Kate Crane
Scott, T. “Writing work, technology, and pedagogy in the era of late capitalism.” Computers and Composition 23.2 (2006): 228-243. Web. Science Direct. 10 Sept. 2010.
Scott observes two camps of technical communication pedagogy. The first camp, “capitalism hope,” believes students in TC will enter the field and make core changes in their positions that in turn will encourage “late capitalism” to be “more humane and ethical” (230). This camp aims at making technical writers critical of technology and their role in the production and distribution of technology so as to avoid mishandling of technology and destruction that can occur due to this mishandling (for instance, Scotts cites Bhopal, Chernobyl, and the Challenger as potential points where such pedagogy, ideally, could eliminate human loss). The second camp however, believes technical communication should prepare students to thrive in the marketplace without pushing the need for influencing ideological changes in the workplace (230). This camp looks to position technical writers so they can be successful within the confines of the new economy [Scott coins this “tactics of survival”] (232). The reasoning behind this pedagogy is that technical writers gain agency in the composition of the work, rather than being “a mere copyeditor/proofreader” (232). Foregrounding with these definitions, Scott argues that “[p]reparing students for writing work in the contemporary economy requires that we account for both the characteristics of this economy and the role that technologies play within it” (235). This does create a paradox between the needs of business versus the role of the academy. Pedagogies must include teaching skills necessary to perform TC duties; however, in the post-industrial economy, TC’s role as a humanistic field must also take into consideration the influence of the new economy on a civic level as well.
This is a very complex article bringing in Reich’s post-industrial categorization of the labor force, technical communicator theorists, and writers looking at the ever changing economy and the role of technology in the new economy; however, by weaving together such ideas, Scott shows the difficulty of defining the position of the technical communicator given the idealist notions of the academy and the demands of the marketplace. For those of us teaching technical communication, this is an important article for looking at how to approach both the practical and theoretical framework of TC education.
I hate it when the nature of websites naturally bumps things back a page.
ReplyDeleteThis seems very similar to the discussion Josh and I are having. Does Reich suggest any specific pedagogical changes, and do you think it is possible? As we have seen with UW's program, it seems that some TC is moving away from a humanistic rationale. The idea I keep stumbling upon (rather unhappily, I might add) is the idea that TC might split/is splitting/has split along the lines of the academy and the corporation. Are programs becoming assembly lines for TCers? It theoretical grounding the only counter for this tendency? I don't have any answers. I just wanted to know what you and others think.
Good questions. You know, Scott does something typical when it comes to discussing whether pedagogy should be more theoretical or practical--he rides the fence. He knows that the practical needs to be taught and that students need to be able to take a set skills to the job market, but he also thinks that students need the opportunity to discuss the economic and social conditions which will influence their work. They may not be able to bring about world peace in there day to day tasks, but they should look for ways to be a force of "good" in their career (cheesy, but essential this is what he is getting at).
ReplyDeleteThe academy/corporation split is problematic not only because core values differ, but also because the economic conditions for tech writers do assume that technical writers are appropriate for one-shot tasks making them disposable to some companies. Scott has interesting insights into the market potential for Tech Writers; unfortunately, it seems tech writers are in the same boat as adjunct English Instructors. Is it typical for specialists in writing communication to be moved to the periphery of industry? And if so, is this a reason to "reinvent" ourselves to address the needs of industry or do we continue focusing on the importance of understanding the role of technical communication in a global economy? I don't have answers to these either...