The guidelines for the curriculum in English published by the National Council of the Teachers of English (NCTE) and the International Reading Association have been criticized by a number of publications. A new guideline—for writing to convey factual information only—is proposed.

Four of the five issues normally involved in an argument of policy can be persuasively argued on the basis of facts. However, the fourth issue, that of fairness, might better be argued by following the organizational plan of an appellate court decision. The Supreme Court decision in Teminello vs. the United States is offered as an example. The practicality of this plan is illustrated with a student paper.

Electronic systems are difficult to describe and explain because: 1) electronic systems involve an unusual layering of several different languages, 2) electricity itself is invisible, and may be indefinable, 3) developments in electronics are occurring so rapidly that few people understand its history, and 4) electricity or electronics is impossible to dramatize and make human.

There are two opposing views towards technical writing courses and towards teachers of technical writing: one favorable, the other disdainful. Those who disdain technical writing seem to believe that it: 1) imposes restrictive and arbitrary forms upon creative individuals, 2) involves only the accumulation of factual evidence, 3) deals with things, rather than with people, and 4) is, like other practical arts, a second-class activity. The first three beliefs are mistaken, and it can be argued that the dissemination of technical and scientific information is just as humanistic as artistic writing.

External examiners drawn from industry and from other universities have been used in a course in technical writing. The evolution of this scheme is described and other teachers of technical writing are urged to adopt it.

Professors emeritii from both engineering and the humanities can usefully serve as External Examiners to determine the student's final grade in a scientific and technical communication course.

Freshman composition is a large, expensive, undisciplined operation. The course is taught to students who have little to say by people who are more interested in analyzing literature. It should be replaced by a course designed for seniors. The author draws on his experience at the University of Michigan and describes at what stage composition is taught to engineering students.