Journal Entry 7

As with most of the readings assigned in this text, technical communicators have been trying to find a niche for themselves in communication, rhetoric, even science. Viewing the technical communicator as author is another stepping stone for technical writers to be recognized as a discipline within and of itself. Instead of simply being the stand-in for a designer, engineer, or organization, the technical communicator work should possess an autonomy all of its own. “The evidence of . . . hard work is a document that works—without the writer’s bring there to explain.” This is where the technical communicator as author would be applicable, as whatever piece of work he or she does must be able to convey the intended message. I believe at time ethics can be circumstantial. Situation, time, experience, worldview, pressures—all these influence an “ethical” decision. The situation is no different for technical communicators

Journal Entry 6

“The Politics of the Interface” has some very interesting points that have never occurred to me before. I have never thought of a computer interface as marginalizing races, sexes, and cultures. I took it for granted that anyone who was educated enough would know and understand the importance of acquiring the knowledge to use a computer. Selfe & Selfe pointed out that in schools with large minority enrollments, using computers in the classrooms are for basic instruction of “drill-and-practice” software. In contrast, in majority schools, the computer is used to achieve higher order skills and develop greater cognitive skills.
Now I would argue that this so because most minority students are from a lower socio-economic background, and are thus not as exposed to technology as the more middle-class students. Many minorities will not send their children to schools with a high minority enrollment because they believe that their children may not get the best academic experience. So, the minority-based schools will continuously be seen as a lower-level realm, and the students at that level will continuously suffer. To fix the problem with how computers are used in the different learning environments goes beyond the English teacher, and into society’s psychological and social milieu.
Selfe & Selfe go further in their arguments by stating the computer interface is a representation of the reality of the white, male, middle and upper class user. “The objects represented within this world are [familiar to the inhabitants] of that corporate culture: manila folders, files, documents, telephones, fax machines, clocks and watches, and desk calendars.” (433) While I can agree with this observation, I have to add that most people who would need a computer and its various functions are people who are in white-collar jobs. Small farmers, carpenters, maids are not necessarily in need of a computer interface to organize their lives. I cannot think of specific options that would ideal for those occupations. However, documents and files can be general store houses for a smorgasbord of information.
Even having English as a default language seems logical, as most business transactions, communication, even schools utilize English as the main language. It is seen as the universal language of choice; not because it’s better than other languages, but because it has been established as a language of the majority. To counteract that will be to reverse centuries of colonization and British monarchy rule; it seems rather impossible.
In today’s classroom using technology is a necessity. Being a critic or a user of technology is a neither here nor there, as teachers are educating students to be a part of the workforce that utilizes these interfaces. Employers are not sensitive to many things, such as cultural barriers, they only want the job to be done. So are we educating students to be a perfect representation of their culture, sex, and race— or are we educating students to function in a world that demands more than it sees?
In “Ideology and the Map” the authors discuss how maps are designed based on political, religious, and cultural point-of-views. Honestly, most of the content is quite lost on me, but from what I have gathered, the authors want designers to use a more “open-minded” vision in creating maps or any visual chart. Similar to “The Politics of Interface,” the idea of reaching everybody where they are, instead of pushing everybody to a specific point-of-view is the main argument I understand from this reading.
The reading gives various examples of the different types of maps designed by the different governmental bodies, as a means of segregating, repressing, or alienating a country or culture because it is viewed as a “nondominant interest.” I believe that these are very ideological concepts that the world ought to embrace, but as I alluded to earlier, the world is not a very ideological place.

Journal entry 5

It is hard for me separate academic writing from nonacademic writing. Instead, the divide is more rooted in formal writing versus informal writing. Nonacademic writing, I assume can be broken down in formal and informal. However, I am quite ignorant of which is which.

Within the workplace, social and organizational contexts should influence writing, as I believe that is the identifying factor based on the position an individual holds in the organization. I wouldn’t expect a paralegal in a law firm, without his/her supervisor’s consent, to write a letter to a major client detailing elements of the client’s case. I, however, expect the paralegal to write memos to be distributed within the office.

I guess no organization has ever been built without writing as the glue holding all parts of the organization together. Writing makes decisions, plans, aspirations, demands more real. It is hard to imagine any organization that doesn’t have writing as a central communicative tool in the running of its business. And similar to the decision making/management within Microware, Inc, most, if not all companies require collaborative efforts to keep the production ball rolling. Also, similar to group projects, the work is divided up based on expertise or preference, and then polished through consensus. The sharing and critiquing of ideas can only give positive results to any collaborative work.

In the article, writing for publication, most of the tips that the author gives are rudimentary, and similar to other content-specific journal articles. However, addressing the specific needs within technical communication gives a prospective writer a good place to start researching information for an article.

I guess this article is geared towards creating a definition for technical communications. If the areas suggested are sufficiently researched and written on, it will provide more credibility to the field of technical communications.

Journal Entry Feb. 4

How can there be a report for/about decision making? Would a writer be reporting on the decision process or the decision itself? Following the IMRD (introduction, methods, results, and discussion) structure seems to be the closest idea to a decision making report I can think of. What sounds logical to me, is in order to make the report for decision making specific to the organization’s need, categories can be added to the scientific report structure (IMRD) as the writer sees necessary. For example, when Rude discusses “criteria” (in terms of “cost, time, or materials”) being a context in which decision making takes place, then it can be added to the IMRD structure.

It seems to me Rude is making a big deal out of a small thing. Even though report writing is essential in all organizations, the reasons, form, and context of the report depend on the work environment, and the internal mechanics of the organization. She is stating that there is no set rule for report writing, yet she tries through reasoning to create a general understanding of something that I believe is relative. She reasons as if writing the report is the decision making/ problem solving process itself. Wouldn’t the decisions be made, discussed, and then the report would reflect these actions, or is it the other way around?
She defines a practical problem as “[requiring] choice about action (even if the action is to continue with the present way of doing things), and solutions to these problems are explored in proposals and reports for decision making.” I am under the impression that any decision that is being made, is first discussed, mulled over, and then written in a report, whether a conclusion is arrived at or not. But through Rudy’s definition and the discussion on this topic in the chapter, it sounds as if the writing process is the decision making process. I can understand with a proposal, where the writing process is the action that gets the task done, but I guess I had another idea of what a report is supposed to be.

I need a clear definition of each: What is a report and what is a proposal? What is the difference between the two? Does this quote from Rudy answer my question: “The genre of the report for decision making as represented in technical and professional writing textbooks embodies the strategies of empirical and theoretical inquiries rather than the problem and action that the report should serve.” (88)
The idea of collaboration in the workplace and in the classroom is a progressive one, especially in the writing process. I find this chapter particularly interesting because I plan to do my instructions assignment on “How to be successful in group assignments.” One point that was made that I found interesting was that their interviewees “found conflict to be quite beneficial to the quality of [the] group’s final product.” Most students hate group work because of the fear of inequality in the quality of the work, disagreements, and an inadequate communication process. The authors of this chapter state that “when handled positively, they can be catalysts for creativity.” This thought gives me a healthy dosage of positive energy, to move forward in my assignment. It is possible for students and/or employees to work collaboratively throughout a project and be successful in the end, irrespective of the fears stated above.
Collaboration: a situation in which decisions are made by consensus. I believe this consensus happens when there is confidence in each group member’s abilities. If there is doubt, some individuals may consider taking on all the responsibility of getting the job done, to not be reprimanded in one way or another. The responders in the interviews done, all experienced conflicts and worked through them in various ways. These problem-solving strategies are things I can discuss in my instructions assignment.

“The Composing Processes of an Engineer” seems similar to the process that any writer will go though in order to achieve a desired end. For the engineer, the differences are the time he has to compose his written pieces; the expectations of his audience; the nonexistent threat of plagiarism; and the laziness of his audience. Selzer mentions that technical writing teachers need to “examine students’ plans, outlines, rough drafts, and revisions.” These are all a part of the writing process. Does it then mean that technical writing teachers do not see technical writing as writing, or that technical writing requires the writing process?

This question has been on my mind for a while:
Who writes the blurbs for movies and television shows that appear when you choose a channel, or when you press information on a Comcast remote? I’m not sure if this feature is also on Direct TV or Satellite.
Also, who writes the blurbs in books? Do they have blurb writers?

Journal Entry for Jan.28

Business communication is a topic I don’t know much about. However, the importance of context when it comes to writing is a situation all writers have some knowledge about. Context is determined by many things- lifestyle, experience, knowledge, audience, and so on. Based on what Driskill is saying, in business writing, it is more about the existing writing situation or context, and the most appropriate course of action.
Page 59 talks about external sources of meaning and internal sources of meaning. It talks about the internal sources being more influential on the writers than external sources, as internal sources come directly from the goal or mission statement of the company. These companies usually know what works for them and what doesn’t. External sources, on the other hand, are relative. They can be interpreted and used as the writer sees fit. From a writer’s and a student’s point of view, writing assignments for a course have a similar function, as external sources in the mutual funds industry. The internal sources and what the teacher wants or instructs are synonymous. These internal sources “affect virtually every document” or piece of assignment that is written. In order to get an “A-paper reaction” from my teacher, I must follow his explicit instructions.
Internal and external sources, placed in context, will affect writers in companies, classrooms, even newspapers. So, it seems more prudent to have a mix of the two.

Quotes I found interesting:

“Communication in organizational contexts is essential to the vitality, and even to the survival, of organizations and society in a technical era.”

“Individuals are sources of meaning and their preferences can affect writing practices.”

“The “subject” or “topic” is not context-free, but situated, involved in what the members of the organization must know, feel, or believe in order to accomplish their goals.”

The article “Making a Guide with Style” is quite relevant for me, as I have to utilize various writing styles for the different articles I write. Working at the newspaper, we are instructed to use AP style, so within that organization, it would be ‘web site.’
In academic writing, I find it easier to use APA style, as it seems more organized than MLA, and it also makes my writing flow better. When writing for magazines, such as Go Riverwalk, they usually use Chicago style in their writing. For each organization, there is a required format.
CTC creating its own manual or style guide seems logical to me because of the many formatting styles out there; employees will probably get overwhelmed or constantly be asking questions, such as ‘is it web site, Website or website.’
To have a set structure or model for employees to follow in an organization sets the standards for those employees, which benefits the organization, in creating optimal quality work, and takes some of the stress off the writers.

Journal Entry for Jan. 21

For a writer, the audience ought to the focal point of his/her thinking process, as the whole point of writing an article or book is for someone to read it. If the writer is simply writing to release energy or put thoughts on paper, then obviously an audience will not be important. “In Audience Involved: Toward a Participatory Model of Writing,” Johnson mentions audience being seen as “addressed” or “invoked,” within the writing process.

The audience gets lost in the writing process at times, as today the audience is so diverse that it is virtually impossible to address the needs of every reader. Therefore, many readers seek alternative or supplemental reference or knowledge sources, other than reading books. To remedy this issue, Johnson introduces a concept that “[discusses] acts of collaboration that involve the audience directly in the discourse production process- what [he] terms audience involved.” It seems rather idealistic that Johnson would encourage the users of written materials to be a part of the writing/production process. Most people don’t care how something gets done; all they are truly interested in is the end product, and the effectiveness of it. If it is in a classroom setting, then the rules are very different, as it will be a learning process for all the parties involved. In the work environment, if the users are themselves overwhelmed with their responsibilities, they might think the technical writer inefficient if he/she asks for their participation. Johnson even mentions the view that some personnel have of technical writers that they “merely “write up”the knowledge of designers and developers.” I will assume that many developers tell the technical writer what it is they are looking for re: the documentation process and that it isn’t solely on the technical writer. So will the technical writer then have to decide whose needs are more important, the developers or the audience? I believe sometimes that the two expectations contradict, so whose side should the technical writer take?

It becomes clearer to me why the field of technical communication is continuously evolving. Audiences at time get lost in the usability of a text, which will be seen as the fault of the technical writer. To broaden the scope of the technical writer and place of technology, in terms of creating websites, maps, brochures, digital versions of written materials create a place for more audience members than only words on paper can.

In “Relocating the Value of Work: Technical Communication in a Post-Industrial Age” Johnson-Eilola discusses the place of technical communication in a post-industrial age; today’s world. She mentions what the overview of technical communication ought to be in this era, where information is much more in demand and valuable than the products. She states that it would be better to “rearticulate technical communication as a post-industrial discipline, with documentation blurring into other areas…” The real value of technical communication is seen when users can adequately follow the technical support instructions of the technical writer and get tasks done. (I’m unsure of whether to say “technical writer” or “technical communicator.” Is there a difference between the two?) However, Johnson-Eilola discusses how corporations see technical communicators as secondary support and not primary support. The primary support team is kept up to date with the production progress and changes to be better equipped to communicate to the users an effective usability manual/instruction/digital design. Johnson-Eilola and many of the authors I’ve read so far believe that this ought to be the case with all technical communicators.

My initial and existing thoughts of, ‘what is the purpose of a technical communicator’ seems to be constantly changing. I was under the impression that technical communicators are at the behest of the developers. But based on my understanding, the readings place technical communicators in more of an authoritative role, where the technical communicator has the responsibility to create usable documents for the users based on the concerns (or lack thereof) expectations, ethnography, ethics, and the list goes on. So, I am very confused as to why the technical communicator’s role is so devalued? How can the work of a technical writer not be taken seriously?

I think with communication being the cornerstone of today’s existence, it would be prudent to use the titles “Technical Communicator” and “Technical Communication” instead of “Technical Writer” and “Technical Writing.” The job obviously requires more, and technical communicators are a necessity for all users/consumers/people to function in today’s post-industrial society.

I remember reading “Tech Writing and the Art of Laziness” for my Public and Professional Writing class; reading the article now is just as entertaining as reading it then. Cassidy points out the annoyance of most people when it comes to reading long, wordy manuals. As a user, the less information I have to contend with, to get what I want, is the more likely that I will actually use the product. As Cassidy says “Knowing what to include in the documentation is important. But knowing what not to include is equally important.”

One thing I find interesting is that the developers tell him what they want, or which sources he should consult. But understanding his audience, directs him to create a manual that the user, not the developers will be satisfied with. With writing his outline for the developers, they get a chance to see Cassidy’s vision, and give it a red or a green light. So maybe there is a middle ground for the technical communicator to occupy when it comes to providing the best usability service to the user while also pleasing the developers.

Journal Entry for Jan. 14

It seems as if the need to define or contain the “essence” of technical communication outweighs the value of the profession itself. I believe it’s neither here nor there what the precise, concise and accurate definition of technical communications is, as long as the various job descriptions in the field make sense and are relevant.

People have a good idea of the jobs done by technical writers. But as Bemer states, because technical communication isn’t as clear-cut as medicine or law, some people may take the field for granted or totally disregard it.

Bemer quotes authors Jo Allen and Pamela S. Ecker saying because the field of technical communication is evolving and the demands of the field change with the times, so deciding on a definitive definition is quite difficult and even unnecessary. I can see where these authors have a point, as why limit the scope of achievement and research for the sake of getting “oohs” and “aahs” at cocktail parties, when someone asks, “So what do you do for a living?” Accordingly, I disagree with Bemer when she states that a definition will not “doom” the field. On the contrary, a definition will stifle the exploratory powers of the field because of the new priority of sticking to the confines of the field description. Bemer states that the definition will evolve with the evolution of the field; if so, why bother to create a definition in the first place?

I also believe that a definitive definition for technical communication may decrease the value already placed on technical writers. Many individuals are not too sure what the field entails, so they don’t go into the field, making the existing technical writers even more valuable.

Many other individuals think of technical writing as a kind of scientific writing in that it involves primarily relaying facts and logical and practical information. As Miller states that “technical writing occurs in the context of government and industry and embodies tacit commitments to bureaucratic hierarchies, corporate capitalism, and high technology.” So why does technical writing need a humanistic component? Fundamentally, what technical writing addresses is the need for instructions, information, laws, and protocols given in a concise, precise, and accurate manner. To incorporate rhetoric, that appeals to people’s emotions, or to persuade will distort the core of technical writing. I believe that a humanistic rationale for technical writing is not beneficial or relevant for the field at this point.

Dobrin’s definition of technical writing: “Technical writing is writing that accommodates technology to the user.” This sounds quite clear and matter-of-fact to me.

My questions:
What is technical rhetoric?
What is scientific rhetoric?

Is there a difference between the two?