A study that compared the usability of two versions of online help for an Application System/400 (AS/400) product is described. The long-term goal was to develop empirically based guidelines for writing online help, particularly for application-enabling products. A portion of the online help text for one AS/400 product was revised. The revisions included changes in the content, writing style, and presentation of the text. The original version and the revised version of the help were compared in an interactive (online) task environment and in three hardcopy reviews. In the interactive environment, participants who used the revised version made 40% fewer requests and viewed 45% fewer help screens than those who used the original version. There was no significant difference in task performance (quality of work) between those who used the original and the revised versions of the help. The results of the hardcopy reviews showed that participants strongly preferred the revised version.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

The author describes the procedure used at NCR Corporation to evaluate the data collected during usability tests. He points out that it can be overwhelming to face a mass of data to be compiled, categorized, analyzed, and evaluated at the end of a test, with limited time available for producing a report. This situation is avoided by defining, before a test, the tools that will be used to collect the test data and the process by which the results will be evaluated, and then performing the preliminary evaluation of data in a process parallel with the test itself. At the end of the test, an evaluation meeting is held at which the cumulative results are reviewed and solutions to the problems that have been identified are defined.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

Computers in technical writing classes are growing in popularity because professionals increasingly use computers for writing reports and because the computer can aid in producing more visually sophisticated documents. Yet, we do not know what computer experience students bring with them to the computer classroom, a lack of knowledge that makes the task of integrating the computers into the classroom more cumbersome. This article presents the results of a survey of Purdue University students' knowledge of, use of, and attitudes toward computers as they enter the technical writing class. It contrasts the technical students with upper division humanities students and draws conclusions about the documentation requirements and the appropriate computer use goals for the Purdue students surveyed. Finally, suggestions are made about how to use a survey of this type.

Technical writing students often misuse models given them for their writing assignments because they fail to distinguish between model and example and between different kinds of models. The results of this misuse are texts that contain inappropriate material and are unfit for their intended audiences. The approach to writing taken by these students is too narrow and rigid. This article details the problem and defines the models used in writing as partially abstract, analogous representations of social codifications of linguistic experience. Since models are social artifacts shared by both writers and readers, a clearer understanding of them should help writers produce texts appropriate for their audiences while giving the writers greater rhetorical flexibility.

Theoretical studies in scientific and technical communication have begun to explore what they call discourse communities in the sciences and engineering on grounds that these communities provide the norms and practices for communication in these fields. The theoretical literature on which these studies are based develops two views of what a discourse community might be, an institutional and a social view. The first of these views has been the more influential, but both views may and should be brought to the study and the pedagogy of scientific and technical communication.

Amplification is the set of rhetorical techniques by which a discourse is elaborated and extended to enhance its appeal and information value. Even in the manual, long considered the most laconic of the genres of technical communication, amplification has its place. Drawing on the theory of classical and modern rhetoric, this article shows how amplification tends to increase and improve the coverage, rationale, warnings, behavioral alternatives, examples, previews, reviews, and general emphasis of technical manuals.

This article presents the results of a year-long study of the business- and technical-communication market in Boston, Massachusetts. The study iden tifies the abundance of professional titles, duties, attitudes, responsibilities, aptitudes, and skills in business and technical communication included in six large categories ofpractice: technical communication, publishing, public rela tions, marketing, development, and training. Based on the Boston communication-market research and on occupational data from the U.S. De partment of Labor, this study suggests that, in the decade ahead, communica tion practitioners can expect healthy growth in the profession.

Modern professionals commonly write documents to be signed by superiors, but are seldom taught how to do this. If students are successfully to fulfill everyday organizational writing tasks, they must learn to master skills of impersonating viewpoint, style and even personality. To teach such skills, we can adapt the ancient exercise of prosopopoeia or impersonation, either by varying the personas of standard textbook exercises, or by making use of the technical writing case study, or by having students impersonate professionals who were involved in famous (or infamous) current events.

The history of Technical Writing closely parallels trends in the discipline of Computer Science. The early technical writers in the computer software industry were its own technicians (programmers and analysts), who used a variety of diagramming techniques to document computer systems. As a result of the widespread availability of computers and software which began in the 1970s, professional communicators joined the software industry and reinterpreted these diagramming techniques from technical source documents into user documentation. The impact of this assimilation process has influenced graphic representations in Technical Writing, as well as created the conceptual metaphors of the “user” and the “module” (which are emerging archetypes). In the past, Technical Writing's historical roots have been the result of reactions to Computer Science. However, the increasing presence of online documentation is now creating opportunities for technical writers to shape their own future by joining with computer scientists as influential equals.

Part-time technical writing teachers who responded to a 1986–87 survey of two-year college technical writing teachers were found to be committed to teaching, well-qualified, experienced, personally involved, and typically employed full time as technical writers or editors. This finding calls into question the unfavorable stereotypical view of part-timers held by individuals and professional organizations. Because of their unique position as full-time practitioners of the skills they teach, part-time technical writing teachers can serve as an important link between teaching technical writing and business/industry.

Technical writers need a historical perspective in order to distinguish between enduring and transitory writing standards, to understand the variety of past styles in building future styles, and to give the profession a better sense of self-identity. To overcome the problems in developing a historical perspective, such as a dearth of artifacts to examine and the peculiarities in rhetorical time and place which undercut attempts to generalize on historical information, the 200 year-old federal collection of patents is offered as a solution. This collection of patents is also very often the only remaining written work of the ordinary mechanic of the nineteenth century, and this collection truly reflects technical not legal, business, or science writing.

In the past few years, several authors have suggested that we reflect on traditional conceptions of rhetoric to see what they can tell us about our own concerns. For instance, the authors whose articles appear in James J. Murphy's 1982 MLA anthology, The Rhetorical Tradition and Modem Writing, would agree that a study of our rhetorical tradition can teach us a good deal about the problems of the present, and they make many comparisons between ancient and modern to illustrate what they mean. Comparing rhetorical pedagogies is another promising area of study, although such comparison may at first seem to involve incongruities. Proposing, as this essay does, that there is a fundamental likeness between the modern technical writing case study and the impersonation exercises of classical rhetoric-in which the student plays Zeus excoriating the Sun-God for lending his chariot to Phaethon, or some of Caesar's troops arguing whether to commit suicide or not-would initially seem imprudent. On first glance, these two teaching methods seem pretty far apart. However, a detailed comparison of the modern case study with the impersonation and with another ancient exercise called suasoria not only is possible but can point out striking similarities. More important, such a comparison can validate the educational value of the case study, point up its grounding in rhetorical principles, and suggest some broader uses the modern methodology might serve. But before I proceed to a comparison, let me briefly describe each method. A modern case, to use a summary of a case from one of the best modern texts, goes something like this:

One lesson to be learned from the fatal decision to launch Challenger is that effective technical and group communication requires more than the fidelious exchange of information. This article examines testimony gathered by the Presidential Commission on the Challenger Accident and reveals communication failures in four dimensions of group differentiation—clarity, interrelatedness, centrality, and openness. The article illustrates all four dimensions with excerpts from the Commission Hearings and identifies communication problems peculiar to highly technical groups.

Linguistics has been largely misunderstood in writing pedagogy. After Chomsky's revolution, it was widely touted as a panacea; now it is widely flogged as a pariah. Both attitudes are extreme. It has a number of applications in the writing classroom, and it is particularly ripe for technical writing students, who have more sophistication with formalism than their humanities counterparts. Moreover, although few scholars outside of linguistics are aware of it, Transformational Grammar is virtually obsolete; most grammatical models are organized around principled aversions to the transformation, and even Chomsky has little use for his most famous innovation these days. Among the more recent developments is Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, a model with distinct formal and pedagogical advantages over Chomsky's early transformational work.

This article proposes a means of characterizing the difference between technical and literary writing, involving a theory of representation in which these distinct writing types are comparable to distinct types of visual representation. Any difference is only intelligible relative to a background of similarlity, but recent discussions of technical writing emphasize its similarity to literature and ignore significant differences. Distinct types of line drawings replicate the literary/technical contrast in a visual medium. This arises from two factors: 1) the way in which the drawing/text is perceived by the viewer/reader, as a substitute or as a standard; and 2) the predominant type of detail in the drawing/text, iterative or contrastive. Literature is most effective if perceived as a substitute for reality, predominated by iterative detail. Technical writing is most effective if perceived as a standard for evaluating reality, predominated by contrastive detail.

Increasing public involvement in science and technology suggests a new role for technical communication in which conventional skills of adapting technical content to audience needs may be replaced by skills that facilitate audiences' own information search activities. This article outlines the reasons for the emergence of this new role, and some of the practical implications.

Software documentation is a growing field in technical writing, yet no synthesis of current research exists to bring together findings on content, form, and the invoked relationship between reader and writer. Without such an overview writers are apt to follow discrete, context-free prescriptions instead of guiding principles that account for the multidimensional functions of language in the communication act of a user's manual. This article reviews findings from research in cognitive processing and text linguistics to derive such a set of principles. It then assesses a widely-used wordprocessing manual against these principles to find that the writers manipulate form (the textual function of language) to achieve comprehension better than they do content (the ideational function) or reader-writer relationships (the interpersonal function). However, comprehension is stymied without equal attention paid to ideational and interpersonal strategies.

This article describes a study of written communication on-the-job and reports writing practices found in seventeen agricultural and engineering firms and agencies in the authors' immediate geographical region. Information was gathered by questionnaire and on-site interviews. Data confirmed the importance of writing on-the-job. Our findings demonstrate the importance of context and reveal the variations in types and length of documents, rhetorical genres, and strategies. The study proved useful for designing instructional materials and strategies and for expanding our basic understanding of what on-the-job writing entails.

Findings from a comparison of undergraduate and on-the-job writers recommend some changes in traditional methods of teaching technical writing in college. Freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and “competent” writers in business and industry were given the same composing task. The writing of the employees showed telling and sometimes unexpected differences in a wide variety of areas, in length, vocabulary, organization, specificity, coherence, sentence formation, and surface error. Implied is increased attention to several general writing skills: compression of meaning, fluency of expression, efficiency in techniques of coherence, expandability of organization and syntax, and rhetorical maneuverability and adaptability.

The problem known as bypassing is explored using a historical example, the medical term 'antiseptics', to show the impact that bypassing can have on communication of technical information. The term antiseptics was in use for over 150 years before Joseph Lister adopted it in the 1860s to describe his system of surgical treatment. A review of published responses of Canadian doctors to Lister's writings indicates that confusion arose because of the fundamentally different perceptions of the term for Lister and his audience.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

A critical overview is provided of desktop publishing in terms of its particular significance in technical communication. Problems that may be encountered in an organization's move toward desktop publishing are addressed. Guidance is provided to help users and potential users find their way into and through this area.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

It is argued that technical writing and computer programming are based on similar principles, perhaps because both are mechanisms for efficiently organizing and communicating complex information. Both technical writing and programming are multistep processes involving planning, drafting, and revising. Moreover, six key aspects of computer programming (modularity, modifiability, user interface, failsafe presentation, style, and debugging) have analogs among such technical writing principles and practices as report sectioning, audience analysis and adaptation, and editing. These similarities are discussed and a course that builds on these likenesses to teach technical writing to programming students is described.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

The author's grading strategy in an upper-division technical writing course is documented. Students taking the course plan technical communication careers. They complete 50 pages of editing exercises and generate more than 75 pages of double-spaced copy for eight assignments. The author responds to students' work in several ways: (1) personalized memos and extended handwritten comments, (2) marginal handwritten comments and questions, (3) internal copyediting of student manuscripts, (4) individual conferences, and (5) assignment of a grade. When editing student assignments, criticism is provided of content, communication effectiveness, and appearance. For content, the accuracy, consistency, logic, and evidence are evaluated. For communication effectiveness, the appropriateness of the narrative and visuals for the audiences, organization, clarity, and conciseness are evaluated, and for appearance, checks are made for spelling, mechanics, stylebook, and format errors.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

The author discusses her experiences as the student project leader in a manuals class charged with researching, writing, and producing a handbook for the New Mexico Tech technical communication program. She describes the management process of organizing the class into groups of writers, outlining the document into sections, assigning research and writing topics to the groups, and setting deadlines for the project calendar.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

A recent survey at Clarkson University showed that students consider technical communication the least worthy and the least difficult of the institution's majors. This prejudice is attributed to the student's high regard for technology and its quantitative, problem-solving analysis coupled with conversely low regard for writing. The author describes his experience with the misconceptions and how he came to understand that technical communication is not a contradiction in terms.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

The technical communication program in the English Department at Oklahoma State University is described. The author describes how teachers can structure course work so the students complete assignments similar to projects they will complete as professionals. To provide experiential learning outside the classroom, it is suggested that educators include internships or cooperative work-study opportunities in their academic programs, encourage students to become active members in professional organizations, and help students complete professional activities such as giving papers at meetings and conferences and publishing articles in newsletters, conference proceedings, and journals.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

Recent exit interviews of Clarkson University graduates majoring in technical communications revealed that students have a clear hierarchy of worth that places technology at the top because of its supposed objectivity. Further, students opposed technology to creativity, which they took to be the domain of writing. The author asks several pointed questions aimed at probing how technical communication curricula can show students that creativity and reason can be in harmony and help them better understand their own talents and skills.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

Examination of the public documents available on the Challenger explosion shows that a history of miscommunication contributed to the accident. This miscommunication was caused by several factors, including managers and engineers interpreting data from different perspectives and the difficulty of believing and then sending bad news, especially to superiors or outsiders. An understanding of the dynamics at work in the Challenger case can help engineers and engineering managers elsewhere reduce miscommunication in their own companies.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

A student perspective is provided on the process of teaching technical writing as a process parallel to computer programming. The idea that each follows a recognizable series of discrete steps is presented, and the steps that parallel each other are contrasted.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

The author discusses his experience as a graduate student in the Technical Communication Program at Oklahoma State University (OSU). He discusses activities that he found particularly valuable being an intern, namely, participating in the Society for Technical Communication (STC), writing for publication, and giving oral presentations.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

Communication instruction at the undergraduate, senior level within the mechanical engineering curriculum is discussed. Faculty collaboration across disciplines and departments and the involvement of students as professionals in their field of study are seen as elements in the process of developing technical communication skills. Faculty-student dialog that supports communication skill development is highlighted.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

It is suggested that students can learn the fundamentals of project leadership, team writing, and production of a major document if the teacher plans and structures the assignments for the project leader so that the project leader and the student writers share the same understanding of the document, know the lines of authority for decisions, and see how individual parts fit into the whole. The principles of cooperation necessary to complete the project also engage the students in issues of professional ethics.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

Technical writing in English by Japanese authors is examined. It is pointed out that Japanese rhetorical structure addresses an underlying communication goal that is very different from the goal of Aristotle's persuasive discourse; Japanese technical writers also consider elements such as beauty, surprise, and easy flow as desirable measures of good writing. This fundamental difference in approaching the problem of writing often produces confusing results.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>

One of the most neglected topics in Technical Communication textbooks and professional articles is the concept of criteria development. Most approaches to teaching criteria development tend to be prescriptive, overly superficial, and, at times, confusing and misleading. One can develop criteria for evaluating the relative merits of potential solutions to problems only after a thorough problem analysis. Criteria themselves derive from two sources: assumptions drawn from the conditions of the problem itself and external constraints that create additional barriers to problem solutions. This article provides a rationale for emphasizing methods of teaching criteria development and describes a heuristic for identifying relevant criteria. Such an approach also addresses national concerns that we develop teaching methods that allow students to think logically, systematically, and analytically.

Poetry has imparted technical information to workers for centuries. This article presents both literary examples of poetic technical literature, and traditional examples of rhyme and song which acted functionally to lead and instruct workers in specific tasks. In so doing, it illustrates the usefulness and time-honored acceptance of poetic devices in technical communication.

The changing relationship of humanist education and society may be traced through historical changes in the relationship of formal education to technical writing. Technical writing with its intrinsic social purposes provides a powerful metaphor for the needs of society, and the resistance of the modern English department to applied writing provides evidence of the growing separation of society and the humanities. From classical philosophies of education through the humanist movement of the Renaissance, education was committed to the development of ideal leadership. Both classical and Renaissance humanists were epistolographers and public orators, meeting the needs of their societies. Modern humanists focus on the individual and the text. While Western culture from ancient Greece to the Renaissance educated citizens to specific service in society, the modern humanities are failing to combine utility with the preservation and creation of knowledge. Teachers should emulate the humanities of the past and teach writing as a social force in technology, politics, and business.

EDUCATION and training. Scholarly and vocational. Theoretical and practical. These terms describe traditionally divergent points of view that converge in technical communication curricula and courses. The directors of those programs and the teachers of those courses perform often delicate balancing acts to encourage that convergence. Creating and maintaining a balanced point of view is the theme for the two essays in this issue's Education and Training department.

OVER the last few years, the technology of electronic technical publishing has become increasingly powerful and flexible; professional technical communicators, as well as other professionals in technical fields, now can expect as a matter of course to develop documents at computer terminals, incorporate tabular and graphic material, format them using a wide range of visual attributes, store them electronically, and produce them on sophisticated computer-supported printing equipment.

The author suggests that answers to some of the more difficult questions in the readability-formula debate may be found in W. Gibson's book, Tough, Sweet, and Stuffy (1966). Gibson, in his analysis of style, develops a set of quantifiable characteristics of language that will produce tough talkers, sweet talkers, and stuffy talkers. In specifically analyzing these three familiar American voices, he is able to combine two necessary attributes of readability for technical communicators: a set of specific rules and a rationale for applying them, providing another slant on the readability issue.

As more colleges develop technical communication programs, often to boost sagging enrollments, more attention must be paid to the proper balance in such programs. Employers will want high quality in the programs from which they hire their technical writers. Engineers and other professionals may be interested in the training of those people who help them produce the manuals, proposals, and reports by which industry functions. This paper presumes that coursework must be balanced among several disciplines of learning, that theory must be balanced against practice, that course demands must be balanced against teaching innovation, and that the scholarly concerns of the academy must be balanced against the pragmatic concerns of industry.

Although engineers spend a substantial amount of their time writing or delivering oral presentations, the typical engineering curriculum segregates communications instruction from technical coursework. But out of an increasing sense of responsibility to provide more authentic professional training, engineering educators are developing programs which bring “real-life” contexts into the classroom. As a result, technical communications instruction is changing in significant ways. Writing clinics are tailoring their services to the precise needs of those they serve and expanding the range of professional support they offer. Furthermore, writing across the curriculum has significantly influenced engineering by linking composing and understanding. New communications courses parallel professional classes, and some redesigned engineering courses actually integrate verbal communication with “subject matter” instruction, Since these broad structural renovations are paradigmatic for other professional programs, technical writing teachers can and should facilitate and support such developments.

A current assumption is that “one best system” can be devised to develop and test user documentation. In-house documentation, however, demands approaches that do not fit into a generic system. Specifically, an in-house manual needs a special type of usability testing, one that measures if and how a manual is used to meet the goals of its organization. Along with quality testing, in-house writers must also run studies on how their manuals actually function in the workplace. This article describes a three-pronged design for actual use testing: user logs; observations; and surveys. In my case study, this testing revealed that users did not use their manuals for reasons other than quality — for instance, reliance on social interactions for acquiring information. My findings show that writing an effective manual requires more than composing skills; it demands writers' involvement in the organizational dynamics that motivate workers to use or not use their manuals.

Traditionally, technical communication courses have focused on the written transmission of information. Recent research, however, indicates that oral presentation and interpersonal exchange are as important as writing to on-the-job communication. This article reviews a research project conducted by the authors and students from their technical communication classes that offers important new insights into the rapidly changing environment of technical communication. Based on these insights, it also suggests some new strategies for teaching technical communication — strategies that place an equal emphasis on writing, oral presentation, and interpersonal communication.

Many engineers and other technical/managerial professionals continually generate writer-centered memos, letters, and brief reports. Because such documents often contain needless repetition, excessive detail, and chronology-based information, an approach for encouraging writers to produce clear, well organized, rhetorically sound prose was developed. Technical writing teachers and communication trainers must 1) make these prose “paladins” aware of the essential ingredients for generating reader-centered prose, 2) familiarize these writers with the major steps involved in the writing process, and 3) operationalize the process through face-to-face writer-editor collaboration — involving peer editorial review. Only through frequent drafting and rewriting and the regular sharing of peer editorial response (oral and written) will clear, rhetorically effective prose accrue value. And only then will technical/managerial writers routinely generate reader-centered documents that communicate.

Field study, using an ethnographic approach, offers a potentially powerful methodology for the technical communication researcher, a methodology that provides a useful balance to the strengths and weaknesses of experiments and surveys. Technical communication studies, however, exhibit not only the typical constraints of field research but several additional constraints inherent to research conducted on-the-job in business, industry, and government, which deserve consideration when designing research.