While user experience (UX) and technical and professional communication (TPC) are intertwined, how UX is taught in TPC is highly variable. In this article, we report data from a study with TPC instructors who teach UX to identify patterns in approaches to teaching UX. We provide background on UX pedagogy, share methods including collecting data from a questionnaire and interviews and conducting qualitative analysis. The findings map teaching activities onto the design process and show patterns and commonalities. We conclude by proposing a process-based approach for teaching UX in TPC classes and programs to provide scaffolding and connections for students.
AmanZ.BallayL. (2015). Flexible Foundations: Preparing Design Students for a Changing Field – User Experience Magazine. User Experience Magazine – The Magazine of the User Experience Professionals Association. https://uxpamagazine.org/flexible-foundations/
2.
BalboniKatrynaBurnamLizzyDombrowskiRobertaHanesLilyHoldenHolly. (2022). The State of User Research 2022 Report. https://www.userinterviews.com/state-of-user-research-2022-report.
BayJ.BeckerM.ClarkA.MastE.RobbB.TorresK. (2022). User experience in the professional and technical writing Major: Pedagogical approaches and student perspectives. In CraneK.Cargile CookK. (Eds.), User experience as innovative academic practice (pp. 265–284). The WAC Clearinghouse; University Press of Colorado. https://doi.org/10.37514/TPC-B.2022.1367.2.12
BirksM.ChapmanY.FrancisK. (2008). Memoing in qualitative research: Probing data and processes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 13(1), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987107081254
7.
BrumbergerE.LauerC. (2015). The evolution of technical communication: An analysis of industry job postings. Technical Communication, 62(4), 224-243.
8.
BuleyL. (2013). The user experience team of one: A research and design survival guide. Rosenfeld Media.
Chong (2012). Teaching usability in a technical communication classroom: Developing competencies to user-test and communicate with an international audienceIEEE International Professional Communication Conference, Orlando, FL, USAhttps://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.2012.6408613.
11.
ChongF. (2015). The pedagogy of usability: An analysis of technical communication textbooks, anthologies, and course syllabi and descriptions. Technical Communication Quarterly, 25(1), 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2016.1113073
12.
ChurchillE.PreeceJ.BowserA. (2014). Developing a living HCI curriculum to support a global community. In CHI ’14 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 135–138). https://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2559236
13.
ChurchillE. F.BowserA.PreeceJ. (2013). Teaching and learning human-computer interaction: Past, present, and future. Interactions. https://doi.org/10.1145/2427076.2427086
14.
CleggG.LauerJ.PhelpsJ.MelonçonL. (2021). Programmatic Outcomes in Undergraduate Technical and Professional Communication Programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 30(1), 19–33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2020.1774662
15.
Design Thinking Bootleg (n.d.). Hasso Plattner Institute of Design at Stanford.
16.
DonathM.BatemanL. (2015). Studying UX Online: Advantages, Difficulties, and Best Practices. User Experience Magazine – The Magazine of the User Experience Professionals Association. https://uxpamagazine.org/studying-ux-online/
17.
ElbowP. (1998). Writing with power: Techniques for mastering the writing process. Oxford University Press.
GouldJ. D.LewisC. (1985). Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3170
20.
GreenM. (2021). Resistance as participation: Queer theory's applications for HIV health technology design. Technical Communication Quarterly, 30(4), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2020.1831615
21.
HaasA. M.EbleM. F. (2018). Key theoretical frameworks: Teaching technical communication in the twenty-first century. University Press of Colorado.
22.
HaberN.SheltonS.ChassaingW. (2018). UX and your library: A scalable model. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 12(3–4), 237–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/1533290X.2018.1498636
23.
InstoneKBowmanELaurenBOpelD (2017). Industry-Academic Collaborations: Fostering a UX Talent Pipeline and Discovering Win-Win Opportunities. User Experience Magazine, 17.
24.
InstoneKeith (2005). User Experience: An Umbrella Topic. In CHI ’05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1087–88. CHI EA ’05. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1145/1056808.1056824.
25.
JonesN. N. (2016). The technical communicator as advocate integrating a social justice approach in technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(3), 342–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281616639472
26.
KangJ.RoestelN. M. E.GirouardA. (2022). Experiential learning to teach user experience in higher education in past 20 years: A scoping review. Frontiers in Computer Science, 4, 812907. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2022.812907
27.
KrossS.GuoP. (2022). Five pedagogical principles of a user-centered design course that prepares computing undergraduates for industry jobs. In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 168–174). https://doi.org/10.1145/3478431.3499341
28.
KuglitschR.CoutureJ. (2018). Things that squeak and make you feel bad: Building scalable user experience programs for space assessment. Weave: Journal of Library User Experience, 1(8). https://doi.org/10.3998/weave.12535642.0001.801
29.
LauerC.BrumbergerE. (2016). Technical communication as user experience in a broadening industry landscape. Technical Communication, 63(3), 248–264.
30.
LeeS.TurnerH. NRoseE. J.. (2023). Community-Engaged User Experience Pedagogy: Stories, Emergent Strategy, and Possibilities. Communication Design Quarterly, 11(3), 28–39.
31.
MacDonaldC. M.RoseE. J.PutnamC. (2021). How, why, and with whom do user experience (UX) practitioners communicate? Implications for HCI education. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.2002050
32.
MacDonaldC. M.RoseE. J.PutnamC. (2022). An industry in flux: Where does UX go from here?Interactions, 29(2), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/3511671
33.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage Publications.
34.
NielsenJ. (2017). A 100-year view of user experience. Nielsen Norman Group.
35.
PottsL.LaurenB.TegtmeyerR.SchopierayS. (2015)Killer Robots and the Humanities: Building an Interdisciplinary UX Program. User Experience Magazine. https://uxpamagazine.org/killer-robots-and-the-humanities/
36.
PriceR.DunaganA. A. (2019). Betting on Bootcamps: How Short-Course Training Programs Could Change the Landscape of Higher Ed. Christensen Institute. https://www.christenseninstitute.org/publications/bootcamps/
37.
PutnamC.MacDonaldC. M.RoseE. J.(2023). “It could be better. It could be much worse”: Understanding Accessibility in User Experience Practice with Implications for Industry and Education. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1145/3575662
38.
RedishJ. (2010). Technical communication and usability: Intertwined strands and mutual influences. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53(3), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2010.2052861
RiveraN. K. (2022). Understanding agency through testimonios: An indigenous approach to UX research. Technical Communication, 69(4). https://doi.org/10.55177/tc986798
41.
RoldanW.GaoX.HishikawaA. M.KuT.LiZ.ZhangE.FroehlichJ. E.YipJ. (2020). Opportunities and challenges in involving users in project-based HCI education. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–15). https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376530
RoseE. J.PutnamC.McDonaldC. M. (2020). Preparing future UX professionals: Human skills, technical skills, and dispositions. In SIGDOC 2020 – proceedings of the 38th ACM international conference on design of communication. https://doi.org/10.1145/3380851.3416774
44.
RoseE. J.SchreiberJ. (2021). User experience and technical communication: Beyond intertwining. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 51(4), 343–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816211044497
45.
RoseE. J.TurnerH. N. (In press). The paradigm shift to UX and the durability of usability in TPC. Technical Communication Quarterly.
46.
ScottJ. B. (2008). The practice of usability: Teaching user engagement through service-learning. Technical Communication Quarterly, 17(4), 381–412.
47.
Shivers-McNairA.PhillipsJ.CampbellA.MaiH. H.YanA.MacyJ. F.WenlockJ.FryS.GuanY. (2018). User-centered design in and beyond the classroom: Toward an accountable practice. Computers and Composition. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.003
48.
St-CyrO.MacDonaldC. M.ChurchillE. F.PreeceJ. J.BowserA. (2018). Developing a community of practice to support global HCI education. In Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–7). https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3170616
TurnerH. N.RoseE. J. (2022). What do we teach when we say we teach UX? A study of the practices of TPC instructors. Programmatic Perspectives, 13(1), 61–102. Retrieved from https://programmaticperspectives.cptsc.org/index.php/jpp/article/view/11
51.
WaltonR.MooreK.JonesN. (2019). Technical communication after the social justice turn: Building coalitions for action. Routledge.
WilcoxL.DiSalvoB.HennemanD.WangQ. (2019). Design in the HCI classroom: Setting a research agenda. In Proceedings of the 2019 on designing interactive systems conference (pp. 871–883). https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322381
ZhouQ. (2014). That usability course: What technical communication programs get wrong about usability and how to fix it. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 2(3), 25–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/2644448.2644454
