http://tc.eserver.org/dir/Articles/Education/Engineering/Writing A listing of the most recently indexed works about Articles and Education and Engineering and Writing in the field of technical communication (and technical writing). en-us Copyright (c) 2005-08 by the EServer. All rights reserved. tclib-editorial@eserver.org (TC Library Editorial Board) webmaster@eserver.org (Geoffrey Sauer) http://tc.eserver.org/images/newlogo.gif http://tc.eserver.org/dir/Articles/Education/Engineering/Writing http://tc.eserver.org/31646.html http://tc.eserver.org/31646.html Teaching writing to engineering students representing Indian, Middle Eastern, Asian, and American cultures can be daunting as their cultural perceptions of time, gender, source of authority, individualism and risk taking, affect learning styles. However, despite cultural differences, many International students have no difficulty with much of American instruction and, in some cases, perform better than American students. Their ability to adapt to American instruction appears to depend primarily on the educational goals of their cultures. http://tc.eserver.org/30137.html http://tc.eserver.org/30137.html The Engineering Writing sequence at the University of California, Santa Barbara, teaches fundamental college writing and research skills emphasizing the discourse and genres common to professional engineering. The first quarter emphasizes library, electronic-database, and literature-type searches, culminating in a literature review on a current technological topic. The second quarter integrates primary research and interviewing with the above, while the students design solutions to actual university building and plant resource problems. The third quarter involves advanced issues of document design and publication, as students post web sites not only pertinent to this year's theme, Engineering and the Environment, but also useful to the local community. http://tc.eserver.org/29147.html http://tc.eserver.org/29147.html Previous research has indicated that engineering faculty do not follow best practices when commenting on students' technical writing. However, it is unclear whether the faculty prefer to comment in these ineffective ways, or whether they prefer more effective practices but simply do not enact them. This study adapts a well known study of response in composition to ask whether engineering faculty prefer authoritative, form-focused comments, or whether they may prefer to write different sorts of comments. We asked ten civil engineering faculty to comment on a sample paper and then rank their preferences for provided versions of comments on the same paper. One provided version emphasized comments on content, one emphasized comments on form, and one was balanced. Comparisons of the respondents' preferences and practices suggest that the engineering faculty recognize and value content-focused, non-authoritative responses, but generally do not write comments that conform to these values. We consider the implication of these findings for research on response to technical writing as well as for technical writing faculty in their own course. While recognizing the need for more research, we also discuss ways in which writing professionals, including WAC administrators and technical writing professors, can encourage engineering faculty to enact their preferences for response styles that reflect best practices. http://tc.eserver.org/26577.html http://tc.eserver.org/26577.html The paper examines whether writing tutors control the subject matter discussed in tutoring sessions with engineering students, topic-raising in six tutoring sessions was analyzed. Over 81% of the topics were raised by tutors, suggesting tutors control subject matter. To examine the subject matter that tutors and students focused upon, topics were categorized by type. Over 55% of the topics raised were related to sentence clarity, conciseness, and mechanics. Tutors and students also raised topics related to content, rhetorical situation, and textual organization and formatting. Writing tutors and engineering students focus on sentence-level issues even though students might benefit from more attention to discourse-level issues. http://tc.eserver.org/22982.html http://tc.eserver.org/22982.html My preliminary studies have shown that students do indeed acquire basic communication strategies appropriate for their chosen field that help them to become acculturated in workplace contexts. In other words, they begin to genre their 'way through social interactions, choosing the correct form in response to each communicative situation [they] encounter,' which they do 'with varying degree of mastery'. The subject of my CCCC 2003 presentation is a series of events that occurred in the life of one of my longitudinal study participants. In the presentation, I related these events to the audience and then analyzed them using Rhetorical Genre Studies as a theoretical tool. http://tc.eserver.org/21806.html http://tc.eserver.org/21806.html The objective of this paper is to bring about a reevaluation of writing assessment practices in engineering classes. The authors begin by drawing rhetoric (the knowledge base of effective technical communication) and engineering together, explaining how engineering work is rhetorical. From this theoretical vantage point, the authors argue for a change in engineering writing assessment practices. Specifically, they argue for an approach that favors formative assessment (focused on writing comments that lead to both better writing and better engineering) over summative assessment (which sees writing ability as separate from engineering design). The authors continue by revealing a scoring guide for the formative assessment of engineering reports, and detailing the process by which such a scoring guide may be created. Each criterion in the scoring guide is explained in terms of the rhetorical and engineering principles that it simultaneously addresses. http://tc.eserver.org/13902.html http://tc.eserver.org/13902.html A case study of an experienced professor's comments on a design report in a first-year engineering class was conducted over the period of an academic year. When compared with the commenting styles of technical writing teachers, the engineering professor's comments were found to be highly directive, and thus at odds with the preference for facilitative comments that prevails in composition studies. However, differences in genre conventions explain much of the discrepancy. http://tc.eserver.org/13838.html http://tc.eserver.org/13838.html This article describes a discipline-specific communication course for engineering students offered by a Canadian university. The pedagogy of this course is based on North American theories of genre and theories of situated learning. In keeping with these theories, the course provides a context in which students acquire rhetorical skills and strategies necessary to integrate into a discipline-specific discourse community. The authors argue that such a pedagogical approach can be used to design communication courses tailored to the needs of any discipline if the following three key conditions are met: assignments are connected to subject matter courses, a dialogic environment is provided, and the nature of assignments allows students to build on their learning experiences in the course. http://tc.eserver.org/13825.html http://tc.eserver.org/13825.html I had been involved with a program at Clemson to integrate laptop computers into the engineering curriculum. In this pilot project, I had taught first-year writing since 1998 to engineering and science majors using their own laptops in classrooms equipped with ethernet connections and a video projector. This proved to be a rich environment for sharing work and collaborating among ourselves. I wanted to see whether we could extend our collaborations to other Clemson classrooms. Mary Haque (a professor in Clemson University’s Horticulture Department) and I decided that my first-year composition classes could collaborate with her horticulture classes.