Technical writing will become increasingly important to the nation's engineering interests in the 21st century. To meet a national agenda of competitiveness, writing program administrators must build courses and programs that are sensitive to unique institutional perceptions about writing. By means of a quantitative and qualitative methodology, the present study describes the perceptions of technical writing held by department heads at a technological university. Using a combined survey method and structured interview process, we investigate how department chairs felt about the contents, instruction, and assessment of a technical writing course. We also investigate perceptions about writing products and processes. Based on our experiences with the survey, we call for writing program administrators to study the institutional context for courses and programs in technical writing.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Committee on the Education and Utilization of the Engineer, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, and the National Research Council, Engineering Education and Practice in the United States: Foundations of Our Techno-Economic Future, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1985.
2.
AllenT. J., Managing the Flow of Technology Transfer and the Dissemination of Technical Information within the R&D Organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1977.
3.
BlewettC. D. and KilduffM., Workplace Automation: Technology Transfer and Strategies for Decision Making, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1991.
4.
AndersonP. V., What Survey Research Tells Us about Writing at Work, in Writing in Nonacademic Settings, OdellL. and GoswamiD. (eds.), The Guilford Press, New York, pp. 3–83, 1985.
5.
ResnickD. P.Historical Perspectives on Literacy and Schooling, Daedalus, 119:2, pp. 15–32, 1990.
6.
ConnorsR. J.The Rise of Technical Writing Instruction in America, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 12:4, pp. 329–352, 1982.
7.
CunninghamD. H. and EstrinH. A. (eds.), The Teaching of Technical Writing, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, Illinois, 1975.
8.
SidesC. H. (ed.), Technical and Business Communication: Bibliographic Essays for Teachers and Corporate Trainers, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, Illinois, 1989.
9.
DobrinD. N., What's Technical about Technical Writing, in New Essays in Technical and Scientific Communication: Research, Theory, Practice, Volume 2, AndersonP. V.BrockmanR. J., and MillerC. R. (eds.), Baywood Publishing Company, Inc., Amityville, New York, pp. 227–250, 1983.
10.
PaceyA., The Culture of Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1983.
11.
ElliotN.Teaching Technical Writing: Notes toward a New Paradigm, Technology Studies, 1:8, pp. 5–10, Fall 1989.
12.
WitteS. P. and FaigleyL., Evaluating College Writing Programs, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Illinois, 1983.
13.
WhiteE. M., Developing Successful College Writing Programs, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California, 1989.
14.
DillmanD. A., Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method, Wiley, New York, 1978.
15.
BurnettR. E., Survey of Teachers of Technical Writing in Four Year Colleges, April 14, 1988. (Survey sponsored by Wadsworth Publishers.)
16.
CasariL. E. and PolvacsJ. T.Practices in Technical Writing in Agriculture and Engineering Industries, Firms, and Agencies, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 18:2, pp. 143–159, 1988.
17.
HillocksG.Jr., Research on Written Composition: New Directions for Teaching, National Conference on Research in English and ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills, Urbana, Illinois, 1986.
18.
LauermanD. A.SchroederM. W.SrokaK., and Roger StephensonE., Workplace and Classroom: Principles for Designing Writing Courses, in Writing in Nonacademic Settings, OdellL. and GoswamiD. (eds.), The Guilford Press, New York, pp. 427–450, 1985.
19.
LoebH. M.Writing Courses in the Engineering College Curriculum, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 15:1, pp. 43–48, 1985.
20.
ElliotN.PlataM. and ZelhartP., A Program Development Handbook for the Holistic Assessment of Writing, University Press of America, Baltimore, 1990.
21.
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Criteria for Accreditation, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, Atlanta, Georgia, 1984.
22.
CravenE. C., A Concluding Perspective, in Academic Program Evaluation, CravenE. C. (ed.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, California, pp. 105–116, 1980.
23.
CohenD. K. and HaneyW., Minimums, Competency Testing, and Social Policy, in Minimum Competency Achievement Testing: Motives, Models, Measures, and Consequences, JaegerR. M. and TittleC. K. (eds.), McCutchan Press, Berkeley, California, pp. 5–22, 1980.
24.
FlowerL. and HayesJ. R.A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing, College Composition and Communication, 32, pp. 365–387, 1981.
25.
GoswamiD.RedishJ. C.FelkerD. B., and SiegelA., Writing in the Professions: A Course Guide and Instructional Materials for an Advanced Composition Course, American Institutes for Research, Washington, D.C., 1981.
26.
ElliotN. and ZelhartP.Hermeneutics and the Teaching of Technical Writing, The Technical Writing Teacher, 17:2, pp. 150–164, Spring 1990.
27.
BroadheadG. J. and FreedR. C., The Variables of Composition: Process and Product in a Business Setting, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, Illinois, 1986.
28.
BabbieE., The Practice of Social Research, (5th Edition), Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, California, 1989.
29.
MillerC. R.A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing, College English, 40:6, pp. 610–617, 1979.
30.
HalloranS. M.Eloquence in a Technological Society, Central States Speech Journal, 29, pp. 221–227, Winter 1978.
31.
HuntP. and WilkinsonS.Technical Communication, The Academic Dilemma, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 15:1, pp. 35–42, 1985.
32.
GreenK. C.A Profile of Undergraduates in the Sciences, American Scientist, 77, pp. 475–480, September-October 1989.
33.
KriegerJ., Winds of Revolution Sweep through Science Education, C&EN, pp. 27–43, June 11, 1990.
34.
ToulminS., Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity, The Free Press, New York, 1990.
35.
ElliotN.Issues of Class in the Teaching of Writing, Transformations, 2:2, 1991, in press.
36.
ElliotN.ZelhartP., and PlataM.Multicultural Appropriateness in Institutionally-Based Writing Assessment Programs, Journal of Instructional Psychology, 18:2, pp. 129–136, 1991.
37.
ElliotN.PlataM., and ZelhartP., A Program Development Handbook for the Holistic Assessment of Writing, University Press of America, Baltimore, 1990.
38.
EstrinH. and ElliotN., Technical Writing in the Corporate World, Crisp, Los Altos, 1990.
39.
KilduffM.Automation and the Practitioner-Client Relationship, Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services, 71:2, pp. 102–105, 1990.
40.
BlewettC. D. and KilduffM., Workplace Automation: Technology Transfer and Strategies for Decision Making, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1991.
