The Composing Processes of an Engineer - Ron Choi ENG 574

Selzer, Jack. "The Composing Processes of an Engineer." College Composition and Communication, Vol. 34, No. 2, 1983: 178-187.

In this journal article, the author Selzer describes a detailed investigation into the composing process of a single engineer, Kenneth E. Nelson.  Selzer examined Nelson’s workplace writing process, collecting all interim written materials and having Nelson self-record a response to detailed questions regarding the conduct of each of his writing sessions.  Selzer also observed Nelson while writing and interviewed him at length regarding his observations.

Selzer reports that Nelson’s writing process was conventional in certain ways – for example, he partitioned the process into planning/invention, arranging, writing and revision sections.  However, Selzer also found that Nelson placed particular importance on the earlier planning, idea invention and arranging activities to minimize revisions, and effectively used a linear rather than recursive composing process.  The author found that Nelson spent the bulk of his writing time in the invention process based on a needs assessment of his audience.  Meanwhile, Nelson’s arrangement process relied heavily on the re-use of standard formats from previous reports and he generated drafts quickly and smoothly.  Once the initial draft is typed out, he revises it quickly, taking only 5% of the total composition time. 

Although a bit dated, I found this article to be one of the few detailed studies examining how engineers write.  Much of the article had phenomenological validity for me, in that Nelson put more emphasis on planning in order to reduce re-work, spent a lot of time generating the technical content/idea, and re-used his highly structured arrangements.  These seem like very “engineering” choices to me.  However, this study is limited by what also makes it such a detailed analysis – its focus on a single participant.  Selzer’s subject is an experienced engineer and writer, and there is no representation across a larger engineering population.  This study was also conducted in a pre-computer era, where reports were typed – making the reduction of revisions perhaps a bigger priority that it is today. 

Exploring the Scientist-Engineer Conflict: A Form and Content Analysis of Their Written Communication - Ron Choi ENG 574

Holland, Winford E. and B.A. Stead. "Exploring the Scientist-Engineer Conflict: A Form and Content Analysis of Their Written Communication." Journal of Business Communication, vol. 9 no. 3, 1972 : 25-35.

In this journal article, the authors discuss a study of the real and perceived differences between a group of engineers and scientists at the same organization, including a textual analysis of their written communication.  Interviews were used to establish the perceived differences between the engineering and scientist groups.  A questionnaire that required feedback from both the engineering and scientist groups on the same topic was used for a content-based textual analysis.  In their analysis, the authors determine that while the actual differences between the groups may be fewer than what was perceived, there was significant difference in the written communication of each group.  The engineers were found to be prone to brevity and the use of incomplete sentences in comparison to the scientists.  And although both groups tended to draw similar conclusions, the vocabulary used in their responses varied between the engineers and the scientists.

I thought this study was very interesting in that people can often lump engineers, scientists, IT professionals and others into the same group of "smart, but bad communicators," and yet each domain has their own genres and unique communication style.  One potential issue with this study as a source is that it is a bit out of date, having been performed in 1972.  I do like that they were able to find a document which was written by both sample groups in a very structured format, which enabled easier comparison and analysis.  In my own research, one of the problems is that because I’m comparing published engineer to engineer communication versus communication to the general public, it would be almost impossible to find such directly comparable texts.  I need to  somehow normalize my analysis of each type of text, such that I can compare the two styles.

Responding to technical writing in an introductory engineering class: The role of genre and discipline - Ron Choi ENG 574

Miller, Paul, J. Bausser and A. Fentiman. "Responding to technical writing in an introductory engineering class: The role of genre and discipline." Technical Communication Quarterly, 7, no. 4, 1998: 443-461.

In this journal article, the authors report on a case study which examined an experienced engineering professor’s feedback on a design report in first year engineering class.  The professor’s comments are compared against those used in composition studies by teachers of technical writing, and against those of a technical editor.  The researchers found that the engineering professor’s comments were highly directive, even when written as a question or a comment.  This is contrasted against composition-style feedback from technical writing teachers, which was typically more facilitative.  The professor’s feedback was closer in nature that that of a technical editor.  The researchers concluded that the differences in feedback were based partially on the introductory level of the course, combined with differences in genre convention for an engineering design report.

One of the important genre differences pointed out by the authors was the compartmentalized nature of the design report, not only for the authors, but for the readers as well.  The design report is highly structured, such that once the topic has been selected, each section is well defined and can be written as separate objects, often by different group members.  On the flip-side, the audience is also not expected to read the report front-to-back.  Rather, it is expected that the audience would jump immediately to the sections of interest. 

This article interested me because it highlights some of the specific genre-based differences that exist in engineering communication, and in engineering communication education.  It also made me wonder – does the way in which engineers are taught communication actually have a negative effect on how they communicate with on-engineers?

Technical Communication Instruction in Engineering Schools: A Survey of Top-Ranked U.S. and Canadian Programs - Ron Choi ENG 574

Reave, Laura. "Technical Communication Instruction in Engineering Schools: A Survey of Top-Ranked U.S. and Canadian Programs." Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18, no. 4, 2004: 452-490.

In this peer reviewed journal article, Reave analyzes the results of a survey conducted of 73 top rated U.S. and Canadian engineering schools, which examines how these schools teach communication to engineering students.  Reave begins by establishing that there is a gap between the communication skills of engineering graduates versus what is expected of them in the workplace.  Both engineers and their employers place high importance on communication skills, and agree that they are not adequately prepared by curricula of their engineering schools. 

Reave’s surveyed 50 U.S. and 23 Canadian engineering schools, and categorizes their technical communication initiatives by their:

• Department home. The department (e.g. Engineering, English) home, location, and faculty affiliation can affect the diversity of the student body, the situated learning environment, the availability of instructors, as well as their moral.   
• Required courses. Many schools require their engineering students to take some form of written and/or oral technical, business and/or academic communication course.
• Integrated Instruction.  Communication instruction that is combined or integrated within engineering programs.  This could take the form of a partnership or team teaching with an English or Communication expert; the addition of communication modules to engineering classes; through expert feedback; and communication instruction across the entire engineering curriculum.
• Elective courses.  School can go beyond their minimum requirements and offer elective courses to keep communication in the foreground for engineering students.
• Engineering Communication Centers.  Schools can also enhance communication education by providing a site for individual instruction and assistance in written and oral communication.

Before concluding, Reave also examines how communication skills are assessed, and establishes that communication instruction does indeed improve the communication skills of the learner.  Reave states that a well-designed communication program would begin with a strong base, but continue throughout the curriculum, and is best taught by communication experts that integrate their instruction with the situated engineering environment.  The survey results indicate that the schools with the most extensive communication programs are amongst the highest rated.

I found this article to be a very useful summary of the current communication instruction within engineering schools.  It also validates some of my initial assumptions, e.g. that there really is a engineering communication gap.  It is also a newer article compared to the others I have read up to this point, and therefore offers a bit more relevance, although I’m sure that many of the schools surveyed have since modified or upgraded their communication programs.  I did find the final conclusions to be a bit weak though.  It is clear in reading the article that Reave favors the “integrated instruction” model, but really only describes how different schools apply it, without proving that these techniques are actually better.  Reave also correlates extensive communication programs with the ranking of top engineering schools, but I believe that there are too many potential extraneous variables in order to draw this conclusion.    

The image of engineering: The silence of the nerds? - Ron Choi ENG 574

Braham, James. "The image of engineering: The silence of the nerds?" Machine Design, Vol.64, Iss.17, 1992: 75-80.

In this article, Braham offers an editorial examination of the engineering community’s attempts to bolster the public’s perceptions of engineers.  The author uses a combination of anecdotes, interviews and survey data to underline the some of the negative and inaccurate perceptions of engineers, and discusses the attempts of engineering societies to identify and correct these misconceptions.  Braham looks at engineers in society and pop culture, examining the Dilbert comic strip, engineers in politics, TV and movies.  Braham also explores a survey on how some engineers see themselves, noting that in some cases, the public perception is aligned with self-perception.  Both the general public and electrical engineers perceived themselves as socially awkward and lacking in good communication skills.  Braham concludes with a discussion of some of the actions being taken to increase awareness and understanding of engineering.

Although this was an editorial article in an engineering trade magazine, and not a peer-reviewed academic journal piece, I still found it to be quite useful in speaking to the conventional wisdom surrounding engineers and communication skills.  The author is an engineer who has contributed to articles which have been cited by many others.  Combining the anecdotes, pop culture references, interviews and survey data provides a multi-faceted examination of the poor image of engineers’ communication skills, both publicly and self-perceived.  For my research, I would attempt to track down the original survey sources, and more importantly, find newer equivalents, since this article was written in 1992.  

The pop culture references used in the article also made me wonder how the media may have affected public perception of engineers over the past 20 years.  TV shows like “The Big Bang Theory” have capitalized on the image of the socially awkward scientists and engineers – does public exposure of this sort only re-enforce the negative image, or perhaps increase the social acceptance of engineering or “geek” behavior?

Beyond Technicalities: Expanding Engineering Thinking - Ron Choi ENG 574

Beder, Sharon. "Beyond Technicalities: Expanding Engineering Thinking." Journal of professional issues in engineering education and practice. 125, no. 1, 1999: 12-18.

In this article, Beder discusses the skills that will be required by engineers of the next millennium[1], and asserts that traditional engineering education does not address these new requirements.  The author cites educational sources acknowledging the gap between engineers’ technical education and the need for social understanding, human interaction and written communication in their careers.  Beder discusses the public perception of engineers as being singularly focused and lacking in social skills, and goes on to discuss how this perception impacts the selection and recruitment of engineers.  The author examines some of the historical reasons for the strict technical and scientific focus of engineering programs, and then proceeds to look at the problems that have resulted from this approach.  Beder further expands as to why this methodology does not fit with the inherent social aspects of technology development.  Beder lists a set of required skills for the engineer of 2010 that go beyond the technical, and “enhanced communication skills” (1999, 17) tops this list.  Beder concludes that a new educational approach is required in order to produce the engineers that are needed for the future.

The author is a visiting professor in the School of Social Sciences, Media and Communication at the University of Wollongong.  Beder was first trained as a civil engineer before shifting her focus to the social and philosophical aspects of engineering.  This background would seem to reflect her motivations for this paper, very similar to my own in fact.  The article includes and extensive list of references, is peer-reviewed, and published through a large professional body.  Although the article is over a decade old, it does speak to the recognition of a communication skills gap in engineering.  In my research I would need to show that this gap still exists today.  This article may not end up being used as a source, however it has been useful for initially validating some of my ideas, and providing a useful list of further sources to investigate.

---

[1] The article was written in 1999.