These questions are important with any information display because they force you into the audience perspective. This perspective is important for the troubleshooting phase.

Largely, I disagree with this sentiment. Granted, it's understandable if there are a few interactive pieces that are particularly important to keep protected. However, for the most part it would solve a majority of issues if your poster was put together by the time you reached the site. That way you only need to worry about immediate issues and solutions, if something goes wrong.

Creating a storyboard allows you to "play test" your design and allow troubleshooting before final product. If you can manipulate the pieces, then you can come up with several different design strategies.

These are good points for presentations, such as PowerPoint, as well. Consider large presentations with similar limits as posters.

This design tool is considered self-explanatory for the modern English student, but many websites and other information displays need to recognize information priority and make it clear for readers to understand at a glance.

Look at the organization of these slides for examples of contrast. There is a difference in color and boldness to highlight titles, while also a difference in indention to create a sublevel relationship of the text (meaning that readers know that the indented, lower level text is supplementary).

Repetition can be used to create groups by using fonts that correlate with organization (similar to creating headers, ect with the same font and size), colors, layouts, and orientation of columns and rows. There are many subtle ways to use repetition to create subconscious relationships and to create readability. Consider the obvious uses of repetition, as well (including buzzwords).

A quick guide as a reminder to the fundamentals discussed in an earlier annotation.

White space is imperative for visuals because they need the entire focus of the eye. If there is too much crowding, then the audience will be overwhelmed and may lose focus on your topic.

Captions are smaller than your standard text, so it is a great option to help readers get reference for your visual. It's often helpful to keep audiences on track

When considering a map, prioritize the space you must cover. If there is too much material to process, maps lose their relevance to the topic. Using subsections to effectively zoom in are intelligent ways of addressing location while focusing on the specific area(s) you're discussing.

Venn diagrams are great for non vocal presentations because they allow the reader to play with relationships and understand the variations of them. However, Venn Diagrams are not easily lent to vocal presentation because the audience will want the freedom to read the diagram as they prioritize specific relationships instead of following the speaker's path through the diagram.

Diagrams can be tricky to portray in terms that an inexperienced audience can quickly (and easily) understand. I think the example in this presentation is a perfect example of how diagrams are more of a specialized version of communication. This seems to be particularly true about dimensions that require contextual knowledge.

Deciding what the table says before creation is great inspiration for concise titles and priority centered organization.

As Dragga points out, this relationship representation is sacred to readers and it is unethical to manipulate graphical representations of relationships to persuade audiences.

Lynda Tutorials for Dreamweaver

Lynda Tutorials for powerpoint

Vast amounts of tutorials

Having visual material purely to have it, is a serious mistake. It lessens your ethos as speaker, and potentially distracts the audience. Visual material should have relevance to your audience about your topic, and should be addressed. If you don't plan on making your visual a valid piece of your information compilation, it does not belong in your representation of information.

This section is made up of an incredibly important realization about headers. There is a way for descriptive headers (A and B level headers) to exist without being exhaustively long or too general. With a proper summarizing header, you're allowing your audience to digest your information completely by telling them what the message is. This helps readers focus on your message and its relationship to the topic, rather than deciphering text walls for meaning.

We discussed this in class in relation to our Service Learning Deliverable Packets. In the business realm, your document(s) have high likelihood of being revisited with the intent of quickly accessing a certain piece of information. With this being the case, you owe the readers navigational tools to utilize your information the easiest way possible. Efficient formatting for your information and a map for navigating that information is a good idea for dense information.

Presentation conundrums are issues for companies as the expectation of communication on social media becomes more urgent. There are benefits to being personable and relate able, but there are also the costs of losing the ethos of an established professional entity.

This is a basic theme of web design elements such as contrast, repetition, alignment, and proximity. The relationship of information to presentation is an ever important consideration within modern communication, where the goal is to communicate in the most efficient and relevant ways to your audience.

Visual content can also add relevant context to principles or points. This can be helpful when persuasive because it can connect your presentation to something established within your audience.

Genre options for communication professionals are rapidly expanding, many of which, as Dragga points out, don't have clear mandates as these genres have.

Readability is a growing trend of concern for Technical Writers who publish digital material. This includes how font is represented, from how it looks on a background to how the typeface is read.

These two relationships between representation and information are vital to Technical Communication, resulting in several areas of research regarding what authors can do to communicate effectively, like Dragga's article.

See Also:Multimodal Literacy

This is important because awareness is key towards making a more ethically inclined workforce. Research will not only reveal ethical issues and solutions for those issues, but it could make more efficient modes of communication

This seems to be an overall ethical urge, but the problem with blindly trusting the ethical leanings of a large population is that there are differing feelings correlated with ethics (justice V feelings) as well as experiences with manipulation of information changing ideals. This should be remedied with professionals aiming toward clear ethical goals.

I think this is a direct response to the lack of true definition of ethical responsibility. Everyone knows the job requirement is to "Assist the reader in comprehension" (8) but it's an easily logical excuse to organize information with the ideas of "reader responsibility"

This is another parallel to "Defining Plagiarism", as the world of academia is refusing to interact on a functioning level with the professional world.

It's interesting to see that people who have become comfortable in their field are more confident in their choices (seen by "complete" answers) while the students who are learning the field without practicing it are more willing to allow instances against their opinion ("mostly")

With an issue as difficult to navigate as Ethics, it's important to try and "unpack" potential issues so that it's easier to encourage a dialectic about terms and situations regarding the issues.

This is a curious observation because many fields that deliver information to consumers have ethical codes that are strictly followed. Doctors, Therapists, Teachers, and even Business Administration all follow their ethical guidelines strictly. I believe clarity in expectations is needed and would be appreciated in the industry.

A popular example of unethical editing is Target's photoshopping history. Through Photoshop, there is a clear manipulation of the swimsuit and the model; which changes perception unethically.

The moral of design manipulation, here, is that as long as the information is left without harmful manipulation, it's ethical. As soon as the information displayed alters the reality of the product, it is an unethical representation.

This reminds me of the article we read for our last annotations that discussed how the concrete definitions and parameters within the Academic world differ from the business world. The expectations change, which means there are new ethical conundrums to address.

This is also a categorical issue throughout Rhetorical History. Consider the five cannons of Rhetoric and how they battled the Rhetorical uses beyond verbal language. And again, the new acceptance of Multimodality within the Academic community addressing more modes of communication.

Rhetoric is constantly being redefined and broadened as new forms of persuasion and communication are discovered and created.

In Miranda's succinct summary of this section, it allows to build on current benefits because of this ruling. Materials can no longer be hoarded or manipulated by families of the deceased with the creation of a material statute of limitations. With the allowance of time, it does create a middle ground with accepting the legacy of the author and their work. This ruling also created the wealth of "open source" material. Meaning that classics that are ingrained into our society's lore can now be republished, translated, or re-used without legal risk. For Technical Communicators, this is an important resource to be aware of.

They have the potential of these legal options, given that they fit the criteria described in the above article. However, understanding the difference between personal ownership and business ownership is vital information when navigating the business realm with plagiarism in mind.

Essentially, Technical Writers have options to protect their manipulation of materials, given that they fit within the legal criteria.

Continuing with the previous dialectic, writers should consider the type of product they are making. Whether it's creating or repackaging, communicators should keep legal terms of protection in mind.

I suppose the question of what kind of material a Technical Communicator makes depends on the situation. However, it is important for the communicators to keep this question in their mind as they create prototypes of potential projects. Understanding this question helps the creators understand their limitations with outside sources.

I wonder if the main difference between this and the Harper & Row V. Nation Enterprises is that the potential act of plagiarism in the book was not the entirety of the product sold, just an accessory to the created content.

Reyman mentions while describing the identity of the author of any given material. It is common to have material that belongs to a business rather than its human creator.

Many works utilizes material that could be otherwise labeled as plagiarism for the sake of protecting the author, but these court rulings are more about the material than the author. It makes sense that satire, critical commentary, and judgments could be undesirable to the author. However, when considering the audience and the use of material, it is clear that is not plagiarism.

Reyman calls for more dialogue following this model. If research can be done on material success and failure, then research between professionals and academia must be on the same page, as well. If this information was readily available and discussed with students, then they would be more prepared for the potential plagiarism choices they will make as professionals.

The struggle, as mentioned in Reyman's article, to create clear, uniform terms for what grants plagiarism seems to be ever present. Unfortunately, it seems to be a frustrating case-by-case decision, rather than the systematic "copying is stealing" ideal in schools from Reyman's examples.

This section is a fascinating appeal to the Right of Free Speech. It seems to allude to the American ideal that your work identity is crucial to your societal identity. It would be completely natural, then, to assert that your business voice is your voice and representation.

Consideration of the public is what fuels information use in Technical Communications. This is precisely why there are instances of re-use and copying formats. There is a benefit to the audience to remain familiar, at times, and there could be a disadvantage to always push material to be unique and individual.

This is the overall theme of Reyman's work. There is a difference between morality and ownership in the US, and those differences are what make scenarios seem grey.

Reference further about effects, other names, and more summary.

In Reyman's article, "Rethinking Plagiarism For Technical Communications", it is stated that these definitions are important for technical communication educators to bring into the classroom.

This tenant of teaching Plagiarism Awareness to students in Technical Writing is focused on definition (Visit Harrington p. 48 for concrete discussion of legal definitions). By getting students to be aware of the different perspective of who an "author" means, it creates a different idea of content created and whether you have control over your final product. The largest example of this section to facilitate understanding that the creator of content is not always the author is Writing for Hire. In this case, the material does not belong to any given creator, but rather to the company or product it was created for. To help students frame what the boundaries of plagiarism are, Reyman gives these four considerations (65):

1. The purpose and character of the use
2. The nature of the copyrighted work
3. The amount and substantiality of the portionused
4. The effect on the potential market for the work

Research on this topic is only founded and enforced by combining the universes of academia and workforce. This discussion will create more foundation indicators and expectations for reusing work, and would do wonders for removing the stigma attached to reusing work. Ultimately, there should be more interaction and awareness in the academic community about the modern uses of information.

I wonder if the school policies around the country are like those in Georgia, where the code of ethics includes strict plagiarism terms. In our common case, it becomes difficult to clearly and uniformly handle plagiarism for your class. I wonder how much of the confusing and vague plagiarism dialogue is pushed by the governing bodies of the school to enforce a definition that allows a more systematic way of handling students.

Scenarios help illustrate the grey nature of plagiarism. The brand of plagiarism changes with any given situation, and often mocks the scenarios of many ethical conundrums. Ultimately, it becomes skewed by intent and practice.

In order to correctly understand and contribute to the creative community, the discussion of re-use is necessary. There is more to plagiarism beyond reusing material, it encompasses intent, audience, the field's given experience, and consideration of the end product. It could be that using other work is not plagiarism because the end product is unique and original content.

This conflict is an ever present debate in our public schools: Should we inform students more on real world practices or should we instruct principles that are the rooted theories of the expectation in the real world? Again, we see educational pedagogies, particularly influenced by Pablo Freire, find roots within Technical Writing and training.

It is important to recognize the timing of this section (2007) and the modern attempts to rectify these issues. Now it is incredibly easy to search for commercially or educationally safe images for presentation and use by simply checking a box on most image searches (i.e google presentation image search). As far as copying and pasting sections into a project to pass as original work, that hasn't worked in years. There are checking sites, which are previously mentioned in this article, as well as the availability of the internet for the reviewers. It's far easier to detect information that is inserted into a project than it is to make your entire project sound the same as copied material without seeming plagarized.

Again, we're revisiting the idea that traditional forms of plagarism are always with unethical intent and outcome. This seems to be the overarching theme of the source materials in this article, which the author argues against.

This is an interesting thought, considering the internet has curated a boom of user-generated content.

This conclusion succintly ties up the issues brought up in the previous annotation. There are grey areas that make up reusing information such as intent and purpose. Rhetorically, this is a complcated issue because of the ultimate goal of communicating to an audience. Is there an inherent negative to communicating to your audience with avenues that are already successful?

At this point, the arguement seems to be more about the moral meaning of theft. This particular sentence mentions the inherent understanding that plagarism is unethically intended.

This piece is an important thought process through the reflection of ownership and plagarism outside of the acedemic context because the rules are not always spelled out. The practices of using materials become complicated across fields as citing sources become more difficult with multiple authors and mediums.

When it comes down to who owns material, is it who the material was created for or the original author? Perhaps each party has rights to the material, which complicates the issue of plagarism and content control

This is a major component of understanding the complexities of plagarism in Technicial Writing. Reusability of your material does not mean that you, the author, will be reusing it... It could be completely detached from you in the future, melded into a new piece.

Technical writing is more about catering to the clients' needs than the acedemic emphasis of creating unique content. Many of us have experienced this difference in our projects this semester. Many groups are repackaging the information we were already given-- and are even manipulating layouts given to us. In an acedemic setting, this is a pretty clear case of plagarism, but in the technical writing world this is an inevitable way to efficiently do your job.

Again, this position is experienced through our Service Learning Projects. At first, we all experienced the individual aspect of curating work with our pitch presentation. Now, as we are venturing into the deliverable phase of the project, we are utilizing different members to create well rounded material. This can clearly complicate the ideas of plagarism, as we all are working on the same piece in our portfolios.

Correlates to the idea in Wicked Problems where different statistics and accounts were being found across the student groups, as well as the affect of perspective. Each specialized group would have a different perspective within their different fields

This is important in a rhetorical sense because it is the open question that we need to address to an audience. It relates to Wicked Problems in that it questions the relation of Technical communication to other fields' areas of study.

"The usability of an interface is a measure of the effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction with which specified users can achieve specified goals in a particular environment with that interface."

Source:(http://infodesign.com.au/usabilityresources/articles/technicalcommunicators/)

This can readily affect organization of material and the diction used, as well as introducing the potential of multimodal communications.

By defining the parameters of origins, you create an easily definable topic for your audience. This helps you compose your document because there is a clear intent behind your piece. Essentially, if we view each piece as teaching the audience (as mentioned earlier in this article), then we can really go about the structure like a lesson plan. With any lesson plan, you need to ensure that the foundation of basic knowledge is addressed and reinforced through the lesson. Establishing these foundational characteristics are key to this goal.

This is interesting in the lens of rhetoric because the interface is the persuasion and the mode. Each interface is designed with ease in mind with readability, attractive appearance, legibility, information organization, and efficiency of the reader retaining the information.

The difference she argues for may become more difficult to navigate as people become part of each; we create computer-based existences alongside or completely separate from our human life.

This seems to imply that for this sector of usability research, the potential market has priority. This means that the information could be manipulated for the benefit of a larger market margin.

Technical writers focus more on source material; what users utilize to learn a system and what materials are out there to help them.

These various disciplines provide a variety in Technical Communication productions. They are not overly focused in "empirical studies" (Professional Communications), but rather focus on analyzing the effective avenues of communicating to audiences

Fascinatingly, the humanity roots of Technical Communication professionals seems to create a more liberal way to assert accuracy in a message to an audience. They focus more on case studies that have more philosophical nature of discussing success. As such, they are always entertaining the idea of what grading should be. This spurs the discussion of usability within the community.

Looking at the natural to introduce the manufactured seems to be a common goal of technology. If we study what we reflexively do through daily tasks, such as organization, then it is easy to create a platform emulating these natural habits, putting users at ease. Hence, the Iphone brands itself as :user friendly" by focusing on the same habits to operate the slew of apps available.

Wicked Problems comes to a similar conclusion about cross-field studies. Each person in the group has an expertise and a perception that differs from the other. This effects priorities, study type experiences, and diction decisions. Combining fields allows a wider lens view of issues and potential solutions.

This is an interesting thought-- that even though the technical failures are at fault for disaster, there is still liability for the technical writers.

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.

An important step of Rhetorical consideration; create boundaries to solutions to visualize what an ideal solution would/should look like.

Rhetoric spans over multiple fields, and technical writing bridges the gaps by creating a unified language to correlate different levels of expertise together.

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?

Is the goal of technical writers (generally) to address or solve their content?

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

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.

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.

Allows technical and communication changes to be applicable to the writing; Evolving the title to match current markets

Official title

Quick list of potential titles

A large trend in corporations to be more accessible.

Definitions of technical writing