ENGL 810: Debate Paper #1: Professional and Technical Communication: Who are we, and where do we belong?

Coppola, Nancy W. "Professionalization Of Technical Communication: Zeitgeist For Our Age Introduction To This Special Issue (Part 1)." Technical Communication 58.4 (2011): 277-284. Academic Search Complete. Web. 16 Sept. 2012.

Malone, Edward A. "The First Wave (1953--1961) Of The Professionalization Movement In Technical Communication." Technical Communication 58.4 (2011): 285-306. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Sept. 2012.

Rentz, Kathryn. "A Flare From The Margins: The Place Of Professional Writing In English Departments." Pedagogy 1.1 (2001): 185. Project Muse. Web. 6 Sept. 2012.

Professional and Technical Writing shares many of the same debates and dilemmas as its parent discipline, English Studies: as a broad and varied specialty, it struggles for recognition, a unified identity, and a focused body of knowledge. Amidst this struggle, we hear a familiar cry: “We cannot be recognized by others if we can’t even recognize ourselves” (qtd. in Coppola 277). According to Coppola, Edward Malone, and Kathryn Rentz, professional and technical writers face an identity crisis that problematizes their position among both practitioners and scholars.

In Coppola’s introduction, she asks key questions that I hope to explore in future debate papers: what are the core competencies of technical writing, and “how do we determine whether our core competencies align with those of professional stakeholders?” (Coppola 280). She points out that Technical Communication is an outcome-defined profession that readily responds to changes among clients, practitioners, and technology, and this ever-changing environment further problematizes its definition of a body of knowledge and core competencies (Coppola 279).

Coppola also points to omissions made in English Studies discussions, particularly in the influential textbook used in our class, English Studies: An Introduction to the Discipline(s), which contains chapters on all specialties except technical communication. It is often lumped with Rhetoric and Composition, for better or for worse. At the worst, it simply doesn’t belong there: according to Rentz, “No, professional-writing and composition courses, as they’re currently taught and understood by those within the fields, are not the same” (188). At best, combining them under the umbrella of Rhetoric and Composition can promote recognition. Coppola lauds the efforts of our very own Louise Whetherbee Phelps for successfully convincing the National Research Council to merge Technical and Scientific Writing with the code for Rhetoric and Composition, thereby achieving strength in numbers. 

Malone traces seemingly modern debates among practitioners back to the 1950s, showing that the field has always had the same identity issues: professional organizations, body of knowledge, ethical standards, certification of practitioners, accreditation of academic programs, and legal recognition. He argues that true professionalization of Technical Communication is achieved, in part, through formal academic training; however, Rentz points out that, despite the growing curriculum, it is often overlooked and ignored by English departments due to its relationship to other disciplines and the fact that it may represent “an embarrassing compromise with capitalism and the technostate” (186). Professional and Technical Writing represents an awkward bridge between English and other departments. According to Malone, technical writers have been urged to double major or get their degree in Engineering instead, and the “service nature” of the field doesn’t exactly endear it to English departments. In fact, a 1955 Code of Ethics has writers repeat the following: “my present and my future depend on the products of science and its workers in all levels” (293).

Ultimately, Coppola, Rentz, and Malone point to the same problem:  professional and technical writers are homeless in both the market and the academy, and they need to unify and even join forces with related fields in order to find a home.