Scholars have given much weight to the question of professional legitimacy in the field of TPC, but much of that focus has been given to practitioners in Euro-Western contexts. However, practitioners in India have also worked to strengthen their own legitimacy in a variety of ways, including by harnessing existing structural mechanisms. This article addresses the founding of the Society for Technical Communication India chapter in 1999 and its subsequent organizational impact as a mechanism toward improving the legitimacy of the field in India. It covers a historical analysis of the founding years of the Society for Technical Communication India chapter and discusses ways that founding members and early participants worked to build their own legitimacy.
BlylerN. R. (2004). Critical interpretive research in technical communication: Issues of power and legitimacy. In Kynell-HuntT.SavageG. J. (Eds.), Power and legitimacy in technical communication Volume II: Strategies for professional status (pp. 143–166).
Amityville, NY:
Baywood.
CollinsP. H. (2002). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment.
New York, NY:
Routledge.
8.
ConnorJ. J. (1991).
History and the study of technical communication in Canada and the United States. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication,
34(1), 3–6.
9.
CorbinJ.StraussA. (2008). Basics of qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
10.
Deb, S. (2011). The beautiful and the damned: A portrait of the new India. New York: Bond Street Books.
11.
FoucaultM. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison.
New York, NY:
Vintage Books.
12.
GettoG.AmantK. S. (2015).
Designing globally, working locally: Using personas to develop online communication products for international users. Communication Design Quarterly Review,
3(1), 24–46.
HaasA. M. (2008).
Wampum as hypertext: An American Indian intellectual tradition of multimedia theory and practice. Studies in American Indian Literatures,
19(4), 77–100.
16.
HaasA. M. (2012).
Race, rhetoric, and technology: A case study of decolonial technical communication theory, methodology, and pedagogy. Journal of Business and Technical Communication,
26(3), 277–310.
17.
HallerC. R. (1997).
Revaluing women’s work: Report writing in the North Carolina canning clubs, 1912–1916. Technical Communication Quarterly,
6(3), 281–292.
HooksB. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center.
London, England:
Pluto Press.
20.
Kynell-HuntT. (2003). Status and the technical communicator: Utilitarianism, prestige, and the role of academia in creating our professional persona. In Kynell-HuntT.SavageG. J. (Eds), Power and legitimacy in technical communication: The historical and contemporary struggle for professional status (vol. 1, pp. 53–69).
Amityville, NY:
Baywood.
21.
LeavyP. L. (2007). The feminist practice of content analysis. In Hesse-BiberS. N.LeavyP. L. (Eds.), Feminist research practice: A primer (pp. 223–248).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
PetersenE. J. (2017).
Feminist historiography as methodology: The absence of international perspectives. Connexions: International Professional Communication Journal,
5(2), 1–38.
33.
PortewigT. C. (2011). The role of rhetorical invention for visuals: A qualitative study of technical communicators in the workplace. In ConklinJ.HayhoeG. F. (Eds.), Qualitative research in technical communication (pp. 145–162).
New York, NY:
Routledge.
34.
PrashantN.PanditM. (2008). Technical communication and IT outsourcing in India: Past, present, and future. ThatcherB.EviaC. (Eds.), Outsourcing technical communication: Issues, policies, and practices (pp. 11–30).
New York, NY:
Baywood.
SavageG. J. (2003). Toward professional status in technical communication. In Kynell-HuntT.SavageG. J. (Eds.), Power and legitimacy in technical communication: The historical and contemporary struggle for professional status (vol. 1, pp. 1–12).
Amityville, NY:
Baywood.
37.
SpivakG. C. (1999). A critique of postcolonial reason.
Boston, MA:
Harvard University Press.
