10572252.2016.1257743

In Colton, Holmes, and Walwema’s (2017) article, “From NoobGuides to #OpKKK: Ethics of Anonymous’ Tactical Technical Communication” they analyzed “the ethical thought of feminist philosopher Adriana Cavarero, particularly her concept of vulnerability, as a supplement for those employing tactics for social justice causes” and examined “the technical documents produced by the hacktivist collective Anonymous” (p. 59). Colton, Holmes, and Walwema discussed the problematics of tactics being classified as “an art of the weak,” the suggested body of thought called the “ethics of care,” then examined three of Anonymous’ recent technical communication genres that demonstrated an ambiguous ethical status, ethical justification, discerning whether a tactic aims away or towards “horrorism,” the evaluation of ethics of tactics through vulnerability or unethical tactic, the act of utilizing hacking, and the issue of doxing hacked information with the question of accuracy and credibility. Colton, Holmes, and Walwema’s purpose was to illustrate that “Through the application of care ethics, particular Cavarero’s notion of vulnerability, we have worked to show that tactical technical communication can benefit from supplementation” (p. 73). Colton, Holmes, and Walwema’s intended audience was those deciding whether a tactic was ethical or not and providing them with a different lens to assess each occurrence individually. Colton, Holmes, and Walwema exposed the wide range of unethical tactics and offered suggestions on how to combat the inclusive labeling, which was supported by their incorporation of the three technical communication genres that demonstrated an ambiguous ethical status.

Dubinsky, J. M. (2002). More than a Knack: Techne & Teaching Technical Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 11(2), (pp. 129-145).

In James M. Dubinsky’s (2002) article, “More than a Knack: Techne & Teaching Technical Communication” he argued “for a more deliberate emphasis on teacher training by reinvigorating techne as a concept that is far more than instrumental or prescriptive” (p. 129). Dubinsky illustrated the need but lack of technical communicators which can lead to a system-centered perspective, the reliance of teachers on a formulaic pedagogy, the relevance of techne to technical communication, Aristotle’s distinction between knack (what one comes to know from repeated practice/habit) and art (techne) where he says that knowledge belongs to art because an artist knows the cause (understands the why) and men of experience do not, the techne of teaching with reliance upon the contingent which has the ability to bridge the gap between theory and practice, techne being a reasoned state of capacity to make, knowledge of the purpose and the audience, the importance of the situational component of teaching an understanding of the students, learning to teach, a user-centered approach to teacher training in the classroom, and using stories to show the reasons for recommendations. Dubinsky’s purpose was to show that “If we prepare prospective teachers to master the techne of teaching, we encourage them to become user-centered, reflective practitioners who understand the critical need for situational uses of knowledge” (p. 129). Dubinsky’s intended audience was teachers of technical communication needing training in how to become more user-centered and on how to teach. Dubinsky skillfully examined the historical context behind techne, which helped to inform the rest of his article and why it’s an important part of the technical communication pedagogy.

Cook, K. C. (2002). Layered Literacies: A Theoretical Frame for Technical Communication Pedagogy. Technical Communication Quarterly, 11(1), (pp. 5-29). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq1101_1

In Kelli Cargile Cook’s (2002) article, “Layered Literacies: A Theoretical Frame for Technical Communication Pedagogy” she proposed a “theoretical frame for technical communication pedagogy based on six layered literacies: basic, rhetorical, social, technological, ethical, and critical” (p. 5). Cook synthesized the current narratives surrounding the teaching of technical communication, assessed the six layered literacies (basic, rhetorical, social, technological, ethical, and critical), knowing oneself and the audience, effectively collaborating, working with technologies, knowing your role and how it affects the user-centered design, the ethical force that moves things along towards a center, recognizing ideological power structures and taking action to assist others, and the incorporation of the literacies into the curriculum. Cook’s purpose was to demonstrate that “most importantly, they can use the frame both to promote and to assess the increasingly complex range of knowledge and skills students require to become successful technical and professional communicators in the twenty-first century” (p. 24). Cook’s intended audience was potential and current instructors of technical communication who might need guidance about teaching such complex material. Cook clearly described each type of literacy distinctly and established their importance into the curriculum.

Dombrowski, P. M. (2000). Ethics and Technical Communication: The Past Quarter Century. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 30(1), (pp. 3–29). https://doi.org/10.2190/3YBY-TYNY-EQG8-N9FC

In Paul M. Dombrowski’s (2000) article, “Ethics and Technical Communication: The Past Quarter Century” he indicated that “Though the transmission of concrete technical information lies at the core of technical communication, we now realize that there are successive layers to the functions and purposes of technical discourse rippling well beyond this core” (p. 3). Dombrowski evaluated the important role ethics plays, the responsibility of technical writers and communicators to be ethical, and provided an overview of opinions and perspectives on the subject (professional, academic, and systematic). Dombrowski’s purpose was to showcase “an annotated bibliography of ethics and technical communication journal articles over the past twenty-five years” to illustrate how the complex and inclusive nature of technical communication has changed (p. 5). Dombrowski’s intended audience was scholars needing an overview of the previous opinions on upholding ethics in technical communication. Dombrowski provided an in-depth analysis of research already conducted, but he could have enhanced his arguments by providing more personal opinions into the mix.

Lauer, C. & Brumberger, E. (2016). Technical Communication as User Experience in a Broadening Industry Landscape. Technical Communication, 63(3), (pp. 248-264).

In Claire Lauer and Eva Brumberger’s (2016) article, “Technical Communication as User Experience in a Broadening Industry Landscape” they argued that “technical communication work shares traits and competencies with the field of UX and that technical communicators who are not already doing UX work are well qualified to expand their career paths into the UX field and could, in fact, play a central role in UX” (p. 248). Lauer and Brumberger analyzed 502 UX job listings on Monster.com, conducted a content analysis of the job descriptions, noted five emerging categories (Designer, Developer, Architect, Manager, and Researcher), the emergence of technical communicators being ideally suited for jobs in user experience, the emphasis on communication, the need for an enhancement of technology skills, and the inclusion of a portfolio of UX accomplishments required as part of the final capstone project for students. Lauer and Brumberger’s purpose was to demonstrate that “If technical communicators claim a more central role in UX, they will be able to shape the user’s experience beyond content and usability, thereby improving interactions with information products at every stage of the process” (p. 263). Lauer and Brumberger’s intended audience was technical communicators unaware of how qualified they are or could be to become a user experience expert. Lauer and Brumberger utilized a unique approach to discovering information that had gone unexplored and their research could greatly benefit technical communicators and the job field of UX.

Redish J. (2010). Technical Communication and Usability: Intertwined Strands and Mutual Influences. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(3), (pp. 191-201). doi: 10.1109/TPC.2010.2052861

In Janice Redish’s (2010) article, “Technical Communication and Usability: Intertwined Strands and Mutual Influences” she acknowledged that “Before we consider how technical communicators can contribute to the future of usability, we need to understand how the fields of technical communication and usability have influenced each other in the past” (p. 191). Redish explored the history of UX, the development of practice and techniques, the extensive research on usability, the importance of teamwork and collaboration, the emphasis on communication, the complexity of both the process and the products, and the need to adapt to new changes. Redish’s purpose was to propose that “Perhaps being reminded of how deeply and how long technical communication and usability have been intertwined will increase mutual respect and collaboration in future work on the entire UX—interfaces, architecture, content, and more” (p. 199). Redish’s intended audience was technical communicators and researchers of user experience. Redish offered an extensive analysis of the history of UX, which effectively promoted reflection and appreciation for how much the field has developed.

Williams, M. F. (2006). Tracing W. E. B. DuBois’ “Color Line” in Government Regulations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 36(2), (pp. 141–165). https://doi.org/10.2190/67RN-UAWG-4NFF-5HL5

In Miriam F. Williams’s (2006) article, “Tracing W. E. B. DuBois’ ‘Color Line’ in Government Regulations” she presented a “discourse analysis of historical regulations that gives us insight into African American’s experiences with historical regulations” (p. 142). Williams highlighted the significance of the problem of regulatory writing within a historical context, the creation of the “color line,” the writings of DuBois and Washington, the African-Americans’ distrust of the government throughout history, the trust and distrust of other marginalized groups, the Houston incident, a discourse analysis in search of language that denotes trust or distrust, coding the language in Black Codes, and the results indicated a skew towards language that would likely promote distrust in an African-American audience. Williams’s purpose was to reveal that the “disenfranchisement of freed blacks in this country was an intentional breakdown in communication and governance; similar government-initiated ruptures have occurred throughout history with people of various ethnic, political, and socioeconomic backgrounds” (p. 163). Williams’s intended audience was individuals unaware of the effect of regulatory writing on the African-Americans’ distrust of the government. Williams had evidently conducted extensive research and used an effective discourse analysis to support her notion.

Barton, B. F. & Barton, M. S. (1998). Narration in Technical Communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2(1), (pp. 36–48).

In Ben F. Barton and Marthalee S. Barton’s (1998) article, “Narration in Technical Communication” they claimed that “narration is widely devalued as a mode of discourse, among teachers and researchers of technical communication” and that “such devaluation is unwarranted by suggesting the complexity, pervasiveness, and potential advantages of narration in technical communication” (p. 36). Barton and Barton evaluated narration in both natural and specialized discourse, the disinterest in narration and reasons for the devaluation, both the complexity and the perverseness of narration, written and oral along with visuals, and advantages in problem solving. Barton and Barton’s purpose was to show that “we need research aimed at a more conscious and informed exploitation of narration in technical communication, at the use of narration appropriate at a variety of levels throughout technical discourse in given contexts and with given goals” (p. 45). Barton and Barton’s intended audience was teachers and researchers of technical communication. Barton and Barton clearly displayed their argument in an understandable way and provided valid support of their claims.

Johnson R. R., Salvo M. J. & Zoetewey M. W. (2007).User-Centered Technology in Participatory Culture: Two Decades ‘Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing.’ IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(4), (pp. 320-332). doi: 10.1109/TPC.2007.908730

In Robert R. Johnson, Michael J. Salvo, and Meredith W. Zoetewey (2007) article, “User-Centered Technology in Participatory Culture: Two Decades ‘Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing’” they argued that “usability requires a balance between empirical observation and rhetoric” (p. 320). Johnson, Salvo, and Zoetewey outlined usability by discussing the “end-of-the-line” problem, the complex relationship between rhetoric and science, efficiency, effectiveness, accuracy, the split between culture and science, human behavior, the “Uniqueness of Individual Perception,” the relationship between humans and technologies, contingencies and probabilities, corporatization, and audience analysis. Johnson, Salvo, and Zoetewey’s purpose was to show that the “long view, exemplified in both scholarship and theorizing, may be inefficient, but it remains the only avenue for innovation and coining new knowledge” (p.330). Johnson, Salvo, and Zoetewey’s intended audience was implied psychologist, technical communicators, and engineers. Johnson, Salvo, and Zoetewey effectively demonstrated the dynamics of usability and its different facets, but there should have been more specific examples of what usability was and why the considerations mentioned were necessary.

Nielsen, J. (2012). Usability 101: An Introduction to Usability. Nielsen Norman Group, (pp. 1-6). https://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-to-usability/

In Jakob Nielsen’s (2012) article, “Usability 101: An Introduction to Usability” he exposed usability as a “quality attribute that assesses how easy user interfaces are to use” (p. 1). Nielsen dissected usability by identifying the five components (learnability, efficiency, memorability, errors, and satisfaction), various definitions (utility, usability, useful), the first law of ecommerce, the effect on budget and profit, improvement through user testing, the process, and the location. Nielsen’s purpose was to demonstrate “Usability and utility are equally important and together determine whether something is useful: It matters little that something is easy if it’s not what you want” (p. 2). Nielsen’s intended audience was anyone who needed to know the basic usability facts and their important role in everyday lives. Nielsen explained usability in simple, digestible terms with definitions that were easy to understand and comprehend.