tebeaux, back to breuch and words of caution

Tebeaux, Elizabeth. “Technical Writing by Distance: Refocusing the Pedagogy of Technical Communication.” Technical Communication Quarterly (1995).

I’m going to start with Tebeaux but finish with a loop back to Breuch. In Tebeaux’s definition of distance education theory, we find a clear association with social constructionism, technology-mediated instruction, and a further extension of Breuch’s virtual peer review, specifically in regard to pedagogies based on computer-based writing and network theories.

“We now realize that students, instead of being passive recipients of knowledge, are and must be capable of constructing their own knowledge with guidance from the teacher. Technology enables teachers to offer part of this tutorial guidance by setting up an environment that will provide student with the resources necessary for independent exploration” (369).

Tebeaux's claim here lies on the same social constructionist --> student-constructed knowledge --> practice-centered learning trajectory laid out in Breuch’s definition of virtual peer review and the relationship to the sub-field of computers in writing. When Breuch refers to computer pedagogy -- computer-based writing – she is suggesting that virtual peer review actualizes the guidelines that pedagogy must drive technology (Breuch 20).

Tebeaux makes a similar suggestion when she discusses the independence offered to the writing student and teacher by technology. “The system should free students and teachers from the need to inhabit the same physical space, allow students choices in learning formats, incorporate use of proven teaching methods… to provide for dialog between student and teacher” (368).

Breuch showed how traditional and virtual peer review have long histories in Composition and important pedagogical assumptions, such as writing as a process, writing as a social act, and student-centered approaches (Breuch 22). Tebeaux makes a similar claim of historical association when wrapping technical writing instruction with distance theory, writing as a social act, theories of practice-centered learning, and “guided didactic conversation."

Both Breuch and Tebeaux are basing their claims on assumptions that writing is a social act. I’m not disagreeing, but I am left wondering how other constructions of knowledge making would or could complicate both claims. Breuch, for example: "Writing instructors have a responsibility to integrate computer technology into their writing courses... virtual peer review can play a transitional role: it can help instructors transition to computer-based classrooms, especially since it has grounding in peer review and pedagogical assumptions important to writing pedagogy" (Breuch 130). And yet regardless of the theoretical lens, I find Breuch and Tebeaux both identifying areas of pedagogical intersection between Tech Comm and Comp. In booth virtual peer review and teaching writing online, I find Tech Comm’s logical predisposition toward technology-enhanced instruction (Comp has relied on computers in writing to make this extension).

There is a caution, however, to slide toward a conclusion that Tech Comm is about the technology. This caution traces back to Cynthia Selfe's argument that computer-based writing instruction (technology mediated writing) often places the technology before the teaching. To avoid the slide, we need to draw from Breuch and Tebeaux their emphasis on pedagogy and the distinctions between collaboration and technology in the writing classroom.