tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-63210082011-07-14T00:09:59.246-05:00Welcome to a web log for students and professionals who study/write technical documents, policies, and procedures. Join in the discussion.Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1481100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1162407971914780742006-11-01T13:05:00.000-06:002006-11-01T13:06:11.933-06:00

I found it quite interesting that Rude basis her argument, at least partially, on the idea that genre should be defined through context rather than form. She describes the differences in terminology and procedure used by textbooks for writing repots which deal with decision making. Some of the various names, given by the textbooks, for these reports include feasibility reports, problem solving

Matthew Bichlerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17089995350576148497noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1161670355300570252006-10-24T00:42:00.000-05:002006-10-25T00:47:00.313-05:00

Winsor begins by commenting that she would never do a so-called study like this now. The article is outdated for several reasons, mostly problems with construction like explanation of her subject choice or analytical triangulation. Regardless, its value is in its interdisciplinary perspective. The basic premise here is this: Observations of the external world is transformed into "knowledge"

Thiahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04487577511729091790noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1161285148102648662006-10-19T14:11:00.000-05:002006-10-19T14:12:28.116-05:00

The questions and issues raised in Selber’s article published in 1993 still reverberate with the use of technology in and for education in general and in tech comm., in particular. The author begins by surveying the courses that involved the use of technology in technical communication programs in the US and categorizing them. Three main categories of approaches to the design of computer related

Sasha Komarenkohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17278685201404548658noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1160421248275100782006-10-09T14:11:00.000-05:002006-10-09T16:47:26.540-05:00

In this article, “The social perspective and professional communication”, Charlotte Thralls and Nancy Roundy Blyler talks about three different social perspectives in professional and academic communication. They are: the social constructionist approach, the ideologic approach, and the paralogic hermeneutic approach. They further breaks these categories down to abstract some similarities

Deebahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15124149752124697779noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1159808622628254272006-10-02T11:58:00.000-05:002006-10-02T13:59:01.353-05:00

Jack Selzer's article "The Composing Process of an Engineer" details the approach to writing taken by Kenneth E. Nelson, an engineer at Henningson, Durham, and Richardson (HDR). Selzer examined Nelson's documents and notes, interviewed Nelson, and listened to responses to questions recorded by Nelson before and after he created documents. This in-depth examination of Nelson's writing process

Hoopshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17140691594267646858noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1159544163032096152006-09-29T10:35:00.000-05:002006-09-29T10:36:03.036-05:00

“The research results that form this model describe and explain the rhetorical and organizational activities of a particular case, and as such can be generalized only very tentatively.”This line from very near the end of the article summed up the skepticism I felt throughout the article. The results seem rather obvious: a business plan, written by the five individuals who control the entire

Matthew Bichlerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17089995350576148497noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1158630153250867682006-09-18T19:41:00.000-05:002006-09-18T20:42:37.716-05:00

The author begins by noting when the original article was written. Today, she comments, technology has advanced so far and so ubiquitously that the content is more common sense. However, despite the fact that the focus should be less on the data, the fundamental necessity for rhetorical understanding of data presentation (reports) remains the same (382). Mirel tackles the importance and

Thiahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04487577511729091790noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1158005842632114462006-09-11T15:15:00.000-05:002006-09-11T15:17:22.670-05:00

Herndl argues that current state of research and pedagogy in the field of technical communication (and, likely, composition in general) fails to critically examine, and thus, possibly, reinforces the hegemony of the prevalent power/political structures. Research, the author argues, has failed to examine the conditions and relationships between the established power structures and the people who

Sasha Komarenkohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17278685201404548658noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1157592794045416582006-09-06T20:22:00.000-05:002006-09-06T20:33:14.080-05:00

In this article, “History, Rhetoric, and Humanism”, Russell Rutter portrayed how technical communication is linked with rhetoric and oratorical ideologies. He showed us how thoughts and ideas about technical communication have changed with time. Technical communication is not about making technology the center point. It is to create a way for people to understand the usage of technology. As David

Deebahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15124149752124697779noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1157558736327094292006-09-06T10:57:00.000-05:002006-09-06T11:06:21.250-05:00

Sorry this is so late. I just finished moving to Champlin and did not have internet access until now.As far as my interest in Technical Writing, I would love to edit in a big publishing company on the coast. In reality, I see myself working for a company like Medtronic or Boston Scientific.Matthew Bichler

Matthew Bichlerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17089995350576148497noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1157162206877866542006-09-01T20:54:00.000-05:002006-09-01T20:56:46.900-05:00

In his article, “The Rise of Technical Writing Instruction in America,” Robert J. Connors describes in detail the progression of technical writing instruction since the middle of the nineteenth century. Connors begins his essay by stating that technical writing, in one form or another, has existed since ancient times; however, he states that the attempt to actually create an instructional

Hoopshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17140691594267646858noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1156960272292299632006-08-30T12:37:00.000-05:002006-08-30T12:51:12.306-05:00

My name is Deeba Rahman. I graduated from St Cloud State University with major in Business Computer Information Systems and a minor in Graphic Design. This is my first semester in MSU. I am pursuing MA in Technical Writing while working full-time at James Tower as a Technical Support Specialist.I am originally from Bangladesh was born in Dubai, finished my high school in England and finally moved

Deebahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15124149752124697779noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1156956981220370902006-08-30T11:43:00.000-05:002006-08-30T11:56:21.240-05:00

My name is Catherine and I am a second year grad student. I am pursuing both the MA in t.com and the MFA in creative writing (fiction), so, as I mentioned the other day, I feel kind of schitzophrenic most of the time. In one program, sentence fragments and intentional comma splices are the way to go. In the other, we write by the book. Plus, while I'm a pretty quick learner, I don't know any HTML

Hoopshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17140691594267646858noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1156909316221097802006-08-29T22:41:00.000-05:002006-08-29T22:45:17.283-05:00

I’m a grad student. Sad to say this is my 3rd grad program. I have a Speech Comm. MA and hope finish my TESOL MA this semester. I’m just starting the Tech Comm. Certificate program at MSU and hoping to finish it in a year. I’m really excited about this program because all of my academic and professional experiences have involved technical communication in one way or another. Since I’m an

Sasha Komarenkohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17278685201404548658noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1156898236937735472006-08-29T19:23:00.000-05:002006-08-29T19:50:35.593-05:00

(Looks like I'm the first one, so I hope I'm doing this right. :P)My name's Thia, and I took the red pill. TechComm grad student.I'm a software, internet, and computer junkie, spending far too much time in front of my laptop than is healthy. (I'm typing this via the latest version of K-meleon, but I much prefer Opera.) That said, I hope to get into technical writing for hardware or software or

Thiahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04487577511729091790noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1156816882843314032006-08-28T20:55:00.000-05:002006-08-28T21:17:48.703-05:00

Welcome to the Fall 2006 edition of the Central Works blog; it is our intention to continue the discussion of the readings here. In your first blog entry, please introduce yourselves though there is no need to divulge a lot of personal information.Throughout the semester you will be responsible for your own entry but also for a response to everyone else's blog entry.

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1147724915379795742006-05-15T15:12:00.000-05:002006-05-15T15:28:35.393-05:00

Thanks to everyone who kept our Central Works blog alive during the spring semester. I thought that Wes, Anna, and Nisha all did a nice job of summarizing and critiquing Central Works articles. Thanks also to Stuart Selber of Penn State (and one of the editors of Central Works), for blogging with us.While the media and the public seem to notice only the political blogosphere, we used our

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1147097993563943232006-05-08T09:15:00.000-05:002006-05-08T09:19:53.576-05:00

While developing a PHD program at Michigan Technological University, the author, Dale L. Sullivan, wrote this article that voices some concerns that the author dealt with during that period. The author has a reactionary stand towards the technological society but she accepts the fact that this wouldn’t help a person who has to make a living in a technological world created by our revolving

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1147059024711900772006-05-07T22:29:00.000-05:002006-05-07T22:30:24.726-05:00

James Paradis wrote this article following his experiences as an expert witness in a liability suit involving the studgun. The lawsuit arose questions regarding the role manuals play in the user’s mental construction of the tool and how effectively the operator’s manuals elaborated the procedurally sensitive process of safely applying the studgun to various tasks. According to Paradis, a operator

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1146960230932447592006-05-06T19:03:00.000-05:002006-05-06T19:03:50.933-05:00

In this article, the author talks about the misplacement of technical writing in today's information age. According to the author, technical communicators are situated as experts in the final stage to create association among various bits of information. While technical communicators should have had a central role in this new information age economy, the field was frequently cast in a supporting

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1146960131636021122006-05-06T18:59:00.000-05:002006-05-06T19:05:46.730-05:00

In this article, the authors suggest that it is important to help teachers identify the effects of domination and colonialism associated with computer use so that they can establish a new territory to understand the relationships between technology and education. They claim that, the teachers of English, though unknowingly, teach students inequity even as they strive to erase such lessons from

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1146927505894646232006-05-06T09:51:00.000-05:002006-05-06T09:58:25.913-05:00

Charney, through this article, responds to other theorists who misunderstood, and therefore avoided, a straightforward empirical approach towards writing. Craney suggests that the writer’s ability to improve their work may be impaired by them advocating to subjective methods as opposed to objective methods. Charney doesn’t hold back when she argues against the mischaracterizations of science, for

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1146708083116819372006-05-03T20:59:00.000-05:002006-05-03T21:01:23.133-05:00

Technology is changing everyday. It has imbued not just the workplace but also the classrooms. Staurt A. Selber, through his article, looks into the challenges that technical communication teachers face in today’s computer age. This article reports results from a survey of US technical and professional communication undergraduate programs concerning core concepts emphasized and most commonly

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144859867884839452006-04-12T11:36:00.000-05:002006-04-12T11:37:47.896-05:00

It’s no secret that globalization is growing. As companies expand into many countries, there is a growing diversity among the people who work for these companies. With this diversity comes the inevitability of cultural clash. Cultures can differ on how they conduct collaboration projects, what values are held, and how communication is conducted. Deborah Bosley knows this and addresses how these

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144809374796368772006-04-11T21:35:00.000-05:002006-04-11T21:36:14.813-05:00

In “Contesting the Objectivist Paradigm: Gender Issues in the Technical and Professional Communication Curriculum,” Lee Brasseur describes her first semester of teaching a master’s level seminar class titled “Gender Issues in Technical and Professional Writing and Communication.” She argues that “the discourse of technical communication has traditionally rested on a foundation of scientific

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144599138172573852006-04-09T11:11:00.000-05:002006-04-09T11:14:14.280-05:00

Like Lee, I would like to thank Stuart for taking the time to contribute to our blog, and for producing Central Works. I was also intrigued by Stuart’s comments on editing the book. I appreciate that he acknowledges that even though the editors attempted to keep politics out of their decisions on what essays to include in the collection, the fact that the collection reflects their values to a

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144598245334588852006-04-09T10:56:00.000-05:002006-04-09T10:57:25.366-05:00

In “Who ‘Owns’ Electronic Texts,” Tharon W. Howard discusses the historical background of U.S. copyright law. Contrary to the romantic notions that some of us have today, copyright was not originally established to protect the rights of authors. Rather, it originated with a royal charter issued to the Stationers’ Company (representatives of the publishing industry) by Mary Tudor and Philip of

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144271807656349532006-04-05T16:13:00.000-05:002006-04-05T16:16:47.670-05:00

There comes a time when we must consider what the future will bring. We must look at where we currently are, what has led us to this point, and what it will eventually lead to. If his article “The Shape of Text to Come: The Texture of Print on Screens” is any indication, Stephen Bernhardt knows this concept very well. The very first sentence in Berhardt’s article states that “changes in the

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144175935453388192006-04-04T13:28:00.000-05:002006-04-04T13:38:55.493-05:00

Thanks Stuart, for taking time out of your busy schedule to blog with us. I was particularly interested in your second point about putting together Central Works with Johndan Johnson-Eilola. I sometimes think that the intellectual journey we students take from high school, through undergraduates studies, and on to graduate programs is partly a process of deciding what the relationship should be,

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1144084020108796572006-04-03T11:50:00.000-05:002006-04-03T12:07:00.180-05:00

Lee asked me to check in on your blogging of Central Works. I was hoping to do this last week, but time got away from me. But I really enjoyed reading your posts thus far on Central Works. I'll make two brief comments: one on my own essay, the other on the task of editing the book. I don't know if you'll be getting to my essay or not, the one called "Beyond Skill Building," but here is some

Stuart Selberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17220671014120183379noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1143664083794440722006-03-29T14:25:00.000-06:002006-03-29T14:28:03.806-06:00

The article “What Experienced Collaborators Say About Collaborative Writing” is, oddly enough, a sizeable collaboration between Nancy Allen, Diane Atkinson, Meg Morgan, Teresa Moore, and Craig Snow. To save time and monotony, I will merely call this eclectic group “the writers” from here on out. The writers start out by making a distinction between collaborative writing and group work. Going with

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1143486794827312452006-03-27T13:12:00.000-06:002006-03-27T13:13:14.843-06:00

In “Engineering Writing/Writing Engineering,” Dorothy A. Winsor seeks to fill a gap in the research by applying contemporary views of the “textual construction of knowledge” (342) to an examination of engineers’ writing, which is traditionally seen as being closely tied to physical reality, with little mediation or interpretation. In this sense, Winsor’s approach has much in common with other

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1141925426518039632006-03-09T11:28:00.000-06:002006-03-09T11:30:26.536-06:00

The goal that Nancy Blyler seems to strive for in her article “Taking a Political Turn: The Critical Perspective and Research in Professional Communication” seems to be nothing less than change how we as technical communicators conduct our research and writing standards. Upon reviewing the established method of communication, Blyler notes how it has been skills-oriented, how it “ignores the

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1141746708520784182006-03-07T09:51:00.000-06:002006-03-07T09:51:48.556-06:00

In “Frameworks for the Study of Writing in Organizational Contexts,” Teresa M. Harrison explores approaches to rhetorical and organizational theory can be applied to writing in organizations. She begins with a discussion of the New Rhetoric, a variety of approaches to rhetorical theory that differ from classical rhetoric in their emphasis on the social communities that frame the contexts for

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140989135103382412006-02-26T15:25:00.000-06:002006-02-26T15:25:35.113-06:00

As I read Johndan Johnson-Eilola’s “Relocating the Value of Work: Technical Communication in a Post-Industrial Age,” I was struck by some of the similarities between how technical communicators and professionals in other fields in which I’ve worked (specifically development research and librarianship) have had to redefine themselves in the information age. Johnson-Eilola argues that technical

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140986381571348532006-02-26T14:39:00.000-06:002006-02-26T14:39:41.580-06:00

Wes raises an interesting question in response to Johnson-Eilola’s article—should we still call ourselves “technical” communicators? I think so, because the technical nature of our communication is what distinguishes us from other professions that also trade in communication. With the shift from an industrial to an information economy, many professions are focusing on information and

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140748171573478072006-02-23T20:28:00.000-06:002006-02-23T20:29:31.586-06:00

I agree with Wes that practitioners of technical communication should be concerned with theoretical discussions of topics such as ethics, humanism, and feminism precisely because of our role as communicators. For instance, a technical writer using Campbell’s book as a practical guide to writing policies and procedures might consider Campbell’s recommendation to use gender-neutral language as

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140658522156424362006-02-22T19:32:00.000-06:002006-02-22T19:50:52.743-06:00

Academics mostly work with idealistic models. That is, they try to incorporate the maximum number of best practices. The whole point of ethics in writing is to encourage sticking to the facts. The starker the facts in your information, the closer it is to reality. The closer it is to reality, the more useful is the information.Every technical communicator worth their salt must be a good technical

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140645043933032452006-02-22T15:43:00.000-06:002006-02-22T15:50:43.950-06:00

After reading "Relocating the Value of Work", I have a few comments and a question for Johndan. First, it's always refreshing to hear how technical communicators are trying to redefine what we do. All too often we--or at least I do--have to fall back on the technical part of what we do, making documents and procedures for implementation. The four areas that you describe focus more on the

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140642744914055322006-02-22T15:00:00.000-06:002006-02-22T15:12:24.926-06:00

I've been thinking about your post from last week, Lee. How can theoretical pieces have any effect on the technical writer in the workplace? After some thought I came up with the conclusion: what DOESN'T it have to do with technical writing? It may sounds like I'm beating a dead horse here, but we as technical writers have to take almost everything into consideration. Our practice can have a

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140474494593056962006-02-20T16:24:00.000-06:002006-02-20T16:28:14.603-06:00

Johndan Johnson-Eilola may have time to join us this week in our blog. I would suggest that you read his article in Central Works so that you know where he is coming from. Please try to engage him in conversation this week.

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140056867087210542006-02-15T20:03:00.000-06:002006-02-15T20:30:31.943-06:00

We are successfully blogging Central Works. I am impressed with the level of writing so far.I would like to propose that we take a break next week from the summary and critique in Central Works and instead try to make connections, on the one hand, between the pragmatic nature of work that technical communicators do in the work place, and on the other hand, the kind of theoretical work that we

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1140041135523750832006-02-15T16:04:00.000-06:002006-02-15T16:05:35.526-06:00

For his article “The Ethic of Expediency: Classical Rhetoric, Technology, and the Holocaust” Steven Katz takes a bit of a philosophical look at what technical communication should be used to accomplish. Katz talks about how in order to be successful, a writer must adopt the ethos whatever organization they are working for. He quotes Walker Gibson’s idea that “in this style responsibility is

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1139974165149971502006-02-14T21:28:00.000-06:002006-02-14T21:29:25.166-06:00

Dale Sullivan published “Political-Ethical Implications of Defining Technical Communication as a Practice” in 1990. Sullivan’s article focuses on what he sees as a conflict between humanism and vocationalism in technical communication education. He argues that while many technical writing educators are sympathetic with the humanistic point of view, since they “teach thought forms and discourse

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1139933127011533512006-02-14T09:57:00.000-06:002006-02-14T10:10:52.113-06:00

In the essay, A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing, written in 1979, Carolyn R. Miller, daunted by a question that arose in a committee discussion, debates on whether or not technical writing has humanistic value. She critiques the common belief of technical writing being a ‘skill’ course with little or no humanistic value. Miller credits the positivist view of science for this belief.

Nishanoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1139805359434939492006-02-12T22:32:00.000-06:002006-02-13T08:46:13.236-06:00

In her essay "Gender, Technology, and Technical Communication", Katherine T. Durack debates the reasons behind women’s invisibility from the recorded history of science and technology. During the course of her essay, Durack, with the help of both references and citations, succeeds in proving her point that historians have often ignored the contributions by women to the fields of science and

Nishanoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1139680633912846662006-02-11T11:56:00.000-06:002006-02-11T11:59:55.040-06:00

Mary M. Lay originally published “Feminist Theory and the Redefinition of Technical Communication” in the Journal of Business and Technical Communication in 1991. In her article, she examines how “current views of scientific objectivism and the adoption of ethnographic studies—particularly those of collaborative writing—necessitate a new and, perhaps, revolutionary affiliation for technical

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1139440254722925122006-02-08T17:05:00.000-06:002006-02-08T17:10:54.733-06:00

What David Dobrin does in his article “What’s Technical About Technical Writing?” is address ways in which other technical writers try to define technical writing, while also providing his own interpretation of what tech writing should be. What Dobrin first claims is that what tech writers choose to define “determines the definer’s project” (108). What he means by this is that there are two terms

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138851269105490952006-02-01T21:32:00.000-06:002006-02-01T21:34:29.116-06:00

In school, the tech comm student is taught from a textbook, studying the ways of constructing documents via ideas of comparison, analysis, and hierarchy. Through her article “Understanding the Writing Context in Organizations,” Linda Driskill points out that although these teachings methods are needed, the “success of many business documents seem to depend on factors outside the genre” that are

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138818814190565472006-02-01T12:32:00.000-06:002006-02-01T12:35:17.373-06:00

In “Audience Involved: Toward a Participatory Model of Writing,” Robert R. Johnson discusses what he calls “audience involved” discourse production, in which the user is an “actual participant in the writing process who creates knowledge and determines much of the content in the discourse” (93). This model stands in contrast to the more traditional “addressed” or “invoked” audience models.

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138723841514694132006-01-31T09:54:00.000-06:002006-01-31T10:10:41.596-06:00

Both Wes and Anna have blogged their readings from the Histories section of Central Works. Both are well written blog postings. Wes points to Rutter's argument for a rhetorical basis for the work of technical communication as opposed to a science or engineering foundation. Anna explores the idea that technical communicators need to acknowledge the applicability of TC not just to software

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138677838234089342006-01-30T21:22:00.000-06:002006-01-30T21:26:57.473-06:00

In “Gender, Technology, and the History of Technical Communication,” Katherine T. Durack argues that women are underrepresented in histories of technical communication “as technical writers, as scientists,” and “as inventors or users of technology” (36). She discusses a common view of technical communication that defines it as having “a close relationship (in subject matter or function) to

Annahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13614810967604329092noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138628683931889982006-01-30T07:41:00.000-06:002006-01-30T07:44:43.976-06:00

Thank you Wes for your pioneering blog posting as we begin our new semester. As Wes has done, please post your two-paragraph summary/critique to the blog. We will continue through the readings in this way. I would like to encourage your reactions to your colleagues writing as well. Let's make this an electronic conversation, not just a place to post our writing.

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138410591232425202006-01-27T19:07:00.000-06:002006-01-27T19:09:51.246-06:00

In his article “History, Rhetoric, and Humanism,” Rutter talks about the common belief that technical communication mimics science and technology. Both are “rigid, monolithic, and devoted to formulaic thinking” (25). This belief puts more emphasis on aspects such as grammar, punctuation, and the more mechanic ideas of writing. Rutter states that in order to be successful, technical communicators

Wes Ahleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17729944904258226209noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1138121201376954952006-01-24T10:41:00.000-06:002006-01-24T10:48:59.633-06:00

Our first reading is going to be from Part 1: Histories. We have three articles: Connors, Rutter, and Durack. I would like you each to write a two paragraph summary/critique of one of these articles. Please post your summary/critique by class time on Jan. 31. Tell us which article you are going to write on by Wednesday, Jan. 26.

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1137553680346486812006-01-17T21:05:00.000-06:002006-01-17T21:08:00.356-06:00

My 477/577 students wrote this blog two years ago. I think we should start it up again, don't you? We'll use it for 577 work. Students will post their critiques and responses of/to their readings in Central Works.

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1083704028682482622004-05-04T15:53:00.002-05:002004-05-04T15:57:39.356-05:00

Campbell and Barker are strong proponents for the critical understanding of your audience. A technical writer makes effective decisions based on the knowledge that he/she possess of the audience. Campbell discusses the importance of audience research on pg. 32. Although Barker’s discussion if, of course, much more thorough, Campbell also offers an effective discussion. I have not had much

Leahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17548513970272447534noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1083704005359353982004-05-04T15:53:00.001-05:002004-05-04T15:57:16.046-05:00

Barker and Campbell both offer good discussions of the review process. Campbell outlines each step and places reviews in their respective categories. While Barker offers a focused approach with a multi-person review process in place. I think that Barker’s view is the ideal – while Campbell’s discussion offers the “basics.” In my own experience, the review process can be a blessing and a project

Leahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17548513970272447534noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1083703982551458552004-05-04T15:53:00.000-05:002004-05-04T15:56:53.250-05:00

Okay -- apparently I had problems longer than I thought. I'm just glad that I was able to recover some of these post responses and I didn't have to rewrite them. Both Barker and Campbell have compelling thoughts in their texts. However, Campbell’s text is a more how-to, with somewhat simplistic, straightforward discussions and accompanying tasks lists. However, Barker’s text is a more thorough

Leahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17548513970272447534noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1083348616844062262004-04-30T13:10:00.000-05:002004-04-30T13:14:35.606-05:00

In reviewing the blogs, I realized that a couple posts did not go through properly. I was having some "technical difficulties" with our Internet DSL connection and my blogger account part way through the semester. Hence, I think my posts looked like they went through, but obviously, didn't -- since I can't find them now when I double-checked. So, I will repost my responses. I'll indicate to which

Leahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17548513970272447534noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1083286368647606422004-04-29T19:52:00.000-05:002004-04-29T19:57:06.576-05:00

Have a great summer everyone!

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081979486268163572004-04-14T16:43:00.000-05:002004-04-14T16:55:42.293-05:00

Language is an integral part of technical communication. As a technical communicator, it is important to use language correctly and efficiently so that the document is usable. Language involves both visual and verbal language involved in documents. It is important to keep in mind who our audience is so that both are used correctly. Certain symbols may mean two different things in different

redfrontdoornoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081812067315217192004-04-12T17:49:00.000-05:002004-04-12T18:25:01.436-05:00

As an ongoing goal, technical writers strive to make their documents usable by virtually anyone. This means that the language contained within the document must be suitable for any/all types of users. This may be difficult since shapes, colors, gestures, and other visual mediums can represent a variety of meanings across cultures, as we discussed in the last blog. Obviously, language also

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081806416995041982004-04-12T16:46:00.000-05:002004-04-12T16:50:50.670-05:00

Language – both text and visual – is everything in communicating information in a document. As a former reporter/editor, I grew accustomed to “writing down” for the mass media audience. Most newspaper and general magazine articles are geared to a fourth- to sixth-grade reading level. Hence, language needed to be appropriate to the topic as well as the audience. How do we know what language to use

Leahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17548513970272447534noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081514788008195202004-04-09T07:24:00.000-05:002004-04-09T10:22:57.810-05:00

Performance-oriented Writing In Chapter 12, Barker grounds the needs of both the user and the technical writer in linguistic and learning theory. Based on research, the basic foundation of a functional technical document is simplified concrete language within a patterned structure designed to meet the users’ expectations and contextual needs. The guidelines that Barker offers technical writers (

Catherinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04284451966808565186noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081442857412403072004-04-08T11:47:00.000-05:002004-04-08T11:52:12.123-05:00

How do we know what language to use for our documents? As a novice tech writer, how would we start? Would you model your writing after the existing documents? Would you solicit feedback from users of your documents? What does Barker say about this topic in Chapter 12? As a novice tech writer, I would be interested to see previous documents written for the company I am employed at. After

sarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01966940825532441015noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081367628376316052004-04-07T14:37:00.000-05:002004-04-07T14:57:35.013-05:00

Language and technical documents How do we know what language to use for our documents? As a novice tech writer, how would we start? Would you model your writing after the existing documents? Would you solicit feedback from users of your documents? What does Barker say about this topic in Chapter 12? When we look at our documents and try an decide what the appropriate language for that

melissahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05617262951729513142noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081225768264248222004-04-05T23:29:00.000-05:002004-04-05T23:33:13.060-05:00

Language definitely describe everything. For technical documents, amount of language depends on the type of document. For example a manual of "how-to" should be short in sentence and contain simple words with aid of image as often as possible. A documentation in the other hand should be very precise and detailed therefore might contain more sentences compare to a "how-to" document. A good

agneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08874137514407813455noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081224042551903542004-04-05T23:00:00.000-05:002004-04-05T23:04:27.606-05:00

Campbell’s opinion on the audience goes in parallel with Barker’s opinion. Both agree that you must understand your audience in order to design a good document. Different words can have different meanings and certain jargons can’t be directly translated to another language. Tone of document can also affect the audience too. I’ve written one cross-cultural document in the past and I agree that

agneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08874137514407813455noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081208460697277632004-04-05T18:41:00.000-05:002004-04-05T18:51:35.000-05:00

What is the connection between language and technical documents? You could say that language is everything. Let's narrow the focus a little bit. How do we know what language to use for our documents? As a novice tech writer, how would we start? Would you model your writing after the existing documents? Would you solicit feedback from users of your documents? What does Barker say about this

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081134635720933592004-04-04T22:10:00.000-05:002004-04-04T22:14:19.216-05:00

Campbell says it all on page 32 when she points out that “the more you know about your audience, the better the choices you can make in the content, wording, format, and design of the document.” This holds true for every audience, but is particularly pertinent to international audiences since many writers are not used to writing for these audiences. Since I have no experience translating

sarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01966940825532441015noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081124060888130002004-04-04T19:04:00.000-05:002004-04-04T19:28:17.623-05:00

Campbell Chapter 8 discusses the topic of editing and levels of review. On page 269, she recommends the editor develop and use a style sheet to facilitate consistency in reviewing documents for readability and usability. User analysis and organizational insight should guide the editor in her view. Given the context of an international or multi-lingual audience, it would be important to insert

Catherinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04284451966808565186noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1080358848202331282004-03-26T21:20:00.000-06:002004-03-26T21:49:52.640-06:00

In Campbell Chapter 4, the use of language is discussed. Campbell and Barker both explain how language should be clear and accurate. Barker explains that using limited and simplified language offers better readability for cross-cultural readers. I especially liked how Campbell chapter 4 included excellent examples of simple words and phrases to use in the "Tools and Resources" section. Both

redfrontdoornoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1080090300220649132004-03-23T18:51:00.000-06:002004-03-23T19:08:27.186-06:00

I agree with Barker in that you should try to use short, simplified sentences with active verbs. This will make things easier for users who are not very familiar with the English language; there will not be much additional text for them to sort through. Also, it will make translating the document much easier if the wording is concise and simple. I have talked with many people here at MSU who

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1080006323269420512004-03-22T19:03:00.000-06:002004-03-22T19:48:48.530-06:00

Cross Cultural Editing Everything Campbell says about audience would fit in with Barker. In looking at cross cultural editing it is really just looking at your documents audience. You are trying to create something that works for the users you intend it to work for. If these users possibly secondary English speakers, then you must take a closer look at your wording. My only experience in

Natehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16676165252220244039noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1080002739437122252004-03-22T18:27:00.000-06:002004-03-22T18:49:04.436-06:00

International, cross-cultural, and translated texts in editing On pp 290-292 Barker discusses editing for international audiences and for translation. First, look in Campbell for any information that would support Barker's claims. Second, what does your own experience tell you about this topic? Do you agree with Barker? Editing for Cross-Cultural Readers Campbell supports some of Barker's claims

melissahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05617262951729513142noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1080001661784355342004-03-22T18:17:00.000-06:002004-03-22T18:31:07.013-06:00

Campbell/Barker Review I know this is a little late but I in the review of Campbell and Barker, derived from our class discussion and from our readings I found that: Campbell defines five different stages: Verification, validation, editing, proofreading, and approval. Barker defines six different stages: Managerial, user, technical, subject-matter, editorial, and sponsor. Some differences I

melissahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05617262951729513142noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1079906983459362622004-03-21T15:57:00.000-06:002004-03-21T16:13:07.436-06:00

Campbell's discussion about audience (pg. 32) talks about how critical understanding your audience is. The more you know about your audience, the better the choices you can make in content, wording, format, and design of the document. This would apply to cross-culture documentation and editing for translation. If you don't know enough about terminology, meanings of colors and icons, or

Prinnahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06055024508997632387noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1079891696196416572004-03-21T11:49:00.000-06:002004-03-21T11:58:19.326-06:00

The chapter in Campell that supports Barker's pages on cross-cultural editing is best supported by chapter 4 "What's the best way to word this?" Campbell lays out rules for wording documentation, being a word miser, and use of clear, succint, and specific language. Following Barker's guidelines will help make documentation that is clear to readers of most reading levels, cultures, and to English

Bobbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16131803500112587917noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1079411876250720102004-03-15T22:37:00.000-06:002004-03-15T22:41:11.983-06:00

On pp 290-292 Barker discusses editing for international audiences and for translation. First, look in Campbell for any information that would support Barker's claims. Second, what does your own experience tell you about this topic? Do you agree with Barker?

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1079397827532268442004-03-15T17:00:00.000-06:002004-03-15T18:50:36.623-06:00

I guess I haven't been checking the blog lately. Oops! Before talking about the differences in review methods between Campbell and Barker, I would like to go back to our last topic. Today on Minnesota Public Radio, they did a feature on accountability in newsbroadcasting. It was interesting to me that a lot of the discussion was spent on the use of blogs and how they are impacting news and

Lindahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07023556601551479929noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1079307924748473302004-03-14T17:36:00.000-06:002004-03-14T17:48:38.746-06:00

It is hard to say one of these views is better than the other. I think the authors go about looking at this subject in a slightly different manor. I personally find Campbell's approach more understandable and useful, but I also appreciate some of Barker's thoughts. One area both authors stress is that suitable time must be planned into the budget for this area. I think that is a major point.

Natehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16676165252220244039noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1081222917975669932004-03-01T22:14:00.000-06:002004-04-05T22:45:42.623-05:00

I think there’s no right or wrong between Barker and Campbell’s taxonomy of reviews. They are intended for different types of reviews and subjects. However from my opinion Campbell’s taxonomy of reviews can be applied to Barker’s whereas Barker is not. Campbell’s review is more generalized than Barker, he define the steps for reviews whereas Barker applies the taxonomy in a subjective ways

agneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08874137514407813455noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078189242853961412004-03-01T18:44:00.000-06:002004-03-01T19:48:01.670-06:00

I would generalize that Barker sees the review process in terms of the hierarchical structure of an organization. Campbell describes the process with more functional labels. Ultimately one hopes that all aspects of the document(s) undergo some measurement against the proposed standard put forth in the planning stages. Certainly there is some crossover between the two taxonomies- perhaps

Catherinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04284451966808565186noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078187029825651682004-03-01T18:18:00.000-06:002004-03-01T18:26:46.310-06:00

After reading Barker and Campbell's thoughts on the review process, I think both approaches effectively review all aspects of the documentation. Campbell puts each aspect into its own category while Barker appears to repeat each aspect within six different categories. While Campbell's method appears to be a bit more logical, I think that Barker's is more realistic. From my review experience, I

Prinnahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06055024508997632387noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078114904079261632004-02-29T22:02:00.000-06:002004-02-29T22:24:39.436-06:00

Campbell defines the review process through five different stages: Verification, validation, editing, proofreading, and approval. While some of the steps can be meshed into one, Campbell suggests, if you have the time, do each one separately. Barker uses six different reviews including: Managerial, user, technical, subject-matter, editorial, and sponsor. Each review has its own clearly defined

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078083055649119802004-02-29T13:30:00.000-06:002004-02-29T13:33:50.390-06:00

I believe that Campbell's taxonomy of reviews is more efficient and useful. I like how you can see that each review is a step after the next. When I review a document, there are different things I look for each time, which is why a list of steps to follow is very useful. Campbell’s simplifies and labels the steps that I already follow when reviewing a document. Barker's list of reviews may be

redfrontdoornoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078062184887017062004-02-29T07:26:00.000-06:002004-02-29T07:49:51.950-06:00

When I look at how Campbell and Barker define "review", it appears inherently different, and it is. However, I do not think either is right or wrong, it's simply a difference of context and semantics. Barker's description of review comes from a whole-project stand point. The ideas is to have the document reviewed by all the parties involved in the creation of the document, from the managers who

Bobbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16131803500112587917noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1078061059147962362004-02-29T07:10:00.000-06:002004-02-29T07:27:13.700-06:00

The article is interesting in that it speaks of the core concept of the blog as new, although the author does allude to older forms. In the early days of public Internet before Web browsers when we had to use Pine, the blog as we know it today, to my mind, was the discussion group. People could create public or private groups, and the content was updated much like a blog, and could be presented

Bobbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16131803500112587917noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1077916169312199952004-02-27T15:09:00.000-06:002004-02-27T15:12:21.716-06:00

The taxonomy in Campbell seems like it would be useful when incorporated into the different types of reviews listed in Barker. Granted, different types of Barker reviews may not be as all-encompassing as others (e.g. an editorial review is likely to be more in-depth than a sponsor review), but all of them could use Campbell’s five types of review as a reminder of the different steps each document

sarahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01966940825532441015noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1077831544098595732004-02-26T15:39:00.000-06:002004-02-26T15:45:34.296-06:00

I have enjoyed reading your interesting discussions of blogging in online learning. Of course originally for me one of the attractions was its uniqueness. The second attraction was that blogs offered us one more technology that we could learn to use in our online courses. That in itself seemed to be a worthwhile reason to use it. The more I use it as a pedagogical tool, the more I can adapt it

Lee S. Tesdellnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1077564413677381272004-02-23T13:26:00.000-06:002004-02-23T13:29:40.216-06:00

I thought the article was interesting. I agree with the idea that blog is an "unedited, published voice of the people" (Winer 2003). It's a way for students in this case to interact, share thoughts, and discuss online with ability to present information not only in text format but also image,and URL link. Though I've been using blog for more than 1 semester now, but somehow I'm still a bit

agneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08874137514407813455noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1077470189132096852004-02-22T10:52:00.000-06:002004-02-22T11:20:37.153-06:00

It's interesting to read about the purpose of blogs AFTER using the technology for what appeared to be an exchange forum for short essay question responses for this course. In fact, when I posted a resulting question that occured to me in my response to the first initial prompt from Lee, it went totally unacknowledged. Based on that response, I took it that the forum in this course was meant

Catherinehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04284451966808565186noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1077163089621170742004-02-18T21:43:00.000-06:002004-02-18T22:00:50.186-06:00

The article gave a good insight into the purpose and effects of blogs (weblogs). When I first heard of a blog (as Lee knows since I e-mailed him before our first class in a panic), I had no idea what it was. I also admit that when I first started using the system, I became a little frustrated. I would miss Lee's posts occasionally, and I wasn't used to checking something continuously (although

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076978554573570222004-02-16T18:08:00.000-06:002004-02-16T18:45:11.623-06:00

I found the article on blogging very interesting and helpful. It opened up new horizons and possibilities that I had not considered before. I didn't realize there was so much availability as far as hyperlinks within the blog until Lee had us do so this week. I liked their idea about introducing blogging and felt that some of us (me in particular) could have used a little more instruction on

Lindahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07023556601551479929noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076991253182876792004-02-16T16:44:00.000-06:002004-02-16T22:16:50.810-06:00

In Breemer Case 4, there are a few problems that occur concerning policies and procedures. First of all, Peterson broaches the idea of a meeting involving city council members and private landowners who would be interested in starting up a renewable energy project in their town, then inviting the students to attend. When Mills, the teacher, mentions the idea to to Winterbach, he is confused to

Tonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14325038889954660848noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076954557984168162004-02-16T11:56:00.000-06:002004-02-16T12:05:15.186-06:00

I would happen to agree with what the article is stating. Blogs are a good source of learning tool for users, but I do believe you must pay attention to the audience in which the tool is being used. If the blog was used in a class where the familiarity with computers is not that adequate, then I would be a little reluctant in using the learing tool. This does correlate to the discussion we

melissahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05617262951729513142noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076899392608529962004-02-15T20:19:00.000-06:002004-02-15T20:45:48.390-06:00

response to the blog article..... The idea of publishing opportunity for knowledge is a good one. There is something about putting down thoughts in a savable format and being able to both receive feedback and edit your ideas. Lets face it we forget a lot of things, but when we save it the information can only become more valuable. The ability of understanding the feedback process and how to

Natehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16676165252220244039noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076809363742711242004-02-14T19:36:00.000-06:002004-02-14T19:45:18.233-06:00

It was interesting to look at the article Lee posted. I hadn't realized just how blogs could be such a useful learning tool! Blogs seemed to be useful in posting answers as an assignment but it was interesting to learn that blogs are also important as a social interaction. Since we don't get to see each other while in class, it's nice to be able to "hear" each other on a blog.

redfrontdoornoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6321008.post-1076808592264676822004-02-14T19:07:00.000-06:002004-02-14T19:38:47.903-06:00

To find out just how to approach the audience situation in Breemer case 4 it would be helpful to follow the guidelines in Barker 5. Through analyzing the situation and emails given in light of Barker 5 it may be possible to solve the audience challenge. The most helpful way would be to formally interview some possible audience members which is not possible in our situation. We may still be able

redfrontdoornoreply@blogger.com0