This special section highlights the efforts of technical communicators to innovate new approaches for postmodern usability. Redish provides an invaluable historical overview of where we have been, and she also addresses where we might be headed as technical communicators engaged in shaping usability studies. Cooke presents a mixed-methods approach for data analysis, leaning on a mixture of eye tracking and concurrent think-aloud protocol. Finally, Kase, Zhang, Carroll, and Rosson offer a pattern-based approach as an alternative method for investigating sustainable strategies of information-technology learning.

Arguably, usability testing is most effective when integrated into the user-centered design process. One way to encourage this integration is to reemphasize the value of paper prototyping. In a recent test of a university library website, we married low-fidelity paper prototyping with medium-fidelity wireframe prototyping. When user navigation led to nonexisting pages or dead ends, users were encouraged to create what they thought should be where there was nothing. This blank-page technique gave us insights into users' mental models regarding site content and design, providing developers with useful data concerning how users conceptualized information they encountered.

2008 marked the 10-year Anniversary of the Open Source movement, which has had a substantial impact on not only software production and adoption, but also on the sharing and distribution of information. Technical communication as a discipline has taken some advantage of the movement or its derivative software, but this article argues not as much as it could or should. We have adopted Open Source Software (OSS) to manage courses or websites; we have, following the principles of Open Source, made some intellectual resources available; but we have not developed a truly open—open to access, open to use, and open to edit—pedagogical resource that teachers of technical and professional communication courses at every level can rely on to craft free offerings to their students. Now is the ideal time to consider developing OpenTechComm. This article makes the case for why and how it could be implemented.

Many students see instructor commentary as not constructive but prescriptive directions that must be followed so that their grade, not necessarily their writing, can be improved. Research offering heuristics for improving such commentary is available for guidance, but the methods employed to comment on writing still have not changed significantly, primarily because we lack sufficient understanding of how students use feedback. Usability evaluation is ideally equipped for assessing how students use commentary and how instructors might adapt their comments to make them more usable. This article reports on usability testing of commentary provided to students in an introductory technical writing course.

Abstract Early scholarly inquiries into online health information focused primarily on questions of accuracy and credibility. In recent research, however, we are seeing an expansion in this initial focus, to include issues such as the usability, design, and ethics of online health information. This special issue contains five articles that contribute to scholarly inquiry in these emerging areas of interest.

For some time, writing teachers have used audio feedback to assess students' work. But previous methods using audiocassettes are now dated or impractical for online or distance classrooms. Voice commentary can still be used to evaluate students' writing, however, using Microsoft Word's commenting feature for embedding voice comments. This article explains why this method of commentary is used; discusses students' reactions to the method, tracked over a 2-year period; and provides detailed instructions for using the software.

Focusing on the issue of readability, this article examines problems that readability formulas present to the technical communicator, especially in terms of interaction with government agencies, and focuses on readability formula requirements mandated by The Office of Health and Industry programs [OHIP] for medical technology product support literature. Because the Flesch Reading Ease and the Flesch-Kincaid formulas are widely available, they are probably the ones most frequently used. Contemporary readability scholars have overlooked the Golub Syntactic Density Formula, which evaluates prose according to a sentence's syntax at a deeper level than the number of words per sentence and the number of syllables per word. The authors recommend it as a tool for evaluating readability. How it might be applied with current computer applications is discussed.