Finding itself at the center of highly publicized legal and political deliberations over fairness in testing, personnel credibility, and legal liability, the training department at a North American transit authority adopted a genre system that enabled the production of objective evidence of job competence, which was then used to make objective decisions about who passed and failed various training programs. The ongoing genre-structured activity of the department involved not only the regularization of organizational texts but also the regularization of social interaction mediated by those texts, which, while producing the types of interpretively stable documents required for successful public deliberation, led to a shift in authority and social relations within the department that instigated considerable resentment and loss of morale among many veteran instructors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GergenK. J., The Mechanical Self and the Rhetoric of Objectivity, in Rethinking Objectivity, MegillA. (ed.), Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, pp. 265–287, 1994.
de CuellarJ. P., Toast at a Luncheon Hosted by United Nations Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar in New York City, in George Bush Presidential Library and Museum Public Papers. Available at: http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/papers/1991/91092302.html, 1991.
BazermanC., Systems of Genres and the Enactment of Social Intentions, in Genre and the New Rhetoric, FreedmanA. and MedwayP. (eds.), Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 79–101, 1994.
6.
BazermanC., What is Not Institutionally Visible Does Not Count: The Problem of Making Activity Assessable, Accountable, and Plannable, in Writing Selves/Writing Societies: Research from Activity Perspectives, BazermanC. and RussellD. (eds.), WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity, Fort Collins, Colorado, 2003.
7.
PareA. and SmartG., Observing Genres in Action: Towards a Research Methodology, in Genre and the New Rhetoric, FreedmanA. and MedwayP. (eds.), Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 146–154, 1994.
8.
DevittA. J., Intertextuality in Tax Accounting: Generic, Referential, and Functional, in Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities, BazermanC. and ParadisJ. (eds.), University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, pp. 336–357, 1991.
9.
BazermanC.LittleJ., and ChavkinT., The Production of Information for Genred Activity Spaces: Informational Motives and Consequences of the Environmental Impact Statement, Written Communication, 20, pp. 455–477, 2003.
10.
BerkenkotterC., Genre Systems at Work: DSM-IV and Rhetorical Recontextualization in Psychotherapy Paperwork, Written Communication, 18, pp. 326–349, 2001.
11.
FreedmanA. and MedwayP. (eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric, Taylor and Francis, London, 1994.
12.
RussellD., Rethinking Genre in School and Society: An Activity Theory Analysis, Written Communication, 14, pp. 504–554, 1997.
13.
LittleJ., The Peter Effect in Early Experimental Education Research, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 33, pp. 41–63, 2003.
14.
GeertzC., The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books, New York, 1973.
15.
DeweyJ., The Sources of a Science of Education, Liveright, New York, 1929.
16.
DeweyJ., Experience and Education, Touchstone, New York, 1938/1997.
17.
BazermanC., Shaping Written Knowledge, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1988.
18.
MillerC. R., Genre as Social Action, Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, pp. 151–167, 1984.
19.
OrlikowskiW. and YatesJ., Genre Systems: Structuring Interaction through Communicative Norms, MIT Center for Coordination Science Working Paper 205. Available at: http://ccs.mit.edu/papers/CCSWP205, 1998.
20.
MegillA., Introduction: Four Senses of Objectivity, in Rethinking Objectivity, MegillA. (ed.), Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, pp. 1–20, 1994.
21.
NovickP., That Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
22.
PorterT., Quantification and the Accounting Ideal in Science, Social Studies of Science, 22, pp. 633–652, 1992.
23.
PorterT., Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1995.
24.
GrimaldiW., Studies in the Philosophy of Aristotle's Rhetoric, Franz Steiner Verlag, Wiesbaden, 1972.
25.
FabianJ., Ethnographic Objectivity Revisited: From Rigor to Vigor, in Rethinking Objectivity, MegillA. (ed.), Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, pp. 81–108, 1994.
26.
SmithD. E., The Social Construction of Documentary Reality, Sociological Inquiry, 44: 4, pp. 257–268, 1974.
27.
BodewitzH. J. H. W.BuurmaH., and de VriesG. H., Regulatory Science and the Social Management of Trust in Medicine, in The Social Construction of Technological Systems, BijkerW. E.HughesT. P., and PinchT. (eds.), MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 243–259, 1987.
28.
BazermanC.LittleJ.BethelL.ChavkinT.FouquetteD., and GarufisJ., Reference Guide to Writing Across the Curriculum, Parlor Press, West Lafayette, Indiana, 2005.
29.
BazermanC. and LittleJ., Knowing Academic Languages, in Festschrift for Britt-Louise Gunnarsson, MarttalaU. M. and BacklundI. (eds.), Uppsala University Press, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 261–269, 2004.
30.
BazermanC.LittleJ., and ChavkinT., The Production of Information for Genred Activity Spaces: Informational Motives and Consequences of the Environmental Impact Statement, Written Communication, 20, pp. 455–477, 2003.
31.
LittleJ., The Peter Effect in Early Experimental Education Research, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 33, pp. 41–63, 2003.
32.
LittleJ., Understanding Statistical Significance: A Conceptual History, Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 31, pp. 363–372, 2001.
33.
LittleJ., Analogy in Science: Where Do We Go From Here, Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 30: 1, pp. 69–92, 2000.
