welcome!

Welcome to Technical Writing! Technical Writing has many varying, overlapping, and meaningful definitions. As early work for the course, try to find 3 top definitions that appeal to you. Prepare to share them at the beginning of our next class (and at your blog). Thanks!

By way of introduction, I'll talk about my disposition to a Technical Writing definition. My doctorate is in Rhetoric & Composition (Rhet/Comp), and I was in the early '90's coding my own web pages, so I was at the borders of Computers & Writing. I designed and hosted topic-oriented MOOs, and often, many high profile scholars (i.e., N. Katherine Hayles, Sharon Crowley, Lester Faigley, Ira Shor) "teleported in" to discuss with us graduate students. In 2003, when I began in earnest to work as a digital filmmaker and publish in peer-reviewed online journals (Kairos, Enculturation), I began to consider myself a kind of artist (sooo qualified), and more as a creative teacher-scholar working at the borders of Digital Media Studies, and Rhet/Comp. I could claim to be a Digital Humanities Scholar, especially with my pedagogy emphasis, and I've also used the term "Digital Rhetorician" to describe myself. These borders are porous -- our field is capacious, and with enough determination, will, and honest self-assessment, you'll find a sense of "your place" in this dynamic field. So where does Technical Writing "fit" within this constellation? In many ways, it's a framework, a wireframe, a structural force, and it's often associated with producing deliverable products even as it's invested in studying process. It's about clarity, style, and delivery. It's about serving others with the rhetorical skills we've developed. There's more. Speaking for myself, my Technical Writing cred exists in my technical work with digital media. I have a special interest in ambiance and visual rhetoric, and I'm grateful to Anne Frances Wysocki for bringing "design" to the field of Rhet/Comp, Writing Studies, and Technical Writing. Ever since Anne "gave permission" for such interdisciplinary thought and work, I've felt relieved and have followed her lead, in my own way.

My design philosophy is informed by a variety of C.R.A.P. principles, but I come to them through usage rather than "rules." This experience-based method of leaning to become a better (technical) writer gets at a central concept and series of practices, knowledge, and history that will form the elemental structuring agent for this course: Storytelling. (Yes, this was my plan even prior to hearing the eternally inspiring Andrea Lunsford. I swear it's true!). Much of my work -- academic and creative -- is about the process (story) of creating a thing. My stories (as most good stories are) are about problems -- their dimensions, histories, and range. My process-oriented, often ethnographic approach to telling the story of a problem engages me in uniquely productive thinking about potential approaches to further, better contemplation and efforts at problem-solving.

As we work through the course, try to think about storytelling, good and bad stories, and how these frames suggest ways of approaching problems, both "real" and rhetorical. To help you get a more formal sense of the concept, you might read Kristen Moore's "Exposing Hidden Relations: Storytelling, Pedagogy, and the Study of Policy." I'm currently curating a list of additional formal resources on storytelling and Technical Writing (updates, soon). In the meantime, you might take inventory of what you know about stories and storytelling; we'll discuss in class and throughout the semester.

Here's a story: I wanted to create a professional-seeming blog for this course. I love the minimalist appeal of many Wordpress blogs. I did create one, and we'll use it as a portal, but here, in easy-to-use Blogger (so helpful for pedagogical purposes), is where most of the action is.

As for a design concept that speaks to method: I prefer to design pages by doing rather than planning much in advance. Some might wonder whether or not this "doing" isn't already a bit overdetermined by my immersion in literate, visual cultures, and they'd be right to wonder -- it's definitely a Technical Communication question worthy of pursuit. But let's say that this "design by doing" thing is somehow more "free" from stodgy rules and lessons; such design practices often work, and many designers come to their aesthetics in a variety of intuitive ways. And here is where I'll add to my story: I decided to default to easy Blogger because of teaching and its demands. I don't have a shiny, minimalist workspace that's just teaming with hipster crewmembers (The Dream), but I know that if my sole job were to create webspaces and engaging content that audiences would admire and want to spend time with, such work would involve a team. So, this sole teacher hopes you'll forgive her dorky blog and appreciate that its very low-sheen isn't about inability as much as it's about emphasis and time. There's much more to this story -- details, and scenes of doubt and remorse and hope and exasperation and acceptance -- so many elements needed to really sell this story! With the affordances of digital tools, I could more emphatically make this thing come to life, ... but back to time ... and focus.

As you might be able to tell, my storytelling frame invites us to reflect frequently on our compositional practices. Many language theorists argue that this disposition marks the thoughtful scholar; I agree, and/but it's also very human. In what ways -- and to what effects -- do some resist the luxurious call to contemplate textuality? This is a question for the present moment on so many levels. How do you respond to it?

Back to Technical Writing, then. Obviously, in addition to rigorous contemplative practice, it's important to be aware of standards and shared practices that come to define a textual process and its product as "good." However, creating space for experimentation and play -- what ancient rhetoricians and modern scholars of rhetoric refer to as "invention" -- is just as important. I hope you'll come to see this class as just such a space.

I'm very invested in rhetorical play and invention. So, my academic web design practices work with commonly shared design "rules" even as I make room for flexibility that will help make my designs useful. Besides, as long as my content is solid, many academics still view visual rhetoric as a sort of "bonus skill." This is increasingly changing.

Regarding the design of this blog, which C.R.A.P. principles seem to be shaping the design most obviously? Which are in need of attention? Regarding how you respond to the design of the page -- its visual appeal, purpose, clarity, and ease of navigation -- what principles might we consider toward a successful revision? Write your responses to these questions in preparation for next class. Feel free to design an alternative blog as an example, and be prepared to share via screenshot. If anything else written here sparks questions you'd like to take up in class, write out some thoughts and be prepared to share. Thank you!