Selting, Bonita R. “Conversations with Technical Writing Teachers: Defining a Problem.” TCQ, Summer 2002, vol 11, no. 3 (251-266)
A teacher lore based discussion of the standard positions held on just how much technology and software to teach in the TW classroom. The key issue: how to balance instruction in rhetoric, editing, writing, and reading of the documents with familiarity with the actual tools (software and hardware) that students will use in the TW jobs. Related: what should have a priority since some skills and not others can carry over in to other fields—especially since not every student in a TW course is going to be a TW. 261
Few deny the importance and role of technology, but nobody seems sure of just how to make sure the students obtani the necessary set of skills and abilities they need. Some folks spend minimal class time on it; others teach students, others have students teach students and still other think students should learn it elsewhere. 258
The machine and software is taught by some as an integral art of the course and is engaged with rhetorically.260
Most useful, I thought, was that some instructors incorporate the writing of instructions for software to context-specific applications. This seems to engage both the rhetorical concerns as well as the students' need to develop their familiarity with software. 262
Author: too many folks treat the issue as not problematic too regularly. 263
Get Selber, Stuart. “Beyond Skill Building: Challenges Facing Technical Communication Teachers in the Computer Age.” TCQ 3 (1994): 365-90.
Showing posts with label tw. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tw. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Monday, January 19, 2009
Article: Kynell: TC from 1850-1950
Kynell, Teresa. Technical Communication from 1850-1950: Where Have We Been? Technical Communication Quarterly, Spring 1999, Vol. 8, No. 2. (143-151)
Formation of TC pedagogy; evaluation of shifts in engineering curriculum from 1850-1960.
144 1850-62 most engineers mentored or had a sparse training
144 1862 Morrill Acts = land grant colleges = practical education/professional trade
145 Mansfield Merriman, quoted in Kynell, "The only way to learn to write is to write."
146 Circa 1910 educators grasped that engineers needed real-world context to develop their writing and they should focus on the kinds of writing they'll actually face as professionals
146-7 Earle's 4 abilities that would make English more relevant to engineers
ability to: put into words an abstract though; describe, in writing, an object not present; write for different audiences; give a concept a full treatment by demonstrating understanding in writing
This piece and the Connors, and possibly the Carolyn Miller could go on the reading list as histories of TC/TW. If I am going to focus on TC/TW and comp, then I need to be aware of the histories of both. This article does pretty well in laying a foundation/basis, as well as reference points, to locate more specifics about how TC/TW and comp have been regarded as service courses for nearly a century. Thus, the problems we see with the treatment/references to writing and composition are, in fact, apparent manifestations of the modern university.
Flying by the seat of my pants here, but I do believe that once the shift took place in the 1860s or so away from the classical educational roots is also when composition began to lose face. Essentially, with industrialization and the gutting of Rhetoric, composition fell down in status. The application of text, of words, seems to be far less important than the creation or manufacturing of materials.
Interesting referenced articles:
Gerald Savage 1996 "Redefining the Responsibilities of Teachers and the Social Position of the Technical Communicator"
Miller, Carolyn. "A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing." College English 40 (1979): 610-17.
Formation of TC pedagogy; evaluation of shifts in engineering curriculum from 1850-1960.
144 1850-62 most engineers mentored or had a sparse training
144 1862 Morrill Acts = land grant colleges = practical education/professional trade
145 Mansfield Merriman, quoted in Kynell, "The only way to learn to write is to write."
146 Circa 1910 educators grasped that engineers needed real-world context to develop their writing and they should focus on the kinds of writing they'll actually face as professionals
146-7 Earle's 4 abilities that would make English more relevant to engineers
ability to: put into words an abstract though; describe, in writing, an object not present; write for different audiences; give a concept a full treatment by demonstrating understanding in writing
This piece and the Connors, and possibly the Carolyn Miller could go on the reading list as histories of TC/TW. If I am going to focus on TC/TW and comp, then I need to be aware of the histories of both. This article does pretty well in laying a foundation/basis, as well as reference points, to locate more specifics about how TC/TW and comp have been regarded as service courses for nearly a century. Thus, the problems we see with the treatment/references to writing and composition are, in fact, apparent manifestations of the modern university.
Flying by the seat of my pants here, but I do believe that once the shift took place in the 1860s or so away from the classical educational roots is also when composition began to lose face. Essentially, with industrialization and the gutting of Rhetoric, composition fell down in status. The application of text, of words, seems to be far less important than the creation or manufacturing of materials.
Interesting referenced articles:
Gerald Savage 1996 "Redefining the Responsibilities of Teachers and the Social Position of the Technical Communicator"
Miller, Carolyn. "A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing." College English 40 (1979): 610-17.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
