Design Discourse - Composing and Revising Programs in Professional and Technical Writing, 2010a
Design Discourse - Composing and Revising Programs in Professional and Technical Writing, 2010a Design Discourse - Composing and Revising Programs in Professional and Technical Writing, 2010a
Ashe and Reilly humanities. In addition to competency in writing and rhetoric, scholars note that professional writing students benefit from training in computer sciences, graphic design, and organizational communication, which they can best and perhaps only get from other departments, depending on the expertise and size of program faculty (Blythe). In certain institutional contexts, creating professional writing programs as extra-departmental, interdisciplinary structures provides the best means for providing educational options for professional writing students; supplementing the skills of the professional writing faculty, who often number only a few; and gaining access for students to more technological resources than small programs in English departments may be able to provide (Blakeslee; Blythe; Andrews & Worley). Forging partnerships with and gaining participation from faculty in other departments can integrate professional writing into the broader university community, which can in turn provide exposure and stability to the program. Such integration can be accomplished using the model of WAC/WID programs already in existence and, in fact, a number of scholars advocate allying professional writing with WAC programs (Bosley; Hocks, Lopez, and Grabill). Other approaches to program development emphasize the work that needs to be done at administrative levels, including compact planning, which focuses on setting specific, incremental goals for the program and gaining administrative support for those goals (Allen). A number of the approaches to program growth and development that we surveyed highlight the importance of and problems with creating a space within traditional academic structures, like English departments, for technical and professional writing programs (Hocks, Lopez, and Grabill), whose interdisciplinarity and focus on workplaces and technologies are not always easily accommodated by traditional notions of discrete departments and the concerns of humanities disciplines. The focus on space is by no means accidental, for academic units, including departments, schools, and universities as a whole, are organic entities sharing attributes of biological and environmental systems. Addressing the space and environmental issues raised by many developers of professional and technical writing (PTW) programs requires systems thinking, as we explain in the next section. systems thinking and academic ecosystems Imagining our universities, departments, programs, students, and faculty as part of an academic ecosystem has both utility and precedent. Systems thinking dominates in contemporary scientific endeavors, putting emphasis on the interdependence of relationships between organisms and their environ- 92
Smart Growth ments. Our work as PTW program administrators is no different; resource allocation and day-to-day challenges may dominate our thinking, but relationships constrain or support our success. Sydney I. Dobrin and Christian R. Weisser define ecosystems as “groups of organisms which function together in a particular environment (physical and chemical) and exchange energy within the system in order to metabolize, grow, and reproduce” (73). Dobrin and Weisser have put together volumes on the link between ecosystems and writing systems, and the connection has been touted for more than twenty years. Marilyn M. Cooper, who made the most widelycited early suggestion of the potential of an ecological approach to composition, still emphasizes the idea that “the systems that constitute writing and writers are not just like ecological systems but are precisely ecological systems, and that there are no boundaries between writing and the other interlocked, cycling systems of our world” (xiv). Extending the link between ecosystems and writing systems, we suggest that academic departments are ecosystems of their own, and that by thinking of them in this way we can highlight the spatial, geographic, and relationship aspects of academic units and the importance of considering these elements for the growth of programs within these units. Michael Weiler and W. Barnett Pearce use the term “rhetorical ecology” to describe viewing public discourse as “a kind of ecosystem in which various individual discursive subsystems interact in relations of conflict and mutual dependence” (14). Likewise, in the academic department, special interests must interact over curriculum, instruction and departmental resources. Our role in this ecosystem is constantly changing and tends to provoke reactive changes in the roles of other members. As Weiler and Pearce suggest, Rhetors are forced to act within the confines of the ecosystem, and their discourses must reflect the web of relationships among its species and its surroundings. But as the rhetorical ecosystem evolves, as any living thing must, so too do its discursive possibilities, and within the system there is ample room for authorial creativity and cleverness (15). The space within the department or university ecosystem for authorial creativity and cleverness offers program administrators opportunities for building programs that have internalized certain survival skills. Survival skills in our case would include careful planning for the inevitable changes that occur in our rhetorical ecosystems. Because “[c]ontext both fits rhetorical action and is reconstructed by it” (15), our decisions as administrators change the system and all of the relationships it affects and is affected by. 93
- Page 60 and 61: Griswold orientation meetings as ne
- Page 62 and 63: Griswold So at this point I had two
- Page 64 and 65: Griswold All the while I am hoping
- Page 66 and 67: Griswold anyone whose primary acade
- Page 68 and 69: Griswold pendix A). I dang well wan
- Page 70 and 71: Griswold Unfortunately, we were not
- Page 72 and 73: Griswold can be appended as evidenc
- Page 74 and 75: Griswold Oct.-Nov. 2003: Evaluation
- Page 76 and 77: Griswold such a program would confe
- Page 78 and 79: Griswold have been hired with exper
- Page 81 and 82: 4 Disciplinary Identities: Professi
- Page 83 and 84: Disciplinary Identities fessional w
- Page 85 and 86: Disciplinary Identities courses, th
- Page 87 and 88: Disciplinary Identities been genera
- Page 89 and 90: Disciplinary Identities sites for e
- Page 91 and 92: Disciplinary Identities ing others.
- Page 93 and 94: Disciplinary Identities responsibil
- Page 95 and 96: Disciplinary Identities well-known
- Page 97 and 98: Disciplinary Identities uncritical,
- Page 99 and 100: Disciplinary Identities departments
- Page 101 and 102: Disciplinary Identities has never,
- Page 103 and 104: Disciplinary Identities 2. Separate
- Page 105: evising
- Page 108 and 109: Ashe and Reilly question impressed
- Page 112 and 113: Ashe and Reilly developing academic
- Page 114 and 115: Ashe and Reilly administrators may
- Page 116 and 117: Ashe and Reilly porate aspects of P
- Page 118 and 119: Ashe and Reilly requirements in the
- Page 120 and 121: Ashe and Reilly developing a system
- Page 122 and 123: Ashe and Reilly to reduce congestio
- Page 124 and 125: Ashe and Reilly diverse student pop
- Page 126 and 127: Ashe and Reilly most onlookers, is
- Page 128 and 129: Ashe and Reilly Andrews, Deborah C.
- Page 131 and 132: 6 Curriculum, Genre and Resistance:
- Page 133 and 134: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance si
- Page 135 and 136: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance bu
- Page 137 and 138: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance a
- Page 139 and 140: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance in
- Page 141 and 142: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance co
- Page 143 and 144: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance We
- Page 145 and 146: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance ma
- Page 147 and 148: Curriculum, Genre and Resistance an
- Page 149 and 150: 7 Composing and Revising the Profes
- Page 151 and 152: Composing and Revising two years th
- Page 153 and 154: Composing and Revising I saw the pr
- Page 155 and 156: Composing and Revising we’ve work
- Page 157 and 158: Composing and Revising their lives
- Page 159 and 160: Composing and Revising the solely p
Ashe <strong>and</strong> Reilly<br />
humanities. In addition to competency <strong>in</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> rhetoric, scholars note<br />
that professional writ<strong>in</strong>g students benefit from tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> computer sciences,<br />
graphic design, <strong>and</strong> organizational communication, which they can best <strong>and</strong><br />
perhaps only get from other departments, depend<strong>in</strong>g on the expertise <strong>and</strong> size<br />
of program faculty (Blythe). In certa<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>stitutional contexts, creat<strong>in</strong>g professional<br />
writ<strong>in</strong>g programs as extra-departmental, <strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>ary structures provides<br />
the best means for provid<strong>in</strong>g educational options for professional writ<strong>in</strong>g<br />
students; supplement<strong>in</strong>g the skills of the professional writ<strong>in</strong>g faculty, who often<br />
number only a few; <strong>and</strong> ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g access for students to more technological resources<br />
than small programs <strong>in</strong> English departments may be able to provide<br />
(Blakeslee; Blythe; Andrews & Worley). Forg<strong>in</strong>g partnerships with <strong>and</strong> ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />
participation from faculty <strong>in</strong> other departments can <strong>in</strong>tegrate professional writ<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>in</strong>to the broader university community, which can <strong>in</strong> turn provide exposure<br />
<strong>and</strong> stability to the program. Such <strong>in</strong>tegration can be accomplished us<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the model of WAC/WID programs already <strong>in</strong> existence <strong>and</strong>, <strong>in</strong> fact, a number<br />
of scholars advocate ally<strong>in</strong>g professional writ<strong>in</strong>g with WAC programs (Bosley;<br />
Hocks, Lopez, <strong>and</strong> Grabill). Other approaches to program development emphasize<br />
the work that needs to be done at adm<strong>in</strong>istrative levels, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g compact<br />
plann<strong>in</strong>g, which focuses on sett<strong>in</strong>g specific, <strong>in</strong>cremental goals for the program<br />
<strong>and</strong> ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g adm<strong>in</strong>istrative support for those goals (Allen).<br />
A number of the approaches to program growth <strong>and</strong> development that<br />
we surveyed highlight the importance of <strong>and</strong> problems with creat<strong>in</strong>g a space<br />
with<strong>in</strong> traditional academic structures, like English departments, for technical<br />
<strong>and</strong> professional writ<strong>in</strong>g programs (Hocks, Lopez, <strong>and</strong> Grabill), whose <strong>in</strong>terdiscipl<strong>in</strong>arity<br />
<strong>and</strong> focus on workplaces <strong>and</strong> technologies are not always easily<br />
accommodated by traditional notions of discrete departments <strong>and</strong> the concerns<br />
of humanities discipl<strong>in</strong>es. The focus on space is by no means accidental, for<br />
academic units, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g departments, schools, <strong>and</strong> universities as a whole, are<br />
organic entities shar<strong>in</strong>g attributes of biological <strong>and</strong> environmental systems. Address<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the space <strong>and</strong> environmental issues raised by many developers of professional<br />
<strong>and</strong> technical writ<strong>in</strong>g (PTW) programs requires systems th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g, as we<br />
expla<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> the next section.<br />
systems th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> academic ecosystems<br />
Imag<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g our universities, departments, programs, students, <strong>and</strong> faculty<br />
as part of an academic ecosystem has both utility <strong>and</strong> precedent. Systems<br />
th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g dom<strong>in</strong>ates <strong>in</strong> contemporary scientific endeavors, putt<strong>in</strong>g emphasis<br />
on the <strong>in</strong>terdependence of relationships between organisms <strong>and</strong> their environ-<br />
92