we can also think about the incident as linked to problems ofrhetoric and technical communication. Such thinking is exemplified, for instance,in research that has explored documents and rhetorical practices related tothe shuttle Challenger explosion
This is an interesting thought-- that even though the technical failures are at fault for disaster, there is still liability for the technical writers.
where they learned the giveand take of organized activities) but also in class discussions (e.g., where theydeveloped strategies for deliberating about issues, and arguing for their plansof action, as a collective
Rhetorically, this emphasizes the public speaking skill and how to maneuver different audiences. It is a very different scenario to address, define, and defend a topic in an intimate group versus a large group (i.e class discussions). The approach and availability of simple connection changes as the audience grows.
The individual plannerthus plays a constructive role in deciding—or, in some cases, prescribing—howproblems should be defined and how, therefore, they ought to be addressed.
An important step of Rhetorical consideration; create boundaries to solutions to visualize what an ideal solution would/should look like.
A range of academic and professional fields were represented during the 2010Fall term: these included wildlife and forestry, engineering, architecture, buildingscience, physics, social work, finance, health and nutrition, communication, edu-cation, and English.
Rhetoric spans over multiple fields, and technical writing bridges the gaps by creating a unified language to correlate different levels of expertise together.
Simply put,we quickly learned that the process of inquiry—even the seemingly “basic” task oflocating reliable information—was a wicked problem in its own right.
Finding information that matches up on a controversial topic across multiple sources can be difficult-- and as such can put a wrench in technical writing writing goals. After all, how can you clearly communicate a given goal if the basis of information is skewed?
learning about multiple ways they can be addressed—if not ulti-mately solved—through research and writing
Is the goal of technical writers (generally) to address or solve their content?
I have often found that students produce better writing when it is directedtoward specific audiences and concrete problems
Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing illustrates the benefit of specific goals (or problems) to focus on while discussing the various communication professionals' priorities when reviewing audiences and usability. Essentially, every successful platform, document, and interface is created with a clear goal in mind, making it easier for a user to access and understand the information
between the fields of rhetoric and design, between placements andtopoi, andbetween theory and practice in technical and professional communication
These relationships are highlighted in Beyond a Narrow Conception of Usability Testing as different communication fields are being discussed. Each relationship holds different priorities, and serve different purposes within their markets.
One way to promote this type of approach is to takeRittel and Webber’s 10 characteristics for defining wicked problems and use itas a basis for getting students to expand their thinking about research anddocument production in a principled way
Introducing this style of problem solving to our educational system would encourage critical thinking in a real-world scale. It would allow students to effectively experiment with the importance of perspectives. If students were able to justify prior lessons learned by utilizing them in a multi-field issue, then there would be a higher motivation to understanding and pursuing intellectual pursuits.