The social justice turn in technical and professional communication (TPC) has inspired a substantial body of progressive scholarship and discussion. But it is not clear how these scholarly efforts have shaped (or are shaping) programmatic and curricular efforts. This article reports the findings of a survey of TPC instructors and an analysis of 231 TPC programs to examine their curricular efforts toward social justice. Drawing from the mixed findings, the authors argue that vigorous curricular efforts in social justice enable TPC to fully and practically demonstrate the core mandate of our discipline.
AgbokaG. Y. (2013). Participatory localization: A social justice approach to navigating unenfranchised/disenfranchised cultural sites. Technical Communication Quarterly, 22(1), 28–49.
2.
AgbokaG. Y. (2014). Decolonial methodologies: Social justice perspectives in intercultural technical communication research. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 44(3), 297–327.
3.
AgbokaG. Y.MatveevaN. (Eds.). (2018). Citizenship and advocacy in technical communication: Scholarly and pedagogical perspectives. Routledge.
BanksA. (2006). Race, rhetoric, and technology: Searching for higher ground. Erlbaum.
6.
BarryB. (2005). Why social justice matters. Polity Press.
7.
BivensK. M.ColeK.KoeberA. (2019). Activism by accuracy: Rhetorical ingenuity for the 21st century. In White-FarnhamJ.FinerB. S.MolloyC. (Eds.), Women's health advocacy: Rhetorical ingenuity for the 21st century (pp. 93–113). Routledge.
8.
BlylerN. (1998). Taking a political turn: The critical perspective and research in professional communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(1), 33–52.
9.
BowdonM. (2004). Technical communication and the role of the public intellectual: A community HIV-prevention case study. Technical Communication Quarterly, 13(3), 325–340.
10.
BrasseurL. (2005). Florence Nightingale's Visual rhetoric in the rose diagrams. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(2), 161–182.
11.
BrennanJ.NaidoR. (2008). Higher education and the achievement (and/or prevention) of equity and social justice. Higher Education, 56(3), 287–302.
12.
ClarkD. (2004). Is professional writing relevant? A model for action research. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(3), 307–323.
13.
Cochran-SmithM. (2004). Walking the road: Race, diversity, and social justice in teacher education. Teachers College Press.
14.
ColtonJ. S.HolmesS. (2016). A social justice theory of active equality for technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 48(1), 4–10.
CoxM. B. (2019). Working closets: Mapping queer professional discourses and why technical communication studies need queer rhetorics. Journal of Business & Technical Communication, 33(1), 1–25.
17.
CoxM. B.FarisM. J. (2015). An annotated bibliography of LGBTQ rhetorics. Present Tense: A Journal of Rhetoric in Society, 4(2), 1–161.
18.
DayleyC. (2019). Student perceptions of diversity in technical and professional communication academic programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, 29(1), 46–69.
19.
DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Sage.
20.
DorpenyoK. I. (2019). Risky election, vulnerable technology: Localizing biometric use in elections for the sake of justice. Technical Communication Quarterly, 28(4), 1–15.
21.
DuráL.SinghalA.ElíasE. E. (2013). Minga Peru's Strategy for social change in the Peruvian Amazon: A rhetorical model for participatory, intercultural practice to advance human rights. Journal of Rhetoric, Professional Communication and Globalization, 4(1), 33–54.
22.
DurackK. (1997). Gender, technology and the history of technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 6(3), 249–260.
23.
EbleM. F.GailletL. L. (2004). Educating “community intellectuals”: Rhetoric, moral philosophy, and civic engagement. Technical Communication Quarterly, 13(3), 341–354.
24.
EdenfieldA. C.HolmesS.ColtonJ. S. (2019). Queering tactical technical communication: DIY HRT. Technical Communication Quarterly, 28(3), 177–191.
25.
EdwardsJ. (2018). Inclusive practices in the technical communication classroom. In AgbokaG. A.MatveevaN. (Eds.), Citizenship and advocacy in technical communication: Scholarly and pedagogical perspectives (pp. 201–222). Routledge.
26.
FaigleyL. (1986). Competing theories of process: A critique and a proposal. College English, 48(6), 527–542.
27.
FrostE. (2015). Apparent feminist pedagogies: Embodying feminist pedagogical practices at East Carolina University. Programmatic Perspectives, 7(2), 251–276.
28.
GonzalesL.TurnerH. (2017). Converging fields, expanding outcomes: Technical communication, translation, and design at a non-profit organization. Technical Communication, 64(2), 126–140.
29.
GordonS. R.Elmore-SandersP.GordonD. R. (2017). Everyday practices of social justice: Examples and suggestions for administrators and practitioners in higher education. Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis, 6(1), 68–83.
30.
GrabillJ. T. (2000). Shaping local HIV/AIDS services policy through activist research: The problem of client involvement. Technical Communication Quarterly, 9(1), 29–50.
31.
GrabillJ. T.SimmonsW. M. (1998). Toward a critical rhetoric of risk communication: Producing citizens and the role of technical communicators. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(4), 415–441.
32.
HaasA.EbleM. (Eds.). (2018). Key theoretical frameworks: Teaching technical communication in the twenty-first century. Utah State University Press.
33.
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.
34.
HerndlC. G. (1993). Teaching discourse and reproducing culture: A critique of research pedagogy in professional and non-academic writing. College Composition and Communication, 44(3), 249–263.
35.
HughesM. A.HayhoeG. F. (2008). A research primer for technical communication: Methods, exemplars, and analyses. Routledge.
36.
HurleyV. E. (2018). Spatial orientations: Cultivating critical spatial perspectives in technical communication pedagogy. In HaasA. M.EbleM. F. (Eds.), Key theoretical frameworks: Teaching technical communication in the twenty-first century (pp. 93–113). Utah State University Press.
37.
HyttenK.BettezS. C. (2011). Understanding education for social justice. Educational Foundations, 25(1-2), 7–24.
38.
JohnsonR. R. (1997). Audience involved: Toward a participatory model of writing. Computers and Composition, 14(3), 361–376.
39.
JonesN.WilliamsM. (2017). The social justice impact of plain language: A critical approach to plain-language analysis. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(4), 412–429.
40.
JonesN. N. (2014). The importance of ethnographic research in activist networks. In WilliamsM. F.PimentelO. (Eds.), Communicating race, ethnicity, and identity in technical communication (pp. 46–62). Baywood.
41.
JonesN. N. (2016a). Narrative inquiry in human centered design: Examining silence and voice to promote social justice in design scenarios. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(1), 471–492.
42.
JonesN. N. (2016b). The technical communicator as advocate: Integrating a social justice approach in technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(3), 342–361.
43.
JonesN. N.SavageG.YuH. (2014). Tracking our progress: Diversity in technical and professional communication programs. Programmatic Perspectives, 6(1), 132–152.
44.
JonesN. N.WaltonR. (2018). Using narratives to foster critical thinking about diversity and social justice. In EbleM.HaasA. (Eds.), Key theoretical frameworks for teaching technical communication in the 21st century (pp. 241–267). Utah State University Press.
45.
LeaskB. (1999, October). Internationalisation of the curriculum: Key challenges and strategies[Paper presentation]. IDP Education Australia 1999 Australian International Conference.
46.
LimayeM. R. (1994). Responding to work-force diversity conceptualization and search for paradigms. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 8(3), 353–372.
47.
MelonconL. (2019, July 14). TechComm Programmatic Central. https://tek-ritr.com/techcomm-programmatic-central/
48.
MelonçonL.St.AmantK. (2019). Empirical research in technical and professional communication: A 5-year examination of research methods and a call for research sustainability. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 49(2), 128–155.
49.
MillerC. R. (1979). A humanistic rationale for technical writing. College English, 40(6), 610–617.
50.
OttenM. (2003). Intercultural learning and diversity in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7(1), 1226.
51.
PetersenE. J.WaltonR. (2018). Bridging analysis and action: How feminist scholarship can inform the social justice turn. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(4), 416–446.
52.
PophamS. (2016). Disempowered minority students: The struggle for power and position in a graduate professional writing program. Programmatic Perspectives, 8(2), 72–95.
53.
RudeC. D. (2009). Mapping the research questions in technical communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 23(2), 174–215.
54.
SackeyD. J. (2018). An environmental justice paradigm for technical communication. In HaasA. M.EbleM. F. (Eds.), Key theoretical frameworks: Teaching technical communication in the twenty-first century (pp. 138–160). Utah State University Press.
55.
SappD. A.SavageG. J.MattsonK. (2015). Special issue on human rights [Special issue]. Rhetoric, Professional Communication and Globalization, 4(1), 1-12.
56.
SauerB. A. (1993). Sense and sensibility in technical documentation: How feminist interpretation strategies can save lives in the nation's Mines. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 7(1), 63–83.
57.
SavageG.MattsonK. (2011). Perceptions of racial and ethnic diversity in technical communication programs. Programmatic Perspectives, 3(1), 5–57.
58.
SavageG.MatveevaN. (2011). Toward racial and ethnic diversity in technical communication programs: A study of technical communication in historically black colleges and universities and tribal colleges and universities in the United States. Programmatic Perspectives, 3(1), 58–85.
59.
SavageJ. G.AgbokaG. (2016). Professional communication, social justice, and the global south [special issue]. Connexions, 4(1), 3-17.
60.
ScottJ. B. (2004). Rearticulating civic engagement through cultural studies and service-learning. Technical Communication Quarterly, 13(3), 289–306.
61.
ScottJ. B.LongoB.WillsK. V. (2006). Critical power tools: Technical communication and cultural studies. State University of New York Press.
62.
Shivers-McNairA.San DiegoC. (2017). Localizing communities, goals, communication, and inclusion: A collaborative approach. Technical Communication, 64(2), 97–112.
63.
SimmonsM. W.GrabillJ. T. (2007). Toward a civic rhetoric for technologically and scientifically complex places: Invention, performance, and participation. College Composition and Communication, 58(3), 419–448.
64.
SullivanD. L. (1990). Political-ethical implication of defining technical communication as a practice. Journal of Advanced Composition, 10(2), 375–385.
65.
ThrallsC.BlylerN. R. (1993). The social perspective and pedagogy in technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 2(3), 249–270.
WaltonR.MooreK. R.JonesN. N. (2019). Technical communication after the social justice turn: Building coalitions for action. Routledge.
68.
WaltonR.PriceR.ZralyM. (2013). Rhetorically navigating Rwandan research review: A fantasy theme analysis. Journal of Rhetoric, Professional Communication and Globalization, 4(1), 78–102.
69.
WaltonR.ZralyM.MugenganaJ. P. (2015). Values and validity: Navigating messiness in a community-based research project in Rwanda. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 45–69.
70.
WilliamsM. F. (2013). A survey of emerging research: Debunking the fallacy of colorblind technical communication. Programmatic Perspectives, 5(1), 86–93.
