Resources for Instructors: How to Use this Textbook
Instructors are sometimes called upon to teach technical/professional writing even though they may not have a background in writing studies (e.g. a Phd in Rhetoric and Composition). If you find yourself in such a position, this chapter is written with you in mind. The ideas outlined here suggest one possible way to use this textbook to help you design a general structure and assessment plan for a technical/professional writing course. This design uses a project and team-based approach that asks students to respond professionally to a formal Request for Proposals (ideally that comes from a real educational partner). Feel free to adapt the ideas here to suit your pedagogical needs.
I make one key assumption here: students will have previously taken a first-year academic writing course as a prerequisite. Therefore, they will (a) be familiar with academic writing genres (research and argumentative essays), (b) be able to write in a formal analytical style, using vocabulary, sentence, and paragraph structures that are appropriate for an academic audience, (c) incorporate source material ethically by quoting, paraphrasing and citing, (d) understand basic principles of rhetoric, and (e) have academic research skills. A technical/professional writing-in-the-disciplines (WID) course will reinforce and build on this foundation.
A general course outline using this textbook could follow the structure outlined in the table below.
| Unit | Description | Chapters |
|---|---|---|
| Unit 1
|
What is technical/professional writing? What does it look like? How does it differ in purpose and style from other kinds of writing you may have done or studied? What are some key characteristics and expectations of a professional writing style?
Understand “genre” and “conventions” in professional writing contexts. Provide an overview of the work students will do in this course, (and the RFP or “catalyst” for that work). Early Deliverable: Translation assignment or exercise. What revisions would be necessary to transform a given text (online editorial, academic essay, or other sample) so that it has a clear transactional purpose, addresses a specific audience, and conforms to technical writing conventions? |
Ch. 1
Ch. 2 |
| Unit 2 | Information design and visual rhetoric. Apply document design and visual rhetoric skills in a low-stakes individual assignment. Students might write an analysis explaining how a text or website uses design and visual rhetoric; or they might write a Memo that includes a problem definition and a proposed course of action. Ideally, this will be related in some way to the term project (proposing an approach or preliminary response to the RFP, a client analysis, etc) | Ch. 3 |
| Unit 3
|
Teamwork and Project Management. Begin the team project by focusing on team formation and developing team processes (Team Charter).
If your course includes a team project, “teamwork” should be a learning objective and should be explicitly taught in the course. I recommend designating class time for team meetings and providing draft agendas to guide their work. After focusing on setting up team expectations and processes, student teams can then work on refining the project focus and developing a collaborative research and writing plan for completing their assignment. |
Ch. 4
Ch. 5
|
| Unit 4
|
Scaffolding the Team Project. Design lower-stakes deliverables that help build towards and make progress on the final deliverable. These will vary depending on what kind of project students are working on, and might fall over several weeks of the term. For example, you might include a Work Plan, Progress Report, Technical Description, User Experience Research, Consultation/Engagement Plan, Work-in-Progress presentation, peer review, and so on. | Ch. 6
Ch. 7 Ch. 8 |
| Unit 5
|
Finalizing and Reflecting. Will students give a final Presentation on their project? Conduct a focus group or other kind of consultation/engagement? Design a poster or website? Write a formal Proposal, Recommendation Report, Feasibility Study, or other kind of long report?
Once the final team deliverable is complete, students should have the opportunity to individually reflect on the process of completing the project. A final reflection assignment (as a kind of Post Project Review) allows them to reflect on the team and project processes they used, what worked well, and what they might do differently next time. |
Backwards Course Design
Start with where you want students to end up and work backwards. This means starting with identifying learning objectives, determining the final deliverable, and then creating a scaffolded system for getting there in a step-by-step manner that allows for feedback and iteration.
STEP 1: Identifying Learning Objectives
A course is designed around its learning objectives: all assignments, activities, exercises, lectures, and resources should be designed to help students achieve them. Students’ work is graded on how well it demonstrates achievement of one or more of these objectives.
Sample Learning Objectives for a Technical Communication Course
At the end of the course, students should be able to
- Apply a problem-solving approach to communication tasks; formally define a problem and formulate a structured approach to addressing the problem.
- Employ individual and collaborative writing processes that include researching, planning, drafting, responding to feedback, revising and editing/proofreading
- Demonstrate an awareness of various genres and conventions of technical writing; select and adapt genres, writing styles, and rhetorical strategies for different audiences, purposes and contexts
- Design and format information for readability and accessibility in a variety of contexts and modes
- Implement effective and equitable collaboration and project management strategies for team projects
- Select, evaluate and synthesize credible research sources to support your purpose and help your audience make an evidence-based decision
STEP 2: Design the Final Deliverable
Start with the final deliverable you want students to create – this should allow students to demonstrate achievement of as many of the course learning objectives as possible (working at or near the top of Bloom’s taxonomy of cognitive skills). It might be a formal long report of some sort (something that emulates a co-op work term report, or the kind of report that is commonly expected in the workplace). I typically use one of the following: Recommendation Report, Feasibility Study, or a Proposal in response to a Request for Proposals. Whatever final deliverable you choose, I recommend that you develop a “catalyst” that provides a meaningful exigence for this report. Developing a project that asks students to take on a real world problem (rather than something entirely hypothetical) and apply the course learning in a realistic way makes the learning more meaningful and engaging. Having a real “client” or intended audience reinforces the importance of rhetoric.
You can do this by developing a relationship with a campus or community partner who is willing to act as a “client” and present the class with an open-ended problem to address. I have worked with Facilities Management (waste and energy management), Student Services, Campus Sustainability Office, and assorted ancillary services, as well as off campus organizations, to create “community engaged” or “service” learning opportunities. While this takes time and bandwidth, having a real person/organization with a real problem is worthwhile in that it increases student engagement in the course. I work with the partner to create a Request for Proposals (RFP) as the catalyst for the course project. Guidelines for creating a course-based RFP are outlined below.
Designing an RFP for In-Course Use
An effective Request for Proposals used as the basis of a course project will necessarily be much shorter than an actual RFP, but should provide clear guidance to potential responders by including the following elements:
- Introduction/Overview: The RFP should introduce the organization requesting the proposals, describing who they are, what they do, their key mission, values and goals. Include relevant links to their website and any key documents that are important for applicants to review (e.g. Strategic Plans, “About” page, mission statement, etc.). Students need to understand the audience they are writing for, and be able to research them further.
- Present the Need/Goal: the RFP should provide a brief project overview, explaining why solutions are necessary or desired; it should define the scope of the project and proposal (if the project has multiple phases, what phase is this RFP addressing?)
- State the Solution Requirements: The RFP should state the requirements and specifications (measurable objectives you’d like solutions to achieve; constraints that solutions must abide by such as deadline, budget, material constraints, etc.) upon which the proposed solutions must be based. Where necessary, requirements should include clear definitions or examples to ensure that all parties share a common understanding of requirements.
- Describe Submission Expectations: The RFP should outline the overall submission process (including where opportunities to ask questions and receive feedback during the process might exist), describe the document submission requirements (length, required content, structure, format, etc).
- List Resources: The RFP should include a list of resources that applicants can review to (a) understand key ideas in the RFP, (b) study examples of similar solutions or inspirations, (c) refer to key documents or websites that should guide responses.
- Evaluation Rubric: Explain how submitted proposals will be evaluated by the client.
Example Proposal Evaluation Rubric
| Criteria |
Short List! |
Maybe? |
Rejected |
|---|---|---|---|
| Understands who we are, our values, goals and needs | Demonstrates sophisticated and detailed understanding of who we are (our mission, values, and goals), what we want/need, why we need it, and the requirements we have specified in the RFP. | Shows a good understanding of who we are, what we want, and why we want it; understands key requirements. | Does not demonstrate a clear understanding of who we are, what we want, or why we want it. Does not seem to understand all requirements. |
|
Alignment of Proposed Solution with Requirements
|
Offers a well-focused, original, and compelling idea that fully aligns with all goals and requirements stated in the RFP. Robustly meets and even exceeds objectives; abides by all constraints. Does not require any compromises to stated requirements.
Evidence-based ideas are fully supported with highly credible research. |
Proposes a promising and well-focused idea that meets most or all RFP objectives to some degree; abides by all constraints, but may require some minor compromises.
Evidence-based ideas sufficiently supported by credible research. |
Proposed idea seems vague and unfocused (or highly predictable). Does not meet all objectives or abide by all constraints.
Not sufficiently evidence-based; some claims are not sufficiently supported by research. |
| Sufficient descriptive detail provided for Proposed Solution(s) and Implementation | Proposed idea is described clearly in thorough and compelling detail, including robust visuals to illustrate ideas fully.
Feasibility and potential benefits are fully and convincingly described. Limitations or potential issues are addressed in a credible way. |
Proposed idea is clearly described in sufficient detail, and uses visuals effectively to illustrate ideas.
Feasibility and potential benefits are clearly outlined. |
Description may lack necessary detail to show how it will solve the problem or be feasible. Visuals do not sufficiently illustrate ideas.
Potential benefits are somewhat unclear. |
| User-Centred and UD approach | Robust explanation for how the proposed idea addresses the defined needs/wants of users, and will provide tangible benefits.
Detailed consideration of how the solution fully meets a variety of accessibility needs. |
Explains how the proposed solution will meet users’ needs /wants and provide benefits.
Design contains some accessibility considerations. |
Insufficient description of how the proposed idea will benefit target users.
Little or no consideration given to accessibility features for uses with disabilities. |
| Communication | Consistently communicates ideas in a clear and engaging manner, using professional formatting and appropriate style. Shows attention to detail and high-level understanding of audience. | Communicates ideas clearly for the most part; uses a professional format and style that is appropriate for the audience. | Ideas are sometimes unclear or presented in a somewhat unprofessional manner. Does not have a clear sense of intended audience. |
STEP 3: Scaffold the Process
Working backward from the final deliverable, build a “scaffold” of shorter, lower stakes assignments that allow the students to make progress and receive feedback along the way to make sure they are on track. I recommend devoting some class time to allowing teams to meet and at least get started on key deliverables. This might entail providing worksheets for problem definition, technical description, audience analysis, social landscape mapping, etc. It might mean assigning draft portions of the final deliverable. It could focus on reinforcing team processes, like assigning a collaborative Work Plan, Work Log, and/or Progress Report. The sample assessment plan below illustrates a fairly robust scaffolding for a 14 week, face-to-face course with 24 students. What you can feasibly do will depend on your class size, length of the term, and delivery mode. Larger the class size, the fewer scaffolded deliverables you will be able to give timely feedback on that will help them with the next assignment.
| Sample Assessment Plan | weight |
|---|---|
| Memo (Individual Assignment) | 10% |
| Team Participation and Engagement/ Professionalism grade | 10% |
| Team Charter | 5% |
| Refined Project Pitch and Collaborative Work Plan | 10% |
| Report Template/Outline and Draft Introduction/Problem Definition (and/or sample technical descriptions, data visualizations, weighted objectives chart, etc.) | 10% |
| Progress Report (choose your own format) | 5% |
| Peer Review of Draft Proposal | 5% |
| Proposal (final revised version) | 25% |
| Post Project Review/Reflection (individual assignment in memo or short report format) | 20% |
STEP 4: Create Rubrics
Ideally, students will understand how each assignment will be evaluated before they submit it. Checklists help students make sure they have included all required elements; rubrics help them understand your expectations for each required element and how it is weighted. A strong rubric will clearly describe what “meeting expectations” looks like (what you need to do to get a B/B+ grade), what exceeding expectations looks like (A/A+ grades), and what not fully meeting expectations looks like (C or lower grades).
A holistic rubric describes the assignment as a whole at each grade level; an analytical rubric describes expectations for selected graded criteria at each grade level. Clearly no rubric can cover all possible criteria for assessment in a writing assignment, so they have to have some room for flexibility built into them. Here is a very generic example of an analytic rubric that can be adapted to suit a variety of assignments.
| Criteria | A | B | C | D/F |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
CONTENT (40%) |
Thoroughly develops all required content, plus unexpected and original content elements in a way that effectively reinforces purpose | Contains all required content elements in a sufficiently developed way that effectively supports your purpose | Solid work overall, but may be missing 1 or 2 required content elements, or some may be under-developed or not fully support your purpose | Several missing or woefully underdeveloped content elements. Purpose is not sufficiently supported. |
| SUPPORTING RESEARCH
(20%) |
Sophisticated integration of more than the required number of highly credible and relevant sources. Flawless citational practice. | Effective integration of the required number of sources in a way that helps to develop and support your argument. Generally strong citational practice. | Some synthesis of sufficient number of secondary sources, but integration may be awkward; may need more credible sources; and/or citational practice may contains several errors. | Insufficient supporting research (may not have sufficient number or quality of sources; integration may be confusing; may violate academic integrity policy) |
| INFORMATION DESIGN
(20%) |
Exemplary use of design features and genre conventions to present information in a compelling visual format that supports your purpose. | Effective organization, formatting, and use of visual rhetoric to support the content and purpose. Adheres well to genre conventions. | Clear attempt to organize and format information to aid readability, but some revision needed to meet reader’s needs. | Organization and formatting of information creates confusion for the reader. Significant revision needed. |
| RHETORIC & STYLE
(20%) |
Sophisticated use of professional style and rhetorical strategies form a compelling argument that successfully persuades the intended audience and is a pleasure to read. | Uses a generally professional style and balance of ethical rhetorical strategies that is effective for persuading the intended audience to find the information credible and compelling. | Use of formal style and rhetorical strategies are generally sound for the intended audience, but may be somewhat inconsistent, slightly out of balance (overly emotional), or inappropriate (slang or ad-speak) in 2-3 places | Often uses a style of expression and/or rhetorical strategies that are not appropriate for persuading the intended audience in this context. |
Importance of Feedback and Reflection
Providing detailed, constructive, supportive and meaningful feedback is arguably the most important and beneficial part of a writing course. It is also the most time consuming. Creating detailed rubrics takes time up front, but will help you save time down the road when grading assignments. Still, rubrics are rather “blunt” instruments and sometimes exceptionally strong (or weak) papers can get average scores on a rubric because they do unexpected things. So it’s best to prepare to be flexible, add written feedback, and refine your rubrics over time and iterations. Feedback should let students know what is working well, what needs improvement, and how/why they can improve it.
Refining one’s writing skills is a process of “deliberate practice” and “continual improvement.” This process requires meaningful feedback from instructors (and peers) and focused reflection on the part of the student. Building in opportunities for reflection will help students develop self-regulated learning strategies. Here are some reflective prompts you might ask students to consider:
- What went particularly well in your assignment?
- What didn’t go as well as you expected?
- What sort of process did you use? Was it effective? why or why not?
- Did you change your approach since the last assignment? What did you do differently and how did it work?
- What is something you want to work on going forward? What strategies and/or or resources will you use to help you?
Here are two helpful resources on providing feedback on students work:
John C. Bean’s “Reading, Commenting on, and Grading Student Writing,” in Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. Wiley, 2011.
Asao B. Inoue and Mya Poe’s How to Stop Harming Students: An Ecological Guide to Anti-Racist Writing Assessment
