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.

ENGL 810 Reading Journal 1: The life and times of English Studies

To help sort out some of the initial reading material in ENGL 810, Major Debates in English Studies, I wanted to generate a rough timeline. The following has been borrowed from English Studies: An Introduction to the Discipline by Bruce McComiskey and The Evolution of College English: Literacy Studies from the Puritans to the Postmoderns by Thomas Miller. I'll add in material from the third book (if time allows) once I finish that reading. The better phrasing would be that the following material has been borrowed from Miller and McComiskey and butchered by... me. Here goes:

• 5th, 4th Century BCE: In "Athenian democracies," schools began to form, and "Plato's Academy and Aristotle's Lyceum" were models for future institutions of higher education (McComiskey 4). The curriculum: "trivium (rhetoric, grammar, logic) and quadrivium (arithmetic, astronomy, geometry, and music)" (McComiskey 4). Law, medicine, and religious studies came later. 
• End of Middle Ages: "Some teachers (magistri) began to concentrate... on specific disciplies" (McComiskey 4-5). Rhetoric was deemed important in this ancient version of liberal education. Can't accomplish much if one can't communicate well.
• 17th, 18th Century: Birth of the "modern" university, rise of "enlightenment/rationalism" (McComiskey 5). Germans shaped the "modern" university, and part of that shape exists in the divide between arts and science (Naturwissenchaft/arts vs. geisteswissenschaft/sciences). 
• Early 19th Century: "philology emerged out of German universities and... joined with English studies" in order to legitimize the study (McComiskey 8). Philology = "the investigation of the history of languages, the uncovering of their relationships, and the reconstruction of lost proto-languages" that later became comparative linguistics (McComiskey 8). Philologists at this time studied literature as "examples of evolving language in a cultural context" (McComiskey 8). Branded their work as the science of language and literary studies.
• 19th Century: Creative writing emerges "to link literary appreciation with literary production" and as a reaction against language as science studied by technical philologists (McComiskey 9). Divide between technical philology and creative writing led to an identity crisis in English studies.
• 1862: Morrill Act of 1862 passed by U.S. Congress: "In every state one or more land-grant universities designed to train a new citizenry," (one trained in sciences and technology) "tuition free, for careers in agriculture, mining, and mechanical engineering" (McComiskey 6). These institutions followed after the German "modern" university model while liberal arts colleges maintained a Medieval "humanistic" education. "English emerges as a discipline" (McComiskey 6).
• Early 1900s: English departments assume responsibility for first-year composition courses. Birth of Current Traditional Rhetoric, birth of the study of pedagogy led by John Dewey in 1898, and the drop in prestige for rhetoric as a study (McComiskey 9, 13). Rhetoric professors became overworked and underpayed (McComiskey 10).
• 1900s: Divide begins between philologists and new linguists. Philologists focus on written texts, linguists begin to focus on speech as primary importance (McComiskey 14).
• 1902: Philologists begin to gravitate toward anthropology, seceding from English departments.
• WWI: Patriotism led to the growth of American Literature studies.
• 1924: Linguistics Society of America was established. Renewed interest in literary criticism and composition, and creative writing emerged as philologists departed, particularly creative writing as a "means for unifying the two main functions of English departments - the teaching of writing and the teaching of literature" (McComiskey 16).
• WWII: Military defense needs put pressure on the university to focus on science and technology. English departments face the knife with serious budget cuts.
• 1950s/Post-WWII: Technical Philology becomes comparative linguistics. Rift occurs between creative writing and literature. Creative writing courses now taught by writers, not critics/scholars (McComiskey 21).
• 1950s-1960s: English studies devalued, seen as too narrowly focused on literature and out of touch with current issues. Study of literature saved by the cash cow known as first-year composition "without composition the study of literature as we know it simply would not exist" (McComiskey 18).
• 1960s: Literary canon changes shape, including more women and minorities (McComiskey 22).
• 1970s: "era of national and state-mandated competency testing" creating scrutiny against all humanities disciplines and their worth (how do you statistically show the benefit of English studies, the self-worth, the empathy?) (McComiskey 20). This era saw a "collapse of jobs and majors as well as culture wars" (Miller 7). New Criticism emerges in literary studies.
• 1870s-1980s: Disenchanted young scholars turn away from humanistic approaches toward practical arts, linguistics, composition, pedagogy, and creative writing (McComiskey 24). Job growth emerges in Rhet/Comp due to "changes in professional structures rather than trickling down from elite institutions" (Miller 9).
• 1980s-1990s: Critical pedagogy emerges, bridging all areas of English studies. Specialties in English studies is most prominent: "there is little place for the generalist" (McComiskey 29).

ENGL 895: Embodied Cognition – Learning Paper Thoughts

I’m interested in gamification, particularly in regard to pedagogy. Video games are wildly successful, capturing audiences that range from age 5-45. In fact, the average of a gamer is 35 years old and has been playing games for years. I grew up playing games (I started with the original Atari), and my husband spends most of his time playing his PS3 (much to my chagrin). Clearly, video games are good at what they do, and what they do is promote learning. 

Education and the academy are supposed to promote learning, but I don’t think they do it all that well. At least I know that the students I receive (those required to take general education writing courses) are largely disenchanted with the system of education. Therefore, I’m trying to find ways to make my classes more like video games – more engaging, more interactive, more exciting. 

James Paul Gee, a big name in video game pedagogy, argues that there are certain learning principles that good games incorporate: identity, interaction, production, risk taking, customization, agency, well-ordered problems, challenge and consolidation, “just-in-time” and “on-demand,” situated meanings, pleasantly frustrating, system thinking, explore/think laterally/rethink goals, smart tools and distributed knowledge, cross-functional teams, and performance before competence. 

There are many features here that are interesting for game designers and course designers (teachers) alike, and they align with many theories/findings on the way our brains work and learn. I’d like to explore the potential connections below: 

For identity, I want to explore the role of the avatar that is either adopted or created in video games. I’m not sure how to connect this, but part of my interest is in exploring how virtual reality recreates an embodied experience. You “feel” like you’re there. I can see possible connections to Damasio and “feelings vs. emotions” here. I also recall Dreyfus (I think?) and his description of virtual reality. 

For “just in time” and “on-demand,” Gee argues that video games provide text tutorials “just in time,” that is, when the gamer has reached a point where that information is necessary to proceed. He argues that textbooks fail because the information isn’t relevant to the students until much later in their process. I’d like to connect this to our reading in Buzsaki who discusses written procedures in navigational exercises as media for learning and performing. I can’t quite remember, but I believe he makes a point about the brain’s process for automating a practice that might resonate with this idea. 

For interaction, I’d like to draw connections to Cozolino’s social brain and explore how video games are structured in ways that invite collaboration and how that collaboration promotes learning. 

For situated meanings, Gee argues that people understand concepts, like words and their meanings, best when they can connect them to a specific experiences, and games do this well. I’d like to explore what Barsalou says about this. 

For “pleasantly frustrating,” I’d like to explore some of the emotions surrounding the learning process, such as frustration and confidence. I’d like to explore diSessa’s work in this area and see if I can make a connection to Damasio. 

I can see this going in many more directions, but here’s where I’ve started. I welcome any suggestions.

English 895 Blog Community Analysis

At the conclusion of the blogging portion of our class, I can see that this medium is effective for distance education courses: they enable students to reflect on information shared by their classmates, assist in building that knowledge through encouragement and intertextuality, and continue the conversation beyond the hours of the class session. In this way, blogs are an effective community-building tool, but they must be presented with a clear purpose, and in conjunction with synchronous media, for a true sense of belonging to occur. 

I understand a community to be a group of people united by a common goal or interest. They inherently turn to communication and collaboration in order to accomplish their goals and maintain their interests. Those in the community should feel a sense of belonging, accomplished when individuals believe they are appreciated. My definition is slightly broader than D. Randy Garrison and Norman D. Vaughn’s definition, which focuses specifically on an “educational community”: “a formally constituted group of individuals whose connection is that of academic purpose and interest who work collaboratively toward intended learning goals and outcomes” (20). The unifying idea here is collaboration in order to achieve shared goals. Generally speaking, community is accomplished at different moments, in different ways, by each individual; therefore, it represents a challenge for instructors to develop, manage, and evaluate.

For many distance instructors, blogs can be an effective community-building tool. Due to the nature of the medium, blogs afford opportunities for reflection and elaboration: one “goal, providing thorough, detailed reader response, is best suited to asynchronous technologies [that allow] virtual peer reviewers to insert… ‘intertextual comments’” (Breuch 151). I used SoundCloud to record spoken feedback, and doing so provided an opportunity to insert “intertextual comments” that would link students to my thoughts, but one can also provide links to other scholars/publications as well. Scott Warnock also points out that asynchronous communication, like message boards and blogs, “provide a complex audience: students are writing not just to the teacher but to each other” and the wider public (70). In fact, I recommended one of my posts to a member of the English department who isn’t in this class. 

I knew I had to eventually write this post, and because of this knowledge, I approached the blogs as an experiment. In order to create a community, I made sure to visit each student’s blog at least once, and I used SoundCloud for audio comments. I initially got some great feedback on SoundCloud. Both Catrina and Sarah began recording their thoughts, but I saw them turn to written feedback as the weeks progressed (as did I). I can’t say whether people felt a stronger connection to me because they heard my voice. In fact, I came to believe that asynchronous audio communication just isn’t as strong as synchronous audio communication, when it comes to community-building. Text comments seem to accomplish as much as audio. 

The blog was a useful tool for my own personal interaction with the topic I had chosen. Unlike the typical annotated bibliography assignment, blogging felt more informal and allowed me an opportunity to discuss the fault in my assumptions, particularly in blog post 5; therefore, when I think of the benefits of the blog assignment, I don’t immediately think of the feedback I received from fellow students. Other moments of camaraderie occurred in the WebEx chat function, the Adobe Connect video camera layout, Google Hangout, and even Facebook. 

The chat in WebEx afforded an opportunity for further support as fellow scholars. When students were speaking through video/audio, listeners would type in comments of praise, encouragement, or elaboration. It can be intimidating to have the camera on you during class, but the chat helped diminish those anxieties by making students feel their input was appreciated. It also allowed students to play; several jokes emerged on the chat (particularly in regard to leopard pants), and that opportunity to relax and interact with each other on a non-scholarly level certainly promoted camaraderie.

 The praise and encouragement continued in the comments on my blog. Angela wrote of our tool review, “Fantastic collaboration among the three of you.” Mark said of an article review, “Fascinating stuff,” while George stated, “Well done!” Each comment I received had some level of encouragement; it was much needed and appreciated. As Garrison and Vaughn point out, “students must feel emotionally secure to engage in open, purposeful discourse,” and my readers gave me that sense of security (20). 

It’s a minor moment, but it stands out to me personally: when I used the Adobe Connect camera layout to indicate that Cheri should speak for our group, the class laughed, and I could see their laughter. As I stated in my definition above, belonging is experienced when an individual feels appreciated. This class is great at providing support for scholarly input, but it also has a great sense of humor, showing appreciation for a good joke, too. Without that camera layout, 1) I wouldn’t have been able to make that particular joke, and 2) I wouldn’t have received that visual feedback of laughter. 

Google Hangout provided a fluid conversational experience that allowed us to accomplish on-task conversation as well as off-task conversation that was just as valuable for community building. We ended up swapping teaching strategies and laughing over our common failures and anxieties as instructors. Hashing out shared experiences provided a sense of belonging that would have been difficult to accomplish in a medium that hindered audio/visual communication. 

As part of my experiment with this blog, I attempted to bring Facebook and Twitter into the experience. I used the NetworkedBlogs app to automatically post links to my blog on Facebook and Twitter as a means of expanding my readership: it wasn’t a complete failure. I can’t say whether any of my Twitter followers used the links, but I know at least one of my Facebook friends checked out my blog regularly because of the links. He just never commented because the material didn’t exactly interest him; I suppose it does have a limited audience. The bigger community moments occurred when jokes from the class trickled onto Facebook: the pictures of Kevin and his halo, Mark in his astronaut helmet, and Cheri in her pirate hat. I wasn’t necessarily a direct participant, but I was in on the joke, and that gave me a feeling of belonging. 

What limited my sense of community during the blog was time and assessment. I struggled to keep up with the reading assignments, the instructional tool review, and the blog posts, and I focused more on what would translate directly into a grade than I did on reading other blogs and commenting on them. Requiring blog comments would have motivated me to comment more, but I don’t believe it would lead to community. Due to my observations of WebEx chat and Google Hangout, I feel a stronger sense of community in synchronous media. This sentiment is supported by Lee-Ann Kastman Breuch’s conclusions: “[synchronous] activities are closely associated with speaking situations; if instructors and students prefer this faster, interactive dynamic, synchronous technologies would be more effective” (151). Asynchronous communication feels much more solitary.

I think a common goal would have strengthened the community-building aspect of this assignment. As Garrison and Vaughn point out, students “must be able to develop the personal relationships necessary to commit to, and pursue, intended academic goals and gain a sense of belonging to the community” (19). I think it would have been better if, perhaps, we initially knew the topic each student was studying; students could post their proposal assignment as their first blog publication. We could, therefore, choose to follow students with a shared interest, and the articles they review could then inform our final project. Their recommendations at the end of each blog post would also resonate more, and writers would feel their work was more appreciated by their readers. 

Approaching the assignment this way would create a “course design that enables [students] to construct their own knowledge, together” (qtd. in Warnock 71). And I feel it aligns with Joyce Neff and Carl Whithaus’s impression that “the opportunity for a community of learners and for the social construction of knowledge in a classroom is improved when students bring a variety of expertise to the learning site” (13). As I stated earlier, community is felt when one is appreciated. By spontaneously forming groups centered on a sub-interest, students may feel that the knowledge they bring to their blog is useful to others. 

Blogs play a valuable role in creating a sense of community in a distance education courses because they help ensure that the conversation continues when the class session is over. I believe blogs are an interactive asynchronous medium for community-building, but they must begin with a clear purpose, and they must be coupled with synchronous communication in order to establish any true bonds. 

Works Cited:

Breuch, Lee-Ann Kastman. “Enhancing Online Collaboration: Virtual Peer Review in the Writing Classroom.” Online Education: Global Questions, Local Answers. Eds. Kelli Cargile Cook and Keith Grant-Davie. Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company, Inc., 2005.

Garrison, D. Randy and Norman D. Vaughn. Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2008. Print.

Neff, Joyce Magnetto and Carl Whithaus. Writing Across Distances & Disciplines: Research and Pedagogy in Distributed Learning. New York: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC, 2008. Print.

Warnock, Scott. Teaching Writing Online: How and Why.  Illinois: NCTE, 2009.  Print.

English 895 Instructional Tool Review: Critique^It

Click on the links below:

Video Review

Written Review

Group Work Experience 

Critique^It Training Manual

English 895 Blog Entry 5: Fine! Video, particularly intermodality, is beneficial to OWI

Whithaus, Carl, and Joyce Magnotto Neff. "Contact And Interactivity: Social Constructionist Pedagogy In A Video-Based, Management Writing Course." Technical Communication Quarterly 15.4 (2006): 431-456. Academic Search Complete. Web. 6 June 2012.

Carl Whithaus and Joyce Neff (two incredible monarchs – one current, one former), discuss their findings in a study of a management writing course broadcasted through interactive television (ITV) and video streaming (VS). Ultimately, their findings suggest that video-based delivery is a beneficial tool for distance teachers and students as it creates a liveliness that promotes social constructionist pedagogy. 

To situate their study, they argue that many approaches to distance learning have touted online environments as “written” environments, with emphasis on technology like discussion boards (a la Warnock); as a result, video technology and the kind of dialogue needed for collaboration has been ignored (Whithaus and Neff 436). They maintain, “Multiple ways of presenting information and multiple means of interaction help students construct the necessary mental representations that we call learning (qtd. In Whithaus and Neff 436-437). 

From their data, they feel that traditional classroom experiences influence the needs of online students. They want the same kind of contact as F2F classrooms. The liveliness of F2F communication was, for instructors, difficult to plan, but they found that it was necessary to have synchronous communication, particularly on video, in order to accomplish any liveliness.  

Whithaus and Neff favor teaching with various modes and modalities, arguing that variety helps the learning process, even for a class aimed at the study of written communication. This supports an argument in my previous blog post on Maud Chiekansky and Thierry Chanier’s study. They found that intermodality, or the use of a variety of communication forms like audio, text chat, and others, supports the writing process and expedites collaboration (Ciekanski and Chanier 175 and 178). These findings also agree with those in another blog post on Mary Lourdes Silva’s study. She proposed that combining modes of feedback helps facilitate the writing process (Silva 1).  It seems intermodality is key to success in online writing instruction. 

Whithaus and Neff’s study disagrees, however, with a study in another previous blog post, at least in part. Jana Reisslein, Patrick Seeling, and Martin Reisslein report that students are equally satisfied with both ITV and VS, and they are more interested in flexibility and interaction than the form of delivery. Whithaus and Neff reveal that, indeed, interaction (or contact) is vitally important to students; however, students get distracted and even frustrated by the mode of delivery, and this frustration can lead to moments of liveliness and collaboration. 

I recommend this article for anyone interested in the affordances of video in an online writing course. It ended up “talking to” many of my previous blog posts, but it also problematizes Warnock’s enthusiastic support of discussion board technology. I started this blog hoping to find research supporting my assumption that audio could accomplish as much as video without the distraction. Instead, I discovered that intermodality is vitally important in online writing instruction, and the distraction has its benefits. I concede. 

Ciekanski, Maud and Thierry Chanier. "Developing Online Multimodal Verbal Communication To Enhance The Writing Process In An Audio-Graphic Conferencing Environment." Recall 20.2 (2008): 162-182. Academic Search Complete. Web. 21 May 2012.

Reisslein, Jana, Patrick Seeling, and Martin Reisslein. "Video In Distance Education: ITFS Vs. Web-Streaming: Evaluation Of Student Attitudes." Internet & Higher Education 8.1 (2005): 25-44. ScienceDirect. Web. 5 June 2012.

Silva, Mary Lourdes. "Camtasia In The Classroom: Student Attitudes And Preferences For Video Commentary Or Microsoft Word Comments During The Revision Process." Computers & Composition 29.1 (2012): 1-22. Academic Search Complete. Web. 30 May 2012.

English 895 Blog Entry 4: Audio/Video delivery changes; Student satisfaction does not

Reisslein, Jana, Patrick Seeling, and Martin Reisslein. "Video In Distance Education: ITFS Vs. Web-Streaming: Evaluation Of Student Attitudes." Internet & Higher Education 8.1 (2005): 25-44. ScienceDirect. Web. 5 June 2012.

This article was published at a time when many universities were considering (or undergoing) a transition from the Instructional Television Fixed Service (ITFS) form of distance education to web-streaming distance education. Its goal is to examine students’ attitudes toward of this new format in order to understand and serve their needs. 

To accomplish this goal, Jana Reisslein, Patrick Seeling, and Martin Reisslein performed a survey-based naturalistic study of nearly 360 distance education students at the University of Arizona. Nearly half of the students surveyed had been participating in ITFS courses, and the other half in web-streaming courses.

Among their background research, Reisslein, Seeling, and Reisslein point out the “no significant difference” phenomenon: distance education appears to be just as effective as face-to-face education. They wish to push this further by checking whether the form of audio/video transmission made any impact on students’ learning.

There are three main forms of distance education through video: “interactive two-way video and audio… essentially a video conference…, one-way live video and two-way audio, and one-way delayed audio and video” (Reisslein, Seeling, and Reisslein 26). The first is closest to the feel of face-to-face education but requires a high-speed connection and synchronous participation. 

Because of some students’ limited access to high-speed internet, the one-way video/two-way audio format has been widely adopted.  In the 80’s this format was accomplished through ITFS. In the early 2000’s, universities began to phase out ITFS in favor of web-streaming education. As of 2005, when this article was published, most online courses were a one-way delayed audio and video profile. 

Results from their survey research showed that ITFS students reported better video quality and fewer technical difficulties, but both groups reported a similar sense of accessibility. Despite the difficulties with web-streaming, all students seemed to prefer it. All participants found interaction with the teacher and fellow students to be mediocre with a slight advantage found among web-streaming. 

The researchers concluded that the level of satisfaction is the same for both forms of delivery, but there are some differences among individual aspects. Namely, students desire flexibility in distance education, marked by the ability to participate either synchronously or asynchronously depending on their schedule. 

This article provides detailed historical information about the progression of audio/video-based delivery in distance education, but I felt the researchers tried to accomplish too much. They have a great deal of useful data from their survey research, but it will require the reader to spend a great deal of time to process everything. 

The most interesting aspect of this article, for me, is the fact that students seemed to be relatively indifferent to minor changes in format and the addition of new technology. What students seem to care about is interaction and time management, two aspects that impact any form of education whether it’s distance or face-to-face.