All posts by rwharton3

Technical Communication and Aesthetics

Blog #12: Technical Communication and Aesthetics

Leave a comment

The Oxford English Dictionary defines “aesthetics” as follows:

The philosophy of the beautiful or of art; a system of principles for the appreciation of the beautiful, etc.; the distinctive underlying principles of a work of art or a genre, the works of an artist, the arts of a culture, etc.

One of the central texts for this class is Writer/Designer. In their handbook Arola, Ball, and Sheppard present writing and composing texts as design processes. Design–whether one is creating texts, teapots, or telescopes–can imply both the creation of something that is uniquely suited to and useful for a particular purpose, as well as something that is aesthetically beautiful or attractive.

Now that you have a little more experience designing in a number of different technical communication genres,  you should have some ideas about the relationship between utility/usability and aesthetics in technical communication. Is effective technical communication–i.e., technical communication that is useful and usable–necessarily aesthetically pleasing or attractive as well? In what kinds of rhetorical situations does aesthetic appeal enhance the effectiveness of technical communication? In what kinds of rhetorical situations might aesthetic appeal detract from the effectiveness of technical communication? When should we care about creating technical communication that is beautiful, entertaining, fun, etc.? And when, if ever, are such concerns irrelevant to our primary goals of utility and usability?

To the extent that aesthetic concerns inform and shape technical communication processes, new digital technologies arguably facilitate the creation of artifacts that are well-designed in every sense. Indeed the New London Group, whose theory and pedagogy provide some of the foundations for the approach to composition described and encouraged in Writer/Designer, argue that multimodal composition most often involves “redesign” whereby “available designs” are remixed and repurposed, rather than the creation of something entirely new. Laser printers and the availability of templates, color-pickers, image filters, and programs such as InDesign, Publisher, and Scribus, arguably give amateur desktop publishers design and print capabilities once reserved for the most experienced and talented professionals.

Given how technology has reconfigured the rhetorical situation, we might ask what role the creation of something truly “new” plays in contemporary technical communication? Is “novelty” or “originality” something for which technical communicators should strive, in what rhetorical situations? How do we define or redefine plagiarism in an environment where remixing and reuse are recognized as normal, even essential parts of the composition process? And if technology opens the possibility that even amateur efforts might meet “professional” aesthetic standards, one might ask the questions “who sets such standards?” and “why do they matter?”

“The Bad Artists Imitate, The Great Artists Steal by Banksy” via Duncan Hull on Flickr.

Posting: Group 2

Commenting: Group 1

Category: Aesthetics

What do you think? In your Blog #12 post, take a position about how aesthetics influence technical communication, and how new digital technologies may be affecting how aesthetics shape our understanding of “usability,” “utility,” and “effectiveness” as they apply to technical communication artifacts. As always, craft your response as a cohesive essay or argument, rather than a list of answers to the questions and topics outlined here. Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog.

Featured Image Credit: IKEA by Missy S. on Flickr.

Project 3: Professional Development/Training Modules, Reflection Prompts

Project 3: Professional Development/Training Module Reflection Prompt

Leave a comment

The Course Overview says the following about reflection and role it plays in this course, your learning, and your communication process:

Reflection: You will need to maintain a work log for each of the projects you complete for two reasons:

  1. A mark of a professional is the ability to accurately judge how long a project takes to complete. Maintaining a work log lets you assess whether your predictions about the time and efforts needed are accurate and to examine your work patterns. For collaborative projects, the work log lets you determine if the work load has been equitably shared.
  2. Many studies about the relationship between learning and reflection indicate that long-term learning takes place during reflection about the work rather than simply in doing the work itself. Thus, following each of your projects, you’ll submit a reflection memo that will include excerpts from your work log and include the entire work log as an appendix.

On Wednesday, 3 December, you will submit your reflection for Project #3: Professional Development/Training Modules. Your reflection should be submitted in PDF form, using the format of a memorandum, on Marca, under Projects > Professional Development/Training Modules > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Reflection” (so, for example, the title for my reflection would look like this, “Wharton Reflection.”) You should include your work log in the PDF of your reflection or upload it as a separate file under Projects > Professional Development/Training Modules > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Work Log.” You must submit a reflection to avoid receiving an incomplete on the project.

As you complete your reflection memo for this project, make sure that your memo includes information that responds to the following questions:

  1. How would you describe the rhetorical situation for this project (purpose, audience, context, author), and how did the rhetorical context influence your decisions about the content and design of the module?
  2. Which of the readings from our textbooks or the supplemental articles proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from these readings in your design, drafting, or revision process for the module?
  3. Which of the professional development training modules proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from the module(s) in your design, drafting, or revision process for the module?
  4. Discuss how your module evolved from one draft to the next in response to in-class workshops, conferences, class presentations, or conversations about the readings.
  5. How would you rate your overall performance and contributions  on this project (fair, good, excellent, needs improvement, etc.)? And why?

You may adapt the format of your reflection memorandum to present your responses clearly, completely, and concisely. For example, you might use a table to rate yourself on specific aspects of work. Similarly, you might use a table to identify information learned from the reading, or the professional development/training modules and how it applied to your work on this project.

Featured Image Credit: Back in reality by MorBCN on Flickr.

Project 4: Service Learning, Reflection Prompts

Project 4: Service Learning–Reflection Prompt

Leave a comment

The Course Overview says the following about reflection and role it plays in this course, your learning, and your communication process:

Reflection: You will need to maintain a work log for each of the projects you complete for two reasons:

  1. A mark of a professional is the ability to accurately judge how long a project takes to complete. Maintaining a work log lets you assess whether your predictions about the time and efforts needed are accurate and to examine your work patterns. For collaborative projects, the work log lets you determine if the work load has been equitably shared.
  2. Many studies about the relationship between learning and reflection indicate that long-term learning takes place during reflection about the work rather than simply in doing the work itself. Thus, following each of your projects, you’ll submit a reflection memo that will include excerpts from your work log and include the entire work log as an appendix.

On Monday, 1 December, you will submit your reflection for Project #4: Service Learning. Your reflection should be submitted in PDF form, using the format of a memorandum, on Marca, under Projects > Service Learning Project > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Reflection” (so, for example, the title for my reflection would look like this, “Wharton Reflection.”) You should include your work log in the PDF of your reflection or upload it as a separate file under Projects > Online Professional Profile > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Work Log.” You must submit a reflection to avoid receiving an incomplete on the project.

As you complete your reflection memo for this project, make sure that your memo includes information that responds to the following questions:

  1. How would you describe the rhetorical situation for this project (purpose, audience, context, author), and how did the rhetorical context influence your decisions about the content and design of the deliverables for this project?
  2. Which of the readings from our textbooks or the supplemental articles proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from these readings in your design, drafting, or revision process for the project deliverables?
  3. Which of the professional development training modules proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from the module(s) in your design, drafting, or revision process for the project deliverables?
  4. Discuss how at least two of the deliverables (MoU, brochure, cover letter, client-specific deliverable) evolved from one draft to the next in response to in-class workshops, conferences, client presentations, or conversations about the readings.
  5. How would you rate the overall performance and contributions of each of team member, including yourself, on this project (fair, good, excellent, needs improvement, etc.)? And why?

You may adapt the format of your reflection memorandum to present your responses clearly, completely, and concisely. For example, you might use a table to rate yourself and your teammates on specific aspects of work. Similarly, you might use a table to identify information learned from the reading, or the professional development/training modules and how it applied to work on particular artifacts for this project.

Featured Image Credit: reflections (A) by Camil Tulcan on Flickr.

Blog Project Prompts, Personal and Professional Identity

Blog #11: Personal and Professional Identity

Leave a comment

Over the course of the semester, we have examined closely the conventions, genres, and processes of technical communication. We have considered carefully and discussed at length how different contexts and audiences influence the form and content of technical communication. In those discussions, we have also addressed the ways in which technical and professional audiences and contexts influence significantly the important choices we make about our self-presentation as workers and communicators.

For example, in addition to thinking about how corporations create a brand identity via their social media and online presence, in your blog posts, professional development/training module presentations, and your online professional profiles, many of you have taken up the question of how we as individuals use social and digital media to create our personal “brands.”  In her guest lecture, Elizabeth Johnson offered some insight into what employers expect from job applicants and employees with regard to dress and behavior. And, in the service learning project, you have been creating communication (including email, in-person conferences, and presentations) with a hybrid academic/professional purpose that has a real audience beyond our classroom.

An image of lego figures dressed in different suits.
“Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society.” ~Mark Twain. Image credit: “Suit up” by stavos on Flickr.

In professional contexts, we are judged by the quality of our work and by how we present ourselves. While the conventions of self-presentation vary from workplace to workplace, those conventions exist, whether they are explicit or implicit. Some people would argue our success in the workplace often depends as much on how well we are able “read” and respond to these conventions, as on our ability to perform the functions in a job description.

What do you think? Do you think conventions of self-presentation play (or will play) a significant role in determining how you and your work are judged in your chosen profession? Do you feel pressure to conform to normative standards regarding dress, speech, writing, grooming, etc., in order to succeed in the academic and non-academic workplace? If so, what are those standards, and are they in any way at odds with how you would prefer to present yourself, either online or in “real life”? What connection, if any, exists between conventions about self-presentation and professional behavior and the overall quality of an individual’s work? For example, do you think being punctual, well-groomed, and suitably attired for a job lead one to do that job better? Do you think it’s fair that prospective employers judge applicants on criteria that may or may not be connected to the quality of work an individual might be able to produce?

Posting: Group 1

Commenting: Group 2

Category: Personal and Professional Identity

In your Blog #11 post, take a position about how workplace contexts shape our identities in subtle and not so subtle ways, and the pros and cons of the current state of affairs. Consider who benefits from the status quo, the ways workplaces are changing, how employers can level the playing field for applicants, and the relationship between contextual norms of professionalism and the work professionals in those contexts are expected to perform and for whom. As always, craft your response as a cohesive essay or argument, rather than a list of answers to the questions and topics outlined here. Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog.

Featured Image Credit: Last Sokol fit check by Samantha Cristoforetti on Flickr.

Blog Project Prompts, What is technical communication?

Blog #10: What is Technical Communication?

Leave a comment

At the beginning of the semester, some of our very first readings dealt with the problem of defining technical communication. Often, scholars offer a number of characteristics of workplace communication–it’s collaborative, multimodal, reader-centered, etc.–but one rarely finds someone willing to provide a neat, quotable definition. As we near the end of the semester, we are going to refocus on the question of what we mean when we identify “technical communication” as a sub-category of “communication.”

For example, in one of the very first articles we read, Susan Rauch defines technical writing as writing about technological or scientific content, a category that explicitly includes medical writing, such as that authored by the medieval abbess Hidegard von Bingen. In her work, Rauch draws upon Katherine Durack’s seminal article, “Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication.” Durack’s own definition of technical communication, which continues to influence how professionals and scholars conceive of their field, consists of three identifying characteristics or markers: 1) “Technical [communication] exists within government and industry, as well as in the intersection between private and public spheres.” 2) “Technical [communication] has a close relationship to technology.” 3) “Technical [communication] often seeks to make tacit knowledge explicit.” (258)

Durack settles upon these criteria after an extended consideration of how other generally accepted definitions of technical communication as related to technology and the workplace led to historical exclusion of female contributions to the field. Thus, she argues that defining “technical communication” also necessitates careful and inclusive definition of “technology” as a key term. Specifically, she maintains that “technology” must include “knowledge, actions, and tools” (258) necessary to accomplish a broad range of human activity, from using the latest computer technology to preventing diaper rash.

Now that you have nearly completed this course, you should be able to come up with your own working definition of technical communication. Using any of the resources you’ve encountered or read this semester, write a blog post that offers your definition of technical communication, explains why you settled upon that definition, and also justifies the utility or value of your definition within the field of technical communication more broadly or within your particular discipline/major.

Posting: Group 2

Commenting: Group 1

Category: What is technical communication?

In your Blog #10 post, take a position about how technical communication should be defined as you consider some or all of these questions: Who “counts” as a technical communicator? Why is it necessary or useful to identify “technical communication” as a sub-category of “communication”? Why should we be concerned about defining “technical communication” in ways that exclude women, or medieval writers, religious or ethnic minorities, or people of color? Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog.

Sources Cited

Durack, Katherine T. (1997). Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 6(3): 249-60.

Rauch, Susan. (2013). The accreditation of Hildegard von Bingen as medieval female technical writer. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42(4): 393-411.

Featured Image Credit: Books for school by Mark Larson on Flickr.

Blog Project Prompts, tl;dr, Uncategorized

Blog #9: tl;dr–Coping With Communication Overload

1 Comment
Any number of commentators have remarked on how the transition from print to digital media–by making it easier and cheaper than ever to produce and disseminate content–has resulted in what some people might call “communication overload.” Via our computers, our smartphones, and the screens that surround us as we make our way in the world, we are constantly bombarded with a barrage of multimedia messages.

Image “Short Attention Span” used here courtesy of a CC license by Sarah Mae on Flickr.

As Seth Godin describes it in a blog post titled, “Trapped by tl;dr,” we are drowning in an “internet tsunami,” and in order to avoid being swept away, we try to tread water by skimming the surface of all that communication:

TL;DR is internet talk for “too long; didn’t read”. It’s also a sad, dangerous symptom of the malfunctions caused by the internet tsunami. (Here’s a most ironic example of this paradox…)

The triathlete doesn’t look for the coldest bottle of water as she jogs by… she wants it fast and now. That mindset, of focusing merely on what’s fast, is now a common reaction to many online options. I think it works great for runners, not so well for learners.

There’s a checklist, punchline mentality that’s dangerous and easy to adopt. Enough with the build up, wrap this up, let me check it off, categorize it and quickly get to the next thing… c’mon, c’mon, too late, TL;DR…

Godin cautions against giving in to the tl;dr mindset, however:

Judging by length is foolish. TL;DR shows self-contempt, because you’re ignoring the useful in exchange for the short or the amusing. The media has responded to our demand by giving us a rising tide of ever shorter, ever more amusing wastes of time. Short lowers the bar, but it also makes it hard to deliver much.

He recommends instead that we “read incisively, curate, edit, choose [our] sources carefully, and in this way “[l]imit the inbound to what’s important, not what’s shiny or urgent or silly.”

In the absence of gatekeepers–such as newspaper and magazine editors, publishers, and the like–who used to control the flow of information by restricting access to the means of production and dissemination, Godin argues we have to become our own content “curators.”

Yet, where Godin places the responsibility squarely on the reader to engage in a meaningful way with longer-form content, some are stepping into the “curator” niche created by user demand for shorter, more concise communication. The website tldrlegal.com, for example, uses crowdsourcing to provide explanations of “software licenses in plain English,” for everything from Dropbox toTrueCrypt.

Posting: Group 1

Commenting: Group 2

Category: tl;dr

For this blog post, consider how digital communication media have changed not just how we compose, but also how we receive and process content. Think about whether and how the roles and responsibilities of content creators and content audiences may have evolved or may need to evolve in order to adapt to the new rhetorical context created by digital media. Use the questions below (or similar ones you create) as starting places when you craft your post:

  • Do readers have a responsibility to engage with longer content? If so, when and under what circumstances?
  • Does a content creator ignore significant aspects of the rhetorical situation when she crafts online content that risks a tl;dr response? Are there circumstances in which longer-form communication is still necessary, even in online contexts?
  • What are some rhetorical strategies that one can use to promote user engagement with longer-form content online, hopefully to avoid a tl;dr response?

In thinking about the relative responsibilities of creators and users in online rhetorical contexts, and how to optimize online communication, locate examples–both good and bad–to help illustrate your points about what works and what doesn’t. Use these examples a springboard for discussion; don’t just drop them in at the end.

In your Blog #9 post, you need to take a focused position about how understanding online rhetorical contexts can assist you in your technical communication process, rather than taking a scattered approach (which would happen if you simply wrote a few sentences in response to each question). Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog. You can quote from additional articles you read as support for your position. You should include specific workplace examples to further support your argument. Make sure to document your sources, either by linking to them or including them in a bibliography at the end of your post.

Featured Image “Short Attention Span Hopscotch” by Janet Lackey on Flickr.

Blog Project Prompts, PowerPoint and Communication Design, Uncategorized

Blog #8: PowerPoint — Bad tool or bad design?

Leave a comment

More than a decade ago, John Schwartz asked in a New York Times article, “Is there anything so deadening to the soul as a PowerPoint presentation?” That negative view has been reinforced and extended by Edward Tufte in his monograph, The cognitive style of PowerPoint: pitching out corrupts within, in which he castigates PowerPoint as a medium for presentation. And we’ve probably all seen too many really, really bad PowerPoint slides.

The question, though, is whether the problem is inherent in the medium and technology, as Tufte maintains, or is the problem the result of poor design design and implementation? Continue reading Blog #8: PowerPoint — Bad tool or bad design? →

Audience Resistance, Blog Project Prompts, Uncategorized

Blog #7: Audience Resistance

Leave a comment

Men never stop to ask for directions. Engineers never read the instruction manual. All manuals are boring. How do such social stereotypes get started? Do such stereotypes have any truth to them?

What do you see as reasons people (or at least some people) are resistant to instructions? What kinds of things can effective writers and designers do to counter such resistance? Use the Hibbard article as well as Solving Problems in Technical Communication and Writer/Designer as a jumping off point for your discussion. You can, of course, use additional resources, but use the material in our textbooks about users and audiences and the Hibbard article as a minimum.

Posting: Group 1

Commenting: Group 2

Category: Audience Resistance

For this blog post, consider how social and cultural factors influence rhetorical context in ways that even the best technical communication expert may not be able to control for. Think, too, about what you’ve learned so far about what makes for “good” technical communication and “bad” technical communication, and how these criteria might vary with context. Use the questions below (or similar ones you create) as starting places when you craft your post:

  • What sort of person always reads the instructions first?
  • How do social expectations about masculinity and femininity influence how men and women respond to instruction sets?
  • Are people with specialized disciplinary knowledge (doctors, engineers, lawyers, scientists) more or less likely to read instructions? Why?
  • In what ways can communication design compensate for social and cultural factors that lead to audience resistance?

In thinking about how “good” and “bad” technical communication responds to or accounts for (or fails to respond to or account for) potential audience resistance, you might locate two examples to incorporate into your discussion (not just dropped in at the end, but incorporated and discussed). Locate an example of really bad instructions; take an excerpt for your post to analyze what’s wrong and ways the problems could be corrected. Also locate an example of good instructions; likewise, take an excerpt for your post to analyze what’s particularly effective.

In your Blog #7 post, you need to take a focused position about how understanding audience resistance can assist you in your technical communication process, rather than taking a scattered approach (which would happen if you simply wrote a few sentences in response to each question). Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog. You can quote from additional articles you read as support for your position. You should include specific workplace examples to further support your argument. Make sure to document your sources.

Reference
Hibbard, Catherine. Addressing resistance to change in policy and procedure writing. http://cypressmedia.net/articles/article/28/addressing_resistance_to_change_in_policy_and_procedure_writing

Featured Image: “Direction Board” by halfrain on Flickr

Project 2: Online Professional Profile, Reflection Prompts, Uncategorized

Project 2: Online Professional Profile–Reflection Prompt

Leave a comment

The Course Overview says the following about reflection and role it plays in this course, your learning, and your communication process:

Reflection: You will need to maintain a work log for each of the projects you complete for two reasons:

  1. A mark of a professional is the ability to accurately judge how long a project takes to complete. Maintaining a work log lets you assess whether your predictions about the time and efforts needed are accurate and to examine your work patterns. For collaborative projects, the work log lets you determine if the work load has been equitably shared.
  2. Many studies about the relationship between learning and reflection indicate that long-term learning takes place during reflection about the work rather than simply in doing the work itself. Thus, following each of your projects, you’ll submit a reflection memo that will include excerpts from your work log and include the entire work log as an appendix.

On Monday, 6 October, you will submit your reflection for Project #2: Online Professional Profile. Your reflection should be submitted in PDF form, using the format of a memorandum, on Marca, under Projects > Online Professional Profile > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Reflection” (so, for example, the title for my reflection would look like this, “Wharton Reflection.”) You should include your work log in the PDF of your reflection or upload it as a separate file under Projects > Online Professional Profile > Reflection, with the title “[Lastname] Work Log.” You must submit a reflection to avoid receiving an incomplete on the project.

As you complete your reflection memo for this project, make sure that your memo includes information that responds to the following questions:

  1. How would you describe the rhetorical situation for this project (purpose, audience, context, author), and how did the rhetorical context influence your decisions about the content and design of your online profile?
  2. Which of the readings from our textbooks or the supplemental articles proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from these readings in your design, drafting, or revision process for your resume, website, social media profile, etc.?
  3. Which of the professional development training modules proved to be most useful in your work on this project? How did you apply the information you learned from the module(s) in your design, drafting, or revision process for your resume, website, social media profile, etc.?
  4. Discuss how your online professional profile (or resume, or social media profile) evolved from one draft to the next in response to in-class workshops or conversations about the readings.
  5. How would you rate your overall performance and contributions on this project (fair, good, excellent, needs improvement, etc.)? And why?

You may adapt the format of your reflection memorandum to present your responses clearly, completely, and concisely. For example, you might use a table to rate yourself on specific aspects of work. Similarly, you might use a table to identify information learned from the reading, or the professional development/training modules and how it applied to your work on particular artifacts for this project.

Blog Project Prompts, Plain Language, Uncategorized

Blog # 6: Plain Language

Leave a comment

Technical communication often covers complex and specialized subject matter, sometimes requiring a high-degree of literacy, and an advanced graduate or professional degree to understand completely. Just as frequently, though, the audiences you’ll encounter in the non-academic workplace will comprise non-specialists and specialists alike, as well as groups with varying levels of formal education and literacy. For that reason, unless you are communicating with a narrow, specialized audience–the readers of a professional or academic journal, for instance–you may be asked to use “plain language” standards in your communication.

Image of John McCain's
What is the relationship, if any, between a communicator’s obligation to use plain language and a communicator’s obligation to avoid misrepresentation or deception? Does “straight talk,” for example, necessarily involve using plain language? Is plain language inherently more “honest” than specialized technical or professional discourse? Image of “The Straight Talk Express” used courtesy of a CC license by DoubleSpeak Media.

So what is “plain language,” exactly? At its core, creating plain language communication involves using simplified syntax and vocabulary to communicate complex ideas without losing essential information or meaning. A number of resources are available to help you understand and apply the guiding principles of the plain language movement. The PlainLanguage.gov website is one of the most useful. Plain language is the law, pursuant to an executive order requiring all federal agencies to use “clear Government communication that the public can understand and use” (Plain Language). Read the law (it’s short). You can use it to help your own writing and to guide you in helping others.

Even when you’re not legally required to use plain language, it often makes sound rhetorical sense to do so. In many cases, everything from corporate mission statements to legally binding contracts can benefit from application of what the Center for Plain Language identifies as “The ten commandments of simplification.”  Skillful communicators have a responsibility to create information that is useful and usable for its audiences. In their widely cited article, George D. Gopen and Judith A. Swan (1990) “demonstrate a number of rhetorical principles that can produce clarity in communication without oversimplifying scientific issues” (p. 550).

Posting: Group 2

Commenting: Group 1

Category: Plain Language

For this blog post, consider a situation from your personal experience in which plain language communication was or might have been useful. Or, you might consider a situation in which the use of plain language created or might have created unexpected negative consequences. According to the Center for Plain Language, “Plain language is a civil right.” This statement could be read to imply that the use of specialized, technical discourse is somehow anti-democratic. The statement also presumes that complex ideas about science, technology, philosophy, law, politics, etc., should be accessible to specialized and non-specialized audiences alike. Take a position on whether and when plain language concerns should influence technical communication, and whether and when plain language concerns might be outweighed by other issues. Use the questions below (or similar ones you create) as starting places as you craft your post:

  • What role might plain language principles play in encouraging greater public understanding of STEM fields and interest in STEM education?
  • Are there circumstances in which using plain language could interfere with your ability to communicate effectively with your intended audience?
  • Plain language principles (and our text) presume the author bears the primary responsibility for assuring communication is usable for its intended audiences. What do you think of that presumption? What responsibilities should the audience bear, if any?

In your Blog #6 post, you need to take a focused position about plain language and its proper role in your technical communication process rather than taking a scattered approach (which would happen if you simply wrote a few sentences in response to each question). Please carefully read and follow the guidelines and posting information for this blog. You can quote from additional articles you read as support for your position. You should include specific workplace examples to further support your argument. Make sure to document your sources.

Sources Cited

Gopen, George D. and Judith A. Swan. The science of scientific writing. (1990). American Scientist, 78, 550-558.

Plain Language. http://www.plainlanguage.gov/index.cfm

Center for Plain Language. http://centerforplainlanguage.org/

Featured Image Credit: “jargon” by Sarah O’Carroll on Flickr.

Dr. Robin Wharton | 25 Park Place #2434 | Office Hours: M/W 9:30 to 10:30, T/Th 2:30 to 3:30