Tag: Social Action

Colton, J. S. & Walton, R. (2015). Disability as insight into social justice pedagogy in technical communication. The Journal of Interactive Technology & Pedagogy 8, (pp. 1-13).

In Jared S. Colton and Rebecca Walton’s (2015) article “Disability as Insight into Social Justice Pedagogy in Technical Communication,” they proposed that, “considerations of disability can provide insight into the relevance of social justice to technical communication practice” (p. 1). Colton and Walton analyzed the definition of social justice, reviewed the various aspects of social action (e.g., service learning, community-based research, action/activist research, civic engagement), the establishment of an ethical framework to insight social justice, the individualistic aspect of the virtue of ethics, studied three designed undergraduate courses with various methods for collecting data about the relationship between social justice and technical communication, discovered an emerging pattern of the students’ need and ability to engage in inclusive and accessible communication design, and the students’ awareness of the connections between social justice and technical communication. Colton and Walton’s purpose was to propose the strategy of “introducing issues of social justice to students by initially pointing their attention to disability and its immediate and more accessible exigency to communication design” (p. 8). Colton and Walton’s intended audience was instructors wishing to implement social justice practices with communication design and students becoming more aware of social justice in the classroom. Colton and Walton demonstrated a clear understanding of the topic they were arguing and approached their study in an ethical way that benefited both the instructors and the students.

Blyler, N. (1998). Taking a political turn: The critical perspective and research in professional communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572259809364616

In Nancy Blyler’s (1998) article “Taking a Political Turn: The Critical Perspective and Research in Professional Communication.,” she promoted that “research in professional communication ought to take an increasingly political turn” (p. 1). Blyler investigated the resistance of political communication in a pedagogy setting along with the possibilities, the sources of power, the ethical benefits, the goal of research, the necessary relationship between knowledge and politics, self-conscious recognition, empowerment and emancipation, the relationship between researcher and participant, free and open communication, ideology and subjectivity, disciplines, theoretical perspectives, and methodology. Blyler’s purpose was to demonstrate the realization that “the same benefits in our research that accrue to us from our political turn in our pedagogy: the benefits of empowerment, emancipation, and social action” (p. 12). Blyler’s intended audience was scholars involved in professional communication who may have been weary of incorporating political features. Blyler’s innovative perspective appeared possible in the article, but it would be interesting to see how the funding issues and political logistics evolve.

Durack, K. T. (1997). Gender, technology, and the history of technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 6(3), (pp. 249-260). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq0603pass:[_]2

In Katherine T. Durack’s (1997) article “Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication,” she assessed the common agreement that “scientific inquiry and technological innovation have been primarily the work of men, the contributions of women have consequently been subsumed, lost, or overlooked” (p. 250). Durack traced the history of technical writing by examining the association of technology and the workplace with men, the separation of the public and private spheres, how women were at a disadvantage, how writing in the household wasn’t recognized as workplace writing, and the goal of social action. Durack’s purpose was to challenge and enlighten “why we deem certain artifacts technology, their attendant activities work, their place of conduct the workplace, and therefore find reason to include associated writings within the corpus history of technical writing” (p. 258). Durack’s intended audience was feminist historians and scholars researching the history of women inventors in technical settings. Durack emphasized the apparent omission of women within the history of technical communication with thought-provoking evidence and researched support, but the bias tone of the essay seemed to aim more towards blaming the “historians who wrote them” rather than searching for a resolution for the greater good of the academic subject (p. 250).