"Inventing the Election: Civic Participation and Presidential Candidates' Websites"

Dadas, Caroline E. “Inventing the Election: Civic Participation and Presidential Candidates’ Websites.” Computers and Compositions. 25.4 (2008): 416-431.

Dadas looks at the extent to which websites from the 2008 presidential election helped to engage voters in civic discourse. She examines each website by the level of participation each allows its users. She breaks these levels down into three categories: Robust, Moderate, and Superficial. Dadas examines three websites from April 15, 2007 to January 6, 2008: Barack Obama’s presidential campaign website, John McCain’s presidential campaign website, and Mitt Romney’s campaign website. Her findings are as follows. Barack Obama’s website was robust in that it allowed users to be “creator, planners, producers, and designers” (424). Participants could create their own webpages from the site, plan events, and connect to social networking tools, thus giving them agency within the campaign. John McCain’s site was evaluated as moderate. Users of the site were given opportunity to take surveys and post questions/responses to the campaign thus giving the campaign feedback from constituents; however, the site did not provide users with the same control over the technology as Obama’s site did. Mitt Romney’s website was evaluated as superficial. User’s did not have the opportunity to create or personalize the site to meet their needs; rather “the Romney website seems more focused on maintaining a carefully crafted image” (428). This analysis provides a leading discussion not only to how digital rhetoric and electronic media can create agency in civic discourse, but Dadas also concludes that having students use such a schema prepares them to begin engaging in civic discourse.

Originally, I worried about the objectivity of this analysis; however, Dadas does a nice job of defining the criteria for which she would evaluate the website. This article inspires me to think about and look for other ways that we could engage people in public discourse using these new tools. Many people have claimed that one of the reasons Obama won the presidency was because of his ability to use the web, social networking, etc., to build a support base from younger generations. By using the web, a new demographic was reached and inspired. How might we use technology to bring more people back into the realm of civic discourse to discuss important issues in our society?

"The Steel Bible: A Case Study of 20th Century Technical Communication"

Johnson, Carol. “The Steel Bible: A Case Study of 20th Century Technical Communication.” Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 37.3 (2007): 281-303. Web.

Johnson analyzes the 'Steel Bible' (aka The Making, Shaping, and Treatment of Steel)

comparing and contrasting the 11 versions of the text published between 1919 and 1999. Through these versions, Johnson sees not only the changing steel industry, but the changing technical communication field. She notes the major changes being technological, graphic, muliple-authorship rather than an authoritative single author, and the organization of

information for easy access. These changes reflected the needs of the audience and the audience

were loyal readers and users of the reference. Once consistency throughout the evolution of the

text, however, was the absence of human/social conditions affecting the steel industry. From the 1920s labor disputes to the outsourcing and decline of steel manufacturing in the U.S. during the 1980s, the text focused only on the technical aspects of manufacturing steel.

Johnson's analysis not only chronicle an important American industry through the 'Steel

Bible' (a historical artifact for sure) but shows how the TC field has particularly adjusted to the

needs of the audience. Her explanation of audience, graphics, and authorship demonstrate how

our field has changed to what we see today.

Research Networks for Graduate Students

Reference

Eyman, D., Sheffield, S., & DeVoss, D. N. (2009). Developing Sustainable Research Networks in Graduate Education. Computers and Composition, 26(1), 49-57. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2008.11.001

Topic

The authors provide a framework for establishing a research network by studying the Rhet.net research network at Michigan State University.

Research Question

The research question was stated as a thesis: “As we see them, research networks tap into the affordances of both networks (in the material and systemic senses) and communities of practice, but in order to be open to emergent possibilities and also sustainable over time, the community of researchers connected through a commitment to advancement of field-specific practices must acknowledge and explicitly construct itself as situated within an ecology of disciplinary, institutional, and social networks” (51).

Methodology

The author’s study Michigan State University Rhet.net research network which manifested from a 2004 course called “Digital Rhetoric.” The author’s look at the history of the network and analyze the stages of the its evolution to provide a working framework for the development of other research networks.

Results

The authors identify a “three-fold framework” for developing a research network

(following is quoted directly from the text):

1. Building a community of practice

2. Engaging critically

3. Applying skills in practical ways (54-55)

Authors’ Interpretation of Results

The authors see research networks as breaking from the model of individualistic work to collaborative work, moving towards “student-centered and critical pedagogies” (56). Furthermore, framing courses as “small-scale research networks” helps move research beyond coursework and creates a community of researchers (56).

Suggested Further Research

Eyman et. al. suggests that “the framework…can serve a springboard for thinking through curricular changes that may help to bring graduate education in rhetoric and composition into a productive dialogue with the collaborative activities that mark the professional work of the field” (56).

Critique

The authors do a fine job in breaking down a successful model and suggesting a framework for other departments to create a research network that will engage its students. However, the run through of the case study was brief and its methodology for developing its framework was unclear.

The PhD and Civic Responsibility

Reference

Knievel, M., & Sheridan-Rabideau, M. P. (2009). Articulating “Responsivity” in Context: Re-

making the M.A. in Composition and Rhetoric for the Electronic Age. Computers and

Composition, 26(1), 24-37. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2008.11.003

Topic

Knievel and Sheridan-Rabideau discuss the importance of focusing on new media instruction in their department at the University of Wyoming to meet the needs of the State of Wyoming, the university, their department, and their program.

Research Question

The research question is stated in thesis form: “Given the unique character of our university and department, as well as the needs of our state, we see new media as a cornerstone for writing studies as it is formulated locally. This privileging of new media has direct implications not only for our program development but also, we believe, for the future of writing studies itself” (25).

Methodology

Knievel and Sheridan-Rabideau take a case study approach to looking at the importance of new media/multimodal composition in their curriculum. They break down their research into two focal points: first, “examining context, examining stakeholders” and second, “positioning new media” (25 & 31). They apply each of these focus areas to the various organizations which have a stake in university education: the State of Wyoming, the university, the English department, and the writing program. The authors discuss how the shift in emphasis (or additional emphasis) will impact the work of each sector. They use historical and speeches from their departments as data for their case study as well as using theoretical texts to apply to their findings.

Results

Knievel and Sheridan-Rabideau indicate that resituating writing studies will provide their program (and assumingly the field in general) will “assert our [UW Writing Program] independence from long-held notions about composition and writing studies’ role in the local departmental and institutional context—in order to insert writing studies into the broader conversation and innovation and responsivity in the university” (36). Furthermore, looking at writing studies through this new lens positions writing studies in the forefront of local and global contexts for students, citizens, and institutions outside the academy.

Authors Interpretation of Results

The authors’ interpretations were the results of the case study.

Suggested Further Research

The author’s indicate that research into other institutions and departments local context may also show the need to incorporate new media into their curriculum.

Critique

The author’s focus is on the specific context of the University of Wyoming, which provides an interesting case of how the work in the university directly impacts the constituents in the state. Knievel and Sheirdan-Rabideau use various types of data to support their work and keep their data set narrowly defined. This creates a well rounded analysis of their departments and its position in the larger framework of Wyoming’s state economy.

History and Technical Communication

Dillon, W. T. “The New Historicism and Studies in the History of Business and Technical Writing.” Journal of Business and Technical Communication 11.1 (1997): 60-73. Web.

Dillon argues that, despite the academy’s push for research that can be directly applied to student outcomes, research in Business and Technical Writing should use a new historicist lens. New historicism, which takes a step further from historicism by shining a light on how historical texts have a direct impact (or legacy) in our present practices. Thus, part of learning history (according to new historicism) is understanding how it has shaped the present. Such theory is traditionally applied in literary theory, but Dillon claims that studying/examining Business and Technical writing through this lens not only shows “that their [students’] writing continues a rich, complex, and very old cultural tradition…but also [enables] them to frame more usefully the writing they produce and receive in terms of power, authority, culture, and economic necessity” (72).

For those of you interested in Technical Communication pedagogy, this is an article worth reading. How might we incorporate such examination in our classrooms? Where do students have the opportunity to deconstruct texts and look at it in theoretical ways or should this be the role of Tech-Com at all? These are some questions I’ve been pondering as I conceive of how to teach students both practical instruction of technical writing, but also providing a contextual framework for the work they do in our field.

Defining TC Annotations

Knievel, Michael. “What is Humanistic about Computers and Writing? Historical Patterns and Contemporary Possibilities for the Field.” Computers and Composition. 26.2 (2009): 92-106. Science Direct. Web. 5 Sept. 2010.

Knievel traces the history of how scholars in computers and writing have argued for the field to be recognized as humanistic and a necessary component of the Humanities and specifically to English. He suggests that this debate goes back to post-World War II distinctions between the humanities and the sciences (which were better funded). This created a dichotomy where the two areas of scholarship were distinctly different and humanities thought of this distinction as “self-preservation” (94). As new technologies began permeating English studies, they were looked at by non-computers and writing scholars as a threat to the study of humanity (languages, art, literature, culture, etc.); specifically, the fear of stifling creativity, critical thinking, and active learning was the concern of traditional humanities scholars. Knievel explains that computers and writing had to begin forming an understanding of the field by closely aligning the use and study of technology in relation to writing and rhetoric with the values of the English humanities. However, since the turn of the century, computers and writing has begun to assert that the teaching and studying of multiliteracies is indeed a core component to humanities due to the nature of the social engagement and knowledge creating/sharing in online environments. Thus, not only is computers and writing advancing in the humanities for these studies, but English studies needs to begin looking at the field through this lens if they want to remain sustainable in higher education.

Knievel’s argument provides an excellent history of the definition of computers in writing in the sphere of humanities and the various forms in which computers and writing scholars have protected the humanistic nature of the field. In many ways, Knievel shows how important incorporating the humanistic approach is in the defining of the field.

Scott, T. “Writing work, technology, and pedagogy in the era of late capitalism.” Computers and Composition 23.2 (2006): 228-243. Web. Science Direct. 10 Sept. 2010.

Scott observes two camps of technical communication pedagogy. The first camp, “capitalism hope,” believes students in TC will enter the field and make core changes in their positions that in turn will encourage “late capitalism” to be “more humane and ethical” (230). This camp aims at making technical writers critical of technology and their role in the production and distribution of technology so as to avoid mishandling of technology and destruction that can occur due to this mishandling (for instance, Scotts cites Bhopal, Chernobyl, and the Challenger as potential points where such pedagogy, ideally, could eliminate human loss). The second camp however, believes technical communication should prepare students to thrive in the marketplace without pushing the need for influencing ideological changes in the workplace (230). This camp looks to position technical writers so they can be successful within the confines of the new economy [Scott coins this “tactics of survival”] (232). The reasoning behind this pedagogy is that technical writers gain agency in the composition of the work, rather than being “a mere copyeditor/proofreader” (232). Foregrounding with these definitions, Scott argues that “[p]reparing students for writing work in the contemporary economy requires that we account for both the characteristics of this economy and the role that technologies play within it” (235). This does create a paradox between the needs of business versus the role of the academy. Pedagogies must include teaching skills necessary to perform TC duties; however, in the post-industrial economy, TC’s role as a humanistic field must also take into consideration the influence of the new economy on a civic level as well.

This is a very complex article bringing in Reich’s post-industrial categorization of the labor force, technical communicator theorists, and writers looking at the ever changing economy and the role of technology in the new economy; however, by weaving together such ideas, Scott shows the difficulty of defining the position of the technical communicator given the idealist notions of the academy and the demands of the marketplace. For those of us teaching technical communication, this is an important article for looking at how to approach both the practical and theoretical framework of TC education.