cdmandrews.github.io

Notes and Overview for Week 13

ENGL 3301, Fall 2021

Nothing special this week. It’s just time to 👏 Get. 👏 Things. 👏 Done. I’ve cancelled the discussion assignment for Tuesday. On Thursday, you’ll do a first round of peer review on a rough, rough draft.

via GIPHY

Previously shared links and resources for getting it all done:

• Project 2 description and video overview
• Notes on tactical vs strategic technical communication
• Notes and nudges on finding research in professional and academic journals
• Generic guide to finding examples of tpw for projects in the course
• Review of informal/memo report formats

Wait, how do I write this thing?

Chapter 5 of Open Technical Communication is about writing processes in technical writing, and has excellent suggestions for helping you brainstorm and narrow down topics for your report, create an outline, and move into that first drafty draft. Go read it.

Inevitably, students always ask me about how to begin their report, pointing to a freshly-typed “Introduction” section heading and a big, blank document beneath it. The problem is, if you haven’t written your repot yet, how can you know what to include in the introduction? Your real introduction can’t be the first thing you write unless you have a very clear idea about what your report is going to say. Wait until you have a serious outline or map for where you want to go with some certainty about what your key messages will be before you try to write the introduction.

Gettin started and writing tentative introductions:

1. Don’t try to write the introduction first.
2. If you HAVE to write an introduction first (because it’s one of your writing rituals), write a tentative one that declares your report’s purpose, using a few filler sentences to help yourself get started:
   • In this report I will… (use an action verb here: describe? define? evaluate? summarize? argue?)
   • I want my readers to know…
   • I will talk about the following topics: (list, list, list)…
3. Come back later to finish your actual introduction.

You’ve done two very important things through those steps: You’ve stopped to identify 1) your purpose and 2) your audience. Coming to understand your purpose is really the first step of any writing task–if it’s a familiar task and a familiar purpose, you barely even have to think about it. But if it’s a new task and a new purpose–like this project might be–this phase can be lengthy. Ideally you’ve come to an initial sense of purpose as a result of writing that first Q&A post and your progress report. Go back to the opening status statements from your progress report and re-use some of that content as you’re getting started with the report.

Once you have an idea about who the report is for and what needs it should meet for them, you’ve got some good clues about what to include (and what to omit). You might think of your audience for this report in a couple of ways, and any one of these will be a good audience for your report:

• Other folx in your major. That is, write your report directed at people who are thinking of a future in that career. What’s important for them to know as professionals-who-will-write, and what is the secret recipe for understanding the documents and situations you’ve studied? How might your report serve their needs?
• Your nerdy tech comm professor. That is, write your report directed at me, a person who is interested in writing and communication research. What will I find interesting about what you’ve studied, and what sorts of questions does your line of inquiry answer that I am interested in? How might your report serve my needs?
• Someone else who needs to know what you’re finding so they can use it to do something. That is, think about who else might find your research interesting and useful. What sorts of questions are they interested in answering, what sorts of problems are they interested in solving, and what kinds of actions might they take with your research findings? Who needs this information, and how might your report serve their needs?

Outlining and writing discussion sections:

There is not one correct way to write your discussion sections! The idea of this kind of reporting is thinking about what you’re writing about, who you’re writing to, and why you’re writing about it. Rhetoric, y’all. Organize your report by key messages and topics–by ideas, not by examples. A “my first document, my second document, my third document” approach does not have any key message beyond “look, I have three documents.” 😴 😴 😴

What do you need to tell your audience about those examples you found and looked at? What’s your message? Is it about a common theme, technique, or principle? Is it about an interesting purpose or audience? An important rhetorical situation? Do you have something to show or teach us?

Rough out on an outline of key topics and messages, not just documents or examples. Group, combine, subordinate, and sequence them into topics that make sense together. There are too many different patterns of sequencing to review in detail here, but Chapter 5 of OTC introduces and gives examples of a few

Use concepts from your readings and research as frameworks for organizing your discussions and identifying key messages. Some useful frameworks that might help you get started organizing your report into meaningful sections:

• Cassandra Race, six characteristics of technical communication (focused on audience, rhetorical/persuasive/purposeful/problem-oriented, professional, design-centered, research/technology oriented, ethical)
• Douglas Downs, six qualities of rhetoric (rhetoric is situated, motivated, contingent, interactional, epistemic, embodied)
• Adam Pope, definition of technical writing as translation
• Miles Kimball, qualities of strategic or tactical technical communication (inside/outside, professional/amateur, invisible/visible, user-centered/user-created, anonymous/personal, authentic/controlled)
• OR is there some concept or definition or theme in another of your secondary sources that you can use as an organizing principle for your report? This will depend a lot on what you see in your examples and what’s interesting there.

Guidelines for writing conclusions

1. Write your conclusion.
2. Cut the entire text of your conclusion. (Ctrl-X on a PC, Command-X on a Mac)
3. Scroll to the top of your document.
4. Paste your conclusion at the top where the introduction should go. (Ctrl-V on a PC, Command-V on a Mac)

No, I’m not kidding. Now that you actually know what you’re writing about and what it all means, revise to integrate your what was once your conclusion but is now your new introduction with your old, tentative introduction. This is BLUF writing all over again.

Introduction sections (which are often more than one paragraph) in technical and professional reports commonly include the following four rhetorical moves:

1. Introduce the subject or topic of the report
2. State the purpose for the report (“This report describes/analyzes/evaluates…”) and preview its key messages or findings
3. Describe the rationale for the report; why is it needed? why does the reader need to read it?
4. Briefly overview the major topics you’ll develop (if you didn’t do so in the purpose statement)

And now you can write your real conclusion. Again, think conclusion section, not conclusion paragraph. Head back down to the end of your document and begin your conclusion again. Don’t introduce brand-new stuff. Know that some readers will read the conclusion first! Summarize where you’ve been, restate the most important key messages, and hammer home one more time with what your reader should take away. Is there a suggested action? An implication to think about? Answers to questions asked in the report? A set of recommendations? A judgment? A prediction?

A good conclusion section answers a couple of questions:

• What were the essential findings again?
• So what? (What’s the larger importance or significance of what I’ve studied)
• Who cares? (Why should my reader care? Who else might find these findings useful?)
• What should readers do with this?

Tuesday

Get Sh!+ Done Club will meet at 1:00 to 3:00 pm CST in my Zoom as usual. If you can’t make it, you can still schedule an appointment with your professor. (Me.) Otherwise, nothing due today. Write like the wind.

via GIPHY

Thursday

Post a rough draft of your report for Project 2 in your group's "Project 2 draft review" discussion thread before 5:00 pm on Thursday. As with the previous major project, I'll post video feedback to you individually as quickly as I am able, but peer review is also critical in these early stages. Y'all see stuff that I don't and vice versa!

This draft will most likely be that shitty first draft for you, and that is okay. Whatever it is, share it with us! The only way to do this wrong is to skip it entirely or turn in a blank document.

WHATEVER YOU DO, JUST TURN SOMETHING IN PLEASE!

1. As before, it’s useful to get organized within your groups and make sure that everyone has at least two people to read their drafts–that way all the feedback doesn’t go to two people. Please use your group email, discussions, or whatever group chats you’ve set up to facilitate that.

2. You can either post your feedback to the forum in a reply to the writer’s original post, or you can upload a document with comments inserted. Use whichever method you are most comfortable with.

3. Read each others’ fact sheets carefully and generously. Each time you review you should provide at least two actionable comments to each writer on any or all of the following areas:

   • Can you tell what the writer’s purpose and audience are supposed to be?
   • Do they talk about examples in specific ways? Do they quote from or summarize appropriate articles, class materials, and other sources?
   • Writing style (how effectively are the writer’s sentences, paragraphs, lists, and words explaining their content?)
   • Page design (how effective is the writer’s use of white space, overall page alignment, use of color, CRAP principles, and other aspects of page design?)
   • Visual elements (If included, how effective, appropriate, and rhetorical are visual elements?)

A few things to remember about feedback:

1. It’s a draft and we’re all learning. Be kind.
2. Everyone’s learning at different speeds. Be polite.
3. It’s still a freaking pandemic outside. Be generous.
4. Take the opportunity to learn from what others are doing. Be attentive.
5. Give feedback to others as you would have feedback given to you.
6. Give writers specific feedback about particular things. This sentence, this word, this picture, this color. Telling writers “It’s great you just have to finish” isn’t helpful–they know that already. Offer specific ideas about how and what to revise or finish.

Peer review is an opportunity to share, learn, and improve your writing. Not participating hurts your final product and the final products of others. Do your group a solid and be present for peer review!! If you do not post feedback to at least two people in your group, you cannot get full credit for peer review activities, even if you posted a draft on time.

via GIPHY

Looking Ahead

During Week 14 we’ll chat about accessibility and professional writing and complete another round of peer review. I’ll go over some quotation/citation stuff, review integrating visuals, and probably some other teachery stuff. Congratulations for reading this far. You are a hero.