The author of this article argues that all too often teachers of technical writing spend too much time pressuring their students to write simply and without jargon, and that as a result they often get writing that is bad because it is skeletal and undeveloped writing lacking in continuity and narrative functions. The technical writer is often overjoyed to submit outline-writing because it requires small effort, not realizing that it shifts the burden of interpretation to the reader. The author recommends a number of cures for the skeletal technical paper.

This paper discusses some of the main reasons for the weakness of much technical writing. It suggests that in teaching college-level students in science and engineering curricula the writing teacher should focus mainly on those weak areas, many of which are neglected in high school English courses or in traditional freshman English. If scientific and technical writers can be taught to make a rigorous intellectual analysis of their writing and can be steered away from simplistic and simple-minded formulas they will come to have enough respect for writing as an intellectual discipline that they can be motivated to bring about actual improvement in their written work.