we describe the humanistic value of a technical writing course? What do we say in the faculty meeting? Or the job interview??
Fadde and Sullivan Notes:
Case studies are a common pedagogical tool not only in professional writing, but in business and communication programs as well. Attempt to highlight all of the contextual nuances and complications real folks navigate in professional settings. (See for instance Harvard Business Publishing).
I indicated last week that while the case focuses on international communication (which, obviously, adds extra layers of complication), it also helps us perceive some of the general difficulties that circulate through just about any professional writing (rhetorical) situation: how we navigate different value systems, power hierarchies, expectations, ambiguities, personalities, etc.
Yu (2012): How can we identify our own underlying cultural assumptions (think Corder–what can make us aware of our own narrative).
One thing I found particularly fascinating was Hofstede’s 6 Dimensional model of national culture. What is something on these maps that surprises you?
Assignment:
We are going to take 20 minutes and draft an email to Kevin Smith. We will CC this email to every member of the Cumberland and Bangalore team, and we will BCC Dr. Kumar into this email. Our email should make 2-3 recommendations. (In this way I am combining the Recommendation Report and Internal Memo assignments on page 152).
Below I have copied most of the vital information from the report into easier to access/scan lists.
- Before we write our email, let’s run through Fadde and Sullivan’s reading questions.
- Before we write our email, we should watch Erin Meyer on Low vs High Context Societies (American = low context, India = high context)(anticipation of sub-text)
- Before writing our email, we should consult this Commisco Global India Guide. [communication style and business communication]
Fadde and Sullivan Email Activity
A link to the resource document.
Professional Writing Review Essay
Our first month’s foray into Professional Writing scholarship will culminate with an analytical / bibliographic review essay. You will select a keyword/topic and trace how that topic has appeared across a range of journals over the past 4 years (so 2018-2021). I am hoping your keyword/idea is narrow enough to focus on 6-8 interrelated articles.
My expectation is that many of you are new to PWTC as an academic discipline, and likely have limited familiarity with the range of scholarship and research published. This project is meant to both give you a sense of that range and help you develop some expertise that might help you either in our community engagement project or in your own scholarly/professional trajectory.
Here’s the list of the journals with which we will work:
- Technical Communication Quarterly
- Journal of Business and Technical Communication
- Business and Professional Communication Quarterly (formerly Business Communication Quarterly)
- Technical Communication
- Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
- Written Communication
- IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Your essay will work to create an ontology that helps organize and synthesize contemporary work.
So, what is a scholarly review essay? It is a kind of review essay–similar to a book review–that synthesizes several recent/important perspectives on an emerging disciplinary trend. Essentially, they offer scholars to stay abreast of developments in related fields without having to read dozens of articles. Generally a review essay is organized by topic not by source, and is the 2500-3500 word range (so slightly less than 1/2 of an academic article).
- Let’s look at the review section of Kairos
- ToC for an issue of Journal of Advanced Composition
- Taylor & Francis Author Services
Think of a review essay as a micro-lit review, except for folks who aren’t necessarily experts in the topic.
For next week: I’d like you to look through the journals above and identify an article you want to read. Ideally, this will be an article written in the last calendar year. Skim the article, taking note of the studies that lie central to its methods and argument. Then use that article–especially its keywords and bibliography–to compile a list of 10 other articles on the subject (book chapters in edited collections are also acceptable; given our time constraints, I would push you away from whole books). Don’t worry–you won’t necessarily read all ten, but I’d like you to have 10 on the list.
Final Due Date for this review essay: February 5th (I will respond to them on the morning of the 6th).
Readings for Next Week: Read any three of the following four articles. Write your Write Ups.
- Clegg et al. 2021. Programmatic outcomes in undergraduate technical and professional communication programs
- Brumberger and Lauer. 2015. The evolution of technical communication: An analysis of industry job postings
- Lauer and Brumberger. 2019. Redefining writing for the responsive workplace
- Spartz and Weber. 2015. Writing entrepreneurs: A survey of attitudes, habits, skills, and genres
