Comments on: Week One Response: Technical Writing and Responsibility to the Public http://courses.johnmjones.org/ENGL605/2012/08/26/week-one-response-technical-writing-and-responsibility-to-the-public/ ENGL 605, WVU, Fall 2012 Wed, 14 Nov 2012 02:44:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4 By: Rachel Henderson http://courses.johnmjones.org/ENGL605/2012/08/26/week-one-response-technical-writing-and-responsibility-to-the-public/#comment-44 Rachel Henderson Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:04:49 +0000 http://courses.johnmjones.org/ENGL605/?p=215#comment-44 I just have two quick thoughts in response to your post, Courtney. My first thought was more of a reaction to the idea of practicality and a stereotype I have picked up somewhere along the way that "technical writers" are technical, dry people who are not skilled in interacting with human beings because they only interact with their technical, dry content material. I readily admit I do not know where exactly this perception of mine of technical writers came from and that I do not really buy into the concept, especially given such well-crafted illustrations of technical writers by those like Miller and Rutter. I like Rutter's position that technical writers are human, first, and writers, second. But I do wonder about the stereotype: does it date back to the early days Connors laid out for us? Is it an antiquated stereotype? Do others believe in this stereotype? My second thought was about a case study I read in a journalism ethics course once. I can only remember the details vaguely, but basically, the case study was about the struggle one writer had in a certain situation in which she was writing a textbook (I can't remember the course subject, science maybe) and the company she worked for essentially wanted to combine church and state, if I recall, and lay out both the theory of evolution and the theory of creation. Anyway, she didn't believe both theories should be included in a school textbook but feared losing her job if she confronted her boss/supervisor. It was an interesting case that I think fits into the conversation happening between our readings this week and the responsibility of a technical writer to stay true to herself and her personal integrity but also serve her audience as best she can while still answering to her superiors. I just have two quick thoughts in response to your post, Courtney. My first thought was more of a reaction to the idea of practicality and a stereotype I have picked up somewhere along the way that “technical writers” are technical, dry people who are not skilled in interacting with human beings because they only interact with their technical, dry content material. I readily admit I do not know where exactly this perception of mine of technical writers came from and that I do not really buy into the concept, especially given such well-crafted illustrations of technical writers by those like Miller and Rutter. I like Rutter’s position that technical writers are human, first, and writers, second. But I do wonder about the stereotype: does it date back to the early days Connors laid out for us? Is it an antiquated stereotype? Do others believe in this stereotype?

My second thought was about a case study I read in a journalism ethics course once. I can only remember the details vaguely, but basically, the case study was about the struggle one writer had in a certain situation in which she was writing a textbook (I can’t remember the course subject, science maybe) and the company she worked for essentially wanted to combine church and state, if I recall, and lay out both the theory of evolution and the theory of creation. Anyway, she didn’t believe both theories should be included in a school textbook but feared losing her job if she confronted her boss/supervisor. It was an interesting case that I think fits into the conversation happening between our readings this week and the responsibility of a technical writer to stay true to herself and her personal integrity but also serve her audience as best she can while still answering to her superiors.

]]>