Saturday, January 30, 2010

760: on spilka’s introduction

Rachel Spilka has always been good at bridging theory and practice. She’s constructed an anthology here that connects the academy to the field in a way that almost blurs the definition of “practice”. It’s likely to be clearer within the essays, but across her introduction, Spilka conflates the teaching of technical communication with the work of technical communicators. Maybe this is a necessary move – link a call for change in the way we prepare technical communicators to what technical communicators do (and they do it) in the field.

General thoughts:

“Now numerous other fields are claiming a stake in information and content design development and management, just as we are…” (4). Composition, Information Science, etc. Isn’t it the reflexive nature of disciplines to claim a stake in activities that involve applying the discipline’s theories?

In describing the “easing up of artificial ‘”fences”’ between disciplines” (5), Spilka is exposing a foundational question (one that we’re attempting to answer in 760): What is technical communication? By replacing the introspective question, “who are we” with a range of questions about how we adapt and contribute, Spilka is invoking the floundering toward legitimacy and purpose that seems pervasive in humanities-based disciplines. Replace “we” with “Composition” in her set of questions on page 6. How similar does this sound to Comp’s historical narratives?

During our first day of class, someone mentioned the anxiety of teaching a technical writing course without the benefit of having "done" technical writing. Consider Selfe and Hawisher’s definition of digital literacy, which Spilka includes in her introduction: “the practices involved in reading, writing, and exchanging information in online environments as well as the values associates with such practices – social, cultural, political, educational” (8). Based on that foundational definition, I would argue that any current student of the CCR program is both qualified and capable to teaching, at the very least, and introductory course in professional or technical writing.

No comments: