Although engineering departments were dissatisfied with early twentieth-century technical writing teaching methods, those methods were not simply a result of “anti-science” attitudes. In fact, late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century composition teachers tried to accommodate the influx of applied science students by teaching correctness and clarity of style and stressing the expository modes of writing. Emphasis on “clarity” was a legacy of rhetoricians like Hugh Blair of the eighteenth century. Emphasis on expository modes was a legacy of the nineteenth-century rhetoricians' interest in the inductive methodology of “pure” science, a method which implied invention by “observation” and made conclusions “self-evident”: argument was unnecessary since observations and methods only need to be explained to “convince.” Applied science departments were, in reality, dissatisfied with teaching methods based on “pure” rather than “applied” science methodology.

To evaluate Technical Communication faculty requires understanding of the distinctive nature of the research, teaching, and service performed by faculty in the field. This article documents the work situations and accomplishments of a cadre of twenty-four accomplished faculty members in Technical Communication. The study group, identified by a prior survey of 275 people in technical writing, composition, and rhetoric, provides an empirical basis for defining the kinds and quantities of work that currently can be expected in the field. The article thus helps to provide empirically-based guidelines and criteria for evaluation. Included also is a discussion of other relevant research on faculty evaluation.

This article interprets research in linguistics and psychology in order to revise and enlarge existing definitions of readability. It suggests instructional methods for teaching students to compose more coherent—and, hence, more readable—technical writing. For a text to be readable, it must be coherent. However, like readability, coherence is variable, depending on the writer and the reader as well as the text itself. The reader is able to understand a message by relying on his shared knowledge with the writer. A starting place for comprehension, cultural and professional knowledge and linguistic knowledge allow readers to set up expectations about a text and to read efficiently. Because accommodating shared knowledge is vital to readable writing, we should teach students how to assess typical audiences and compose in forms routinely used for technical documents. With practice in audience analysis, students learn to accommodate a reader's professional and cultural knowledge. With practice in traditional organizational patterns, stylistic imitation of readable writing, they learn to accommodate common expectations about language and form.

This article offers a pedagogical sequence for teaching the development of a thesis for the research report. The unit presented introduces students to a heuristic of research and shows students how to apply research techniques. The sequence elucidates the steps and loops through which a researcher passes in moving from initial topic to completed thesis. The article argues that neither research nor written report can work without a (hypo)thesis. Arguing against the currently taught inductionist models of research, it adopts Karl Popper's model of research by conjecture and refutation. The process of conjecture and refutation is just as valid for library-based research as it is for original scientific research. The pedagogical sequence, then, shows students how to develop conjectures and how to use literature to refute or modify them in the development of a final thesis for the research report.

The status and standards of technical communication teaching in universities are much lower than in business and industry. The four main reasons—that scientists and engineers don't know that they have a problem; that they know and don't care; that professional technical communication teaching is confused with basic literacy skills teaching; and that technical communication is not regarded as a legitimate academic subject—have a circularity that is difficult to break. Awareness of the problem is the beginning of an answer, and some examples, gleaned from a sabbatical tour of universities, are given.

Although teachers of technical writing have long considered themselves as the vanguard, they too have shown considerable resistance to change, despite recent theoretical advances in composition theory. This author proposes that the technical writing community review its traditional views and attitudes toward the teaching of writing to incorporate insight derived from cross-disciplinary research.

When science and engineering students apply their analytic skills to the study of words, they make several discoveries: that words have components just as machines have components; that many of these word components are already known to them; and that world analysis frequently pays off in making sense out of familiar words and in making unknown words familiar. Result: greater comfort with their growing vocabularies and increased enthusiasm for language study.

Each semester, undergraduate technical writing students at The University of Texas at Arlington learn to adapt and present written material orally and visually by participating in a three-or four-day simulated professional meeting. Each student gives a ten-minute oral presentation, followed by a five-minute question-and-answer period. Presentations are grouped in panels of five papers; each panel is moderated by a session chairperson. Students receive copies of the schedule and presentation abstracts prior to the opening sessions. Presentations are evaluated by the students and the instructor for technical content, visuals, and delivery using a standardized evaluation checklist. Students learn to analyze and speak to a heterogeneous audience; to distinguish the strengths and weaknesses of presentations and visuals; and to convey assessments to others in a professional manner.

Rhetoric teachers often defer responsibility for technical-problem treatment to either the technical student or the technical instructor. But these technical persons are trained largely in academic problems and treatments, which are shown to differ profoundly from their professional counterparts. For engineering students are traditionally trained in a discipline dissociated from a professional base at its very origins, enrolled in a science-oriented curriculum, and taught by technical instructors lacking professional experience. Rhetoric instructors should not, therefore, consider engineering students experts in the articulation and treatment of typical problems addressed by professionals. This paper describes representative student difficulties in the selection and treatment of technical problems in simulated professional reports. Based on results obtained with questionnaires and in-depth interviews, these difficulties are traced to the use of academic materials as sources. Representative case histories are used to illustrate typical student pitfalls in adapting academic source materials. Pedagogical suggestions are offered.

The use of audiovisual materials, graphics, acoustics, special effects, and the like, to enhance, supplement, or even supplant the lecture, paper, or standard written/oral forms of communication has become increasingly important in today's technologically oriented business world. Available products and new developments offer both a challenge and a satisfaction that can be highly advantageous to the classroom situation. Students profit with increased learning and often a more avid interest in communication studies; teachers profit by having interested, involved students and the satisfaction that comes with employing up-to-the-minute resources and materials. (Examples of films for use in teaching communications classes are cited.)

A survey of technical communication students at North Carolina State University has revealed information about students' perceptions of their communication skills and abilities, their immediate and long-range career plans, and what should be offered in a technical communication course. This information complements information gathered from surveys of business and industrial employers and of technical graduates on the job. The results of the survey suggest the desirability of increased technical communication course emphasis on oral reports and simulating professional communication activities. The survey also suggests specific areas for emphasis in the teaching of organization, format, and style.

Native and international science, engineering, and humanities graduate students at The University of Texas at Arlington experience real-world communication situations in an interdisciplinary, projected-oriented technical communication course team-taught by a technical writer and a mechanical engineer. The course simulates the writing requirements of industry and helps students prepare theses and dissertations. A special feature for international students is a supplementary weekly laboratory session devoted to intensive review of writing fundamentals. The course, which has been offered three times since 1976 with enrollments of eleven, five, and nine students, has been received well by science and engineering students for whom it was initially designed and by humanities students who now also enroll. Even though in some cases the progress that a foreign student makes in one semester is limited, all students have found the course of great benefit. The interdisciplinary team approach is an effective way of teaching graduate-level technical communication, providing engineers an opportunity to learn to express ideas to humanists and providing humanists an opportunity to learn to communicate effectively with engineers and scientists.

Because in these days of economic troubles, all areas of science, social science, and industry must account for and justify more closely what they do and want to do, students of technical writing will receive immediate, practical benefit from learning the theory and practice of writing proposals. Proposals are also marvelously versatile for the teacher, because they can be taught in courses of varying length, and to both homogeneous and heterogeneous groups of students. The greatest advantage in teaching them is that through the various parts of a standard proposal, practically every theoretical and/or expository technique used in technical writing can be discussed and practiced. Indeed the proposal can become in itself a minicourse in technical writing, creating yet another possible avenue for work: private consulting.

To determine whether there are different technical styles, syntactic structures at three audience levels in the published writing of three disciplines were analyzed. Our analysis discloses that different disciplines rely primarily on different types of subordinate clauses, sentence openers, and sentence types. It also discloses that paragraph length varies with audience level, as do the number of subject sentence openers and the kinds of verb constructions. Next, we compare our findings with standard textbook treatments of style and advocate a more flexible approach to the teaching of technical style, one that accounts for variations in subject matter and audience.

Tables and figures arc an integral part of the medium of communication of science and technology. An analysis of tables and figures, relying heavily on Euclidean terms (point, line and plane) explains something of their power–their ability to display with clarity large amounts of data, complex data relationships, and intricate three-dimensional configurations. Analysis also clarifies the mutual dependence of tables and figures and their accompanying texts. Additionally, analysis makes clear the semantic gap between tables and graphs, on the one hand, and illustrations, on the other. All are equally vital strategies in scientific and technical discourse. However, tables and graphs are paralinguistic extensions of scientific and technical dialects; illustrations, on the other hand, are a nonlinguistic supplement to these dialects. Finally, analysis provides clues for the teaching of proper graphic choice, good graphic ‘grammar,’ and the appropriate contextualization of graphs.

Teaching technical writing to non-native speakers of English is complicated by their special needs. Central to the discussion is the idea that expository writing ought to be a key element of any program purporting to teach English. The nature of proper preparatory training is discussed with specific reference to the language groups American trainers are likely to encounter working in the U.S. or abroad. The justification for specific practices is discussed and should enable instructors to develop further strategies for training. Once the preparatory work is completed, effective technical writing instruction for non-native trainees requires modification of a good program for native speakers. Training is most effective if material is presented in culturally familiar and intellectually compatible ways.

To teach an in-house public speaking course, the instructor defined the purposes of the course to: 1) make available the training in the skills needed to make an effective presentation, 2) select the effective visual aids to be used in the presentation, 3) learn effective techniques of body language, 4) organize facts and ideas for the presentation, 5) construct the presentation for maximum impact, 6) analyze an audience, 7) establish rapport with the audience and keep its attention, and 8) improve speech, gestures, delivery, and timing. In addition, the instructor must consider the following aspects of the course: the schedule, the size of the class, the number of sessions, the texts, the methods of instruction, and the evaluation of the course. Included are the course of study and the assignments.

This article traces the history of technical writing instruction in American colleges, concentrating on the major figures in technical writing instruction, the most important textbooks, the forces that shaped courses in technical writing during the period 1900–1980, and the refinements and improvements in teaching and materials that led to the current growth and success of technical writing courses.

Borrowing from scientific logic, the technical writing teacher can demonstrate differences between the way researchers/writers problem solve and the way readers comprehend written reports that are roughly parallel to the differences between deductive and inductive logic. As three pyramid theories of writing and their application in university and industry classrooms demonstrate, learning both systems of logic and how to transpose one into the other enables students to understand and structure their information from their readers’ viewpoint. In this logical context, opening with the conclusion finally makes sense to most writers.

The laboratory notebook, traditionally a primary document in patent applications, has recently developed additional importance in the wake of federal regulations designed to insure more stringent record-keeping in the testing of drugs. Compression of procedural detail in published reports to save journal space has also changed the function of the laboratory notebook, which now serves as a receptacle for detailed information omitted from published accounts. These recent developments in laboratory notebooks are discussed with application to possible technical writing assignments.

Language study and literary criticism have for many years been separated. Modern developments in critical theory have stressed the study of texts. Structuralism developed a semiotic approach to texts using psychological and linguistic theory to support objective analysis. Poststructuralist theory has further developed these approaches investigating deep and surface significance in textual interpretation urging a deconstruction of texts to yield a full contemporary understanding. The relationship between writer, reader, text, and context is seen anew within the whole communication complex in an approach which regards texts as discourse. Advanced foreign language teaching unites literature and language in a new synthesis stressing communication and conceptualization through language. Technical communication should be aware of new interdisciplinary trends since it is itself at the center of the dominant theme of communication.

Procedures, instructions, and specifications demand precise and imaginative audience analysis. Although these three communications tasks ask an audience to participate in an operation, the specific purpose and audience of each is unique. Recognizing this uniqueness provides the technical communications teacher with challenging student assignments and the technical writer and editor with useful questions to ask in analyzing these audiences. This article describes the audiences that read procedures, instructions, and specifications, provides examples of each communication task, suggests assignments in each for technical communications teachers, and lists questions for technical writers and editors to ask about audiences of each task.

This article is placed within the defined area of study of “coherence,” which is seen as one of the three parts of recent work in the “discourse analysis” of contemporary English prose with emphasis on technical writing. One element of the total system of coherence is seen to be the “associated nominal” which, together with repetition, substitution, deletion, synonymy, among others, enables writers to maintain the thread of continuity in a text. Introductory details of associated nominals are given, and some of their purposes and environments of use are described with the use of examples of actual English use. Potential effects of this work on the teaching of technical writing are mentioned, and detailed references and anannotated bibliography assist readers who may wish to read further.

Dr. Robert S. Harnack and associates have developed a revolutionary method designed to eliminate the disadvantages, but to retain and improve the advantages of unit teaching. The electronic computer is applied to provide teachers with pre-planning suggestions from a large Computer-Based Resource Unit coded to the students' individual characteristics and objectives.

Moby-Dick is a classic of technical literature as well as a classic of American literature. But for the technical writing teacher, its relevance goes beyond this: Moby-Dick can also be a valuable teaching resource. It provides pertinent examples for teaching students the concepts of audience, purpose, research and sources, use of background experience, and thoroughness in compiling data. It also supplies ample models of technical definitions, descriptions, processes, and theories. Finally, Moby-Dick demonstrates the kind of energetic technical writing that is so needed today.

The debate as to whether heuristics or prescription provides the best approach to teaching technical writing is still largely unresolved. When heuristics are used as process, as problem-solving devices, and when prescription is used as a product-producing device, a useful synthesis of the two approaches occurs. This article presents such a synthesis of heuristics and prescription; it concludes with a short annotated bibliography on heuristics and prescription which can be used by the technical writing teacher and the technical writer.

The author of this article contends that there is more to teaching than the teacher possessing a body of information and using group dynamics in passing the information to the students. One-to-one teaching could be better used through the study of behavior and the individual verification of ideas. The author refers to research in the utilitarian verification of ideas and the frequency of error, and he takes note of the difficulties inherent in translation. The role of the teacher in this age of new training methods is clear. He must not only explain concepts but also the different expressions used to refer to them. Also cited is the use of questionnaires and the student analysis of information. The author considers telematics to be a most important source of information.

This article discusses an attempt to match the student characteristics in sections of technical report writing in a community college setting so as to determine if different teaching methodologies affected performance and/or attitudes. As many similarities as possible in the general characteristics of age, background field of study, and initial attitude towards the course were sought in order to measure the effect of a variance in presentation of material. The first class was taught by the traditional lecture technique; the second, by individual consultation.

This paper distinguishes Skill I, the ability to communicate with the lay audience, from Skill II, the ability to communicate with the technically expert audience. It also discusses the origins of the misunderstanding of the role of these two skills in the technical writing classroom and demonstrates how this failure works against an efficient and successful technical writing program. Some suggestions are offered to remedy this situation which, if followed, would not only remedy the existing problem but would form the base for a comprehensive technical communications curriculum.

Technical communication is not one discipline but three, each addressing its own distinctive set of problems and applying its own particular criteria when deciding which of the alternative solutions it has generated addresses its problems most effectively. Of the three, only the professional discipline is conducting its research satisfactorily; the teaching and theoretical disciplines are not. All three could improve their research activities by posing themselves a wider variety of significant problems, generating a richer array of alternative solutions, and conducting more carefully the activities that enable them to select the alternatives most worthy of continued attention and use.

Many current teaching practices in undergraduate technical communications are insensitive to students' career needs because they are based on mistaken notions concerning writing and the process of communication. The specific problem areas in current teaching practices include: the lack of emphasis on rewriting and on the cooperative element of technical communication, the overreliance on proscriptive strictures in graphics instruction, and the undue emphasis on large-group oratory in oral communications. Academic teaching methods need to be better informed by the practices and procedures of professional technical communicators in order to correct their mistaken notions and to more effectively meet students' career needs.

This study examines some assumptions about context clues. Relating research in vocabulary instruction for readers yields a generic system of semantic function categories. These categories are broad enough to include word and nonword clues. Samples from technical writings of different readability levels are analyzed to demonstrate the utility of teaching such a system to technical writers and editors.

Kinneavy's theory of discourse and Mathes' concept of contextual editing can be effectively applied to teaching classification in technical writing. My procedure, in the nine steps described here, provides students with an understanding of classification as an analytical and generative tool. Its usefulness in analysis is discovered through a structural study of Mumford's “Machines, Utilities, and ‘The Machine‘”; an awareness of Mumford's classificatory structure helps students understand his essay. Students see for themselves, by organizing facts into paragraphs, the generative power of contextual editing applied to classification; the same kind of structuring Mumford uses can be used in their own writing. This generative application simulates the research-to-writing process and dramatically increases the coherence and clarity of much student writing.

In order to correctly and concisely understand a scientific, technical English article written by Japanese specialists, the readers should understand in what areas of English grammar they are inclined to make mistakes when they write an English version. The most crucial mistakes made are usually certain aspects of English grammar. Learning the key mistakes from a Japanese specialist will also help an English teacher focus more efficiently on profitable areas of teaching.

A quick, effective method of teaching students how to use Science Citation Index is described. This method was developed for students in a university with emphasis in science and applied science, but could be adapted for the social sciences. A copy of the diagram illustrating two ways in which to use Science Citation Index is included; plus an exercise with directions and blanks to fill in during the class period. This exercise may be used outside the classroom also.

The technical writing course has the potential to be one of the most valuable and relevant classes that a student takes, but before his rhetorical skills can improve he must overcome his reluctance to write. The formal technical report, the most challenging and the most rewarding assignment, offers the technical writing teacher a unique opportunity to bring his course to life and to enrich each class member's learning experience. The author has developed an approach to the major report that allows the student to assume the role of a consultant in his field while simultaneously permitting him to feel independent and creative. The inexperienced technical writer must create a realistic situation in which someone would require the technical information he wishes to convey. Placing the student in the role of a consultant makes him more aware of his audience and its needs. This problem-oriented approach effectively increases the writer's liberty to choose an appropriate topic and his responsibility to present it in a coherent and professional manner.

Within the past few years have appeared a number of journal articles about a rift between technical writing teachers and literature teachers. At this point there seems to be some improvement in containing this rift between these two groups, uneasy partners in many English departments. At the same time, the problem continues as new people enter the teaching profession and older people are forced to change their direction.

Frequent attention is drawn to the decline in the standards of written English. High school examinations are changing to meet a new situation. Attempts are being made to find a unified approach to all aspects of English study. Literary studies figure prominently in the education of teachers of English. New critical approaches bring linguistic and literary studies together. Form and content are seen as combined in structure. Basic critical approaches can be applied to a wide range of texts. This is significant for the teaching and learning of communication skills in English.

Several innovative methods were used to help technical writing students to write more purposively, professionally, and effectively: writing a paper on the improvement of style in technical writing; reading science literature and writing critiques; editing a technical report; writing a professional technical report; writing science books for children; and writing for publication.

The teaching and practice of technical writing are sometimes hampered by assumptions and approaches that have little value. The traditional term paper has as few applications in the real world as the essay. An “idea grid” has much more value than the outline, and creativity is not linear, sequential, or measurable. Most technical writing texts are of minimal value because of their common denominator approach.

Teachers are recruited from the technical professions and from advanced composition courses to instruct the new discipline: technical writing. Students in a single class major and work in diverse fields. As a common denominator, organization, research, and writing a major paper are emphasized. Classroom discussion, specialized workshops, and individual conferences are utilized. Quality is the key.

The author of this article directs his remarks primarily to teachers of literature who may be considering the teaching of technical writing. He shows the similarities existing among the forms of creative, expository, and technical writing. He then cites some of the differences: the interactions of writer, subject, and the audience; the use of graphics; and the emphasis of the practical rather than the aesthetic.

The transition from teacher of literature to teacher of technical writing was both a matter of choice and a matter of necessity. By choice I teach in a community college. But the subjects I teach and the manner in which I teach them are largely influenced by the nature of the institution and the students. The institution, committed to the concept of extending educational opportunity to all, attracts a uniquely heterogeneous student body who prefer occupationally oriented programs.

In the teaching of communication studies to engineering and commerce students, the time available for teaching communication principles and models did not allow for a detailed study of the various models currently in use. A systems model based on a consistent and limited terminology was developed. This model consists essentially of three subsystems; the human system, the message transfer system, and intermediate receiver-storage-transmitter systems. With the use of this system approach, it is possible to construct models of any human communication system and to use these models to analyze and compare the strengths and weaknesses of the different systems.

“Technical English and the Future” begins by discussing two methods of teaching technical English: the practical and the imaginative. It then argues that these methods need not be mutually exclusive and that teachers should search for ways of synthesizing the two. One such way is for courses in technical English to focus on the subject of the future. After discussing the rationale for this approach, the article describes what such a course might be like.