We spoke with Dr. Joseph Robertshaw about his show, The Podcast of Podcasts, and the potential that podcasting holds for everyday technical communicators: students, professionals, educators, and even homesteading enthusiasts.
We sat down with our friends Lindsey and David to talk about medical misinformation and its effects on relationships, the challenge of choosing what to trust in the swirl of constantly changing pandemic info, and the role that communication can play in increasing access to vaccines and clinical trials. Lindsey and David also tell the story of their family’s participation in clinical trials for the COVID vaccines, and the surprising ways it changed their views on social media and the medical research process.
Sources and further reading
Gerrard, M. and R. Nevil (2006). We’re all in this together. [Recorded by V. Hudgens, A. Tisdale, L. Grabeel, and D. Seeley]. In High School Musical [Videorecording]. Disney Channel.
Holmes, R. (1979). Escape (The Piña Colada song). On Partners in Crime [Album]. Infinity Records.
TC Talk opens its 2nd season with a special episode for the Big Rhetorical Podcast Carnival 2022. We took our own (very literal) spin on the Carnival theme “Rhetoric: Spaces and Places in and Beyond the Academy” and discuss the epic communication challenge of alien-to-human contact, as portrayed in film. From Arrival to Close Encounters of the Third Kind, sci-fi movies have a lot to teach us about technical communication, audiences, and empathy. Don’t forget your towel!
Sources and further reading
Adams, D. (1995). The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1st edition). Del Rey.
Spielberg, S. (Director). (1977, December 14). Close Encounters of the Third Kind [Drama, Sci-Fi]. Julia Phillips and Michael Phillips Productions, EMI Films.
Villeneuve, D. (Director). (2016, November 11). Arrival [Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi]. Lava Bear Films, FilmNation Entertainment, 21 Laps Entertainment.
Vuorensola, T. (Director). (2012, April 4). Iron Sky [Action, Adventure, Comedy]. Blind Spot Pictures Oy, 27 Films Production, New Holland Pictures.
Zemeckis, R. (Director). (1997, July 11). Contact [Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi]. Warner Bros., South Side Amusement Company.
In this final part of the UX series, we share some ways instructors can help students to see user experience and usability as the rhetorical, human, and messy processes that they are. We also celebrate the season finale of TC Talk with a game show, Wheel of Exigencies, during which you will meet the new celebrity spokesperson for Course Hero!
Sources and further reading
Chong, F. (2016). The pedagogy of usability: An analysis of technical communication textbooks, anthologies, and course syllabi and descriptions. Technical Communication Quarterly, 25(1), 12–28.
Cooke, L., & Mings, S. (2005). Connecting usability education and research with industry needs and practices. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(3), 296–312.
Getto, G., & Beecher, F. (2016). Toward a Model of UX Education: Training UX Designers Within the Academy. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 59(2), 153–164. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2016.2561139
Meloncon, L., & Henschel, S. (2013). Current State of U.S. Undergraduate Degree Programs in Technical and Professional Communication. Technical Communication, 60(1).
Rose, E., & Tenenberg, J. (2017). Making practice-level struggles visible: Researching UX practice to inform pedagogy. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 5(1), 89–97.
Scott, J. B. (2008). The practice of usability: Teaching user engagement through service-learning. Technical Communication Quarterly, 17(4), 381–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572250802324929
St.Amant, K. (2018). Contextualizing Cyber Compositions for Cultures: A Usability-Based Approach to Composing Online for International Audiences. Computers and Composition, 49, 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.007
Zhou, Q. (2014). “ That usability course”: What technical communication programs get wrong about usability and how to fix it. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 2(3), 25–27.
What if User Experience professionals, instead of designing for a “universal” user, put their most marginalized audiences first? In this episode, we share how you can invite audiences into classic UX processes including personas, localization, visual methods, and usability. We also discuss the challenges that come with participatory design, and how technical communicators must step into their advocacy role in order to support more socially just UX.
Sources and further reading
Acharya, K. R. (2019). Usability for social justice: Exploring the implementation of localization usability in Global North technology in the context of a Global South’s country. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 49(1), 6–32.
Acharya, K. R. (2022). Promoting Social Justice Through Usability in Technical Communication: An Integrative Literature Review. Technical Communication, 69(1), 6–26.
Agboka, G. (2012). Liberating intercultural technical communication from “large culture” ideologies: Constructing culture discursively. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42(2), 159–181.
Agboka, G. (2013). Participatory localization: A social justice approach to navigating unenfranchised/disenfranchised cultural sites. Technical Communication Quarterly, 22(1), 28–49.
Bakke, A. (2019). Writing for Patients on the Participatory Web: Heuristics for Purpose-Driven Personas. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 62(4), 318–333. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2019.2946999
Benjamin, R. (2019). Race After Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. John Wiley & Sons.
Buchanan, R. (2001). Human Dignity and Human Rights: Thoughts on the Principles of Human-Centered Design. Design Issues, 17(3), 35–39.
Bregman, R. (2018). Utopia for Realists: How We Can Build the Ideal World (Reprint edition). Back Bay Books.
Carlson, E. B. (2021). Visual participatory action research methods: Presenting nuanced, co-created accounts of public problems. In R. Walton & G. Agboka (Eds.), Equipping technical communicators for social justice work: Theories, methodologies, and pedagogies (pp. 98–115).
Jones, N. N. (2016a). Narrative inquiry in human-centered design: Examining silence and voice to promote social justice in design scenarios. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(4), 471–492.
Jones, N. N. (2016b). The technical communicator as advocate: Integrating a social justice approach in technical communication. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(3), 342–361.
Mirel, B. (2004). Interaction design for complex problem solving: Developing useful and usable software. Morgan Kaufmann.
Munroe, R. (n.d.). How it Works [Xkcd]. Retrieved May 10, 2022, from https://xkcd.com/385/
Opel, D. S., & Rhodes, J. (2018). Beyond Student as User: Rhetoric, Multimodality, and User-Centered Design. Computers and Composition, 49, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.008
Rose, E. J. (2016). Design as advocacy: Using a human-centered approach to investigate the needs of vulnerable populations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 46(4), 427–445.
Rose, E., & Cardinal, A. (2018). Participatory video methods in UX: Sharing power with users to gain insights into everyday life. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 6(2), 9–20.
Rose, E. J., & Cardinal, A. (2021). Purpose and Participation: Heuristics for Planning, Implementing, and Reflecting on Social Justice Work. In R. Walton & G. Agboka (Eds.), Equipping Technical Communicators for Social Justice Work (pp. 75–97).
Rose, E. J., Edenfield, A., Walton, R., Gonzales, L., McNair, A. S., Zhvotovska, T., Jones, N., de Mueller, G. I. G., & Moore, K. (2018). Social Justice in UX: Centering Marginalized Users. Proceedings of the 36th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication, 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1145/3233756.3233931
Sano-Franchini, J. (2017). What can Asian eyelids teach us about user experience design? A culturally reflexive framework for UX/I design. Journal of Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization, 10(1), 3.
Simmons, W. M., & Zoetewey, M. W. (2012). Productive usability: Fostering civic engagement and creating more useful online spaces for public deliberation. Technical Communication Quarterly, 21(3), 251–276. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2012.673953
Sims, M. (2022). Tools for Overcoming Oppression: Plain Language and Human-Centered Design for Social Justice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 65(1), 11–33. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2022.3150236
Sun, H. (2006). The triumph of users: Achieving cultural usability goals with user localization. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 457–481.
St.Amant, K. (2015). Culture and the contextualization of care: A prototype-based approach to developing health and medical visuals for international audiences. Communication Design Quarterly Review, 3(2), 38–47.
Wachter-Boettcher, S. (2017). Technically Wrong: Sexist Apps, Biased Algorithms, and Other Threats of Toxic Tech. W. W. Norton & Company.
Wessels, T. (2013). The Myth of Progress: Toward a Sustainable Future (1st edition). University Press of New England.
Wohlleben, P. (2016). The Hidden Life of Trees: What They Feel, How They Communicate—Discoveries from A Secret World. Greystone Books.
Last episode, we focused on UX (user experience) and usability as a discipline; in this episode, we focus on UX as a practice. We discuss various stages of the UX process, from “empathize” to “ideate” to “prototype.” Abi describes typical methods in UX research and testing and when to use them. To demonstrate, she springs a (poorly conducted) usability test on Benton. Finally, they discuss the typical skills and traits required of UX professionals.
Sources and further reading
Buley, L. (2013). The User Experience Team of One: A Research and Design Survival Guide. Rosenfeld Media.
Krug, S. (2009). Don’t Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability. Pearson Education.
Lauer, C., & Brumberger, E. (2016). Technical communication as user experience in a broadening industry landscape. Technical Communication, 63(3), 248–264.
Lanius, C., Weber, R., & Robinson, J. (2021). User Experience Methods in Research and Practice. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 51(4), 350–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816211044499
Nielsen, J. (2000). Designing Web Usability. New Riders.
Redish, J. (2012). Letting Go of the Words: Writing Web Content that Works. Elsevier.
Rose, E., Putnam, C., & McDonald, C. (2020). Preparing Future UX Professionals: Human Skills, Technical Skills, and Dispositions. Proceedings of the 38th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3380851.3416774
Abi and Benton explore the differences between usability and UX (User Experience) through the extended example of a toaster (and share their secret for extra delicious pop-tarts). They discuss the origin of the field of usability and its overlap with technical communication.
Sources and further reading
Acharya, K. R. (2022). Promoting Social Justice Through Usability in Technical Communication: An Integrative Literature Review. Technical Communication, 69(1), 6–26.
Gould, J. D., & Lewis, C. (1985). Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM, 28(3), 300–311.
Johnson, R. R. (1998). User-Centered Technology: A Rhetorical Theory for Computers and Other Mundane Artifacts. SUNY Press.
Johnson, R. R., Salvo, M. J., & Zoetewey, M. W. (2007). User-centered technology in participatory culture: Two decades “Beyond a narrow conception of usability testing.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(4), 320–332.
Lauer, C., & Brumberger, E. (2016). Technical communication as user experience in a broadening industry landscape. Technical Communication, 63(3), 248–264.
Marrone, T., & Yerich, K. (2020). Mushrooms of the Upper Midwest: A Simple Guide to Common Mushrooms. Adventure Publications.
Rouse, W. B. (2007). People and organizations: Explorations of human-centered design. John Wiley & Sons.
Rude, C. D. (2009). Mapping the Research Questions in Technical Communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 23(2), 174–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651908329562
Salvo, M. J. (2001). Ethics of engagement: User-centered design and rhetorical methodology. Technical Communication Quarterly, 10(3), 273–290.
Sullivan, P. (1989). Beyond a narrow conception of usability testing. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32(4), 256–264.
Tham, J., Howard, T., & Verhulsdonck, G. (2022). Extending Design Thinking, Content Strategy, and Artificial Intelligence into Technical Communication and User Experience Design Programs: Further Pedagogical Implications. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 00472816211072533.
Audience is arguably the most central concept in the fields of rhetoric and tech comm. What have theorists been asking about audience from centuries ago up until the modern day, when social media has exploded the reach and interactivity of audiences? What does the evolution of audience mean for technical and professional communicators? And what is the best episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000? Books discussed include Involving the Audience by Lee-Ann Breuch and Update Culture by John Gallagher.
Sources and further reading
Asante, M. (2011). Afrocentric Idea Revised. Temple University Press.
Bakke, A. (2019). Trust-building in a patient forum: The interplay of professional and personal expertise. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 49(2), 156–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281618776222
Breuch, L.-A. K. (2018). Involving the audience: A rhetorical perspective on using social media to improve websites. Routledge.
Brizee, A. (2015). Using Isocrates to Teach Technical Communication and Civic Engagement. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 45(2), 134–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281615569481
Collins, D. F. (2001). Audience in Afrocentric Rhetoric. Alternative Rhetorics: Challenges to the Rhetorical Tradition, 185.
Dayton, D. (2003). Audiences involved, imagined, and invoked: Trends in user-centered interactive information design. Professional Communication Conference, 2003. IPCC 2003. Proceedings. IEEE International, 9-pp.
Gallagher, J. R. (2020). Update Culture and the Afterlife of Digital Writing. University Press of Colorado.
Houser, R. (1997). What is the value of audience to technical communicators? A survey of audience research. Proceedings of IPCC 97. Communication, 155–166. https://doi.org/10.1109/IPCC.1997.637043
Ede, L., & Lunsford, A. (1984). Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked: The Role of Audience in Composition Theory and Pedagogy. College Composition and Communication, 35(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.2307/358093
Johnson, R. R. (2004). Audience involved: Toward a participatory model of writing. Central Works in Technical Communication, 91–103.
Mallon, J. (1994, September 17). The Creeping Terror. In Mystery Science Theater 3000.
Munroe, R. (n.d.). Duty Calls. Xkcd. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from https://xkcd.com/386/
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1973). The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. University of Notre Dame Pess.
Plato. (2003). Phaedrus. Hackett Publishing.
Schriver, K. A. (1997). Dynamics in document design: Creating text for readers. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Whitburn, M. (2000). Rhetorical scope and performance: The example of technical communication. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Part 1 established how social justice is relevant to technical communication; Part 2 follows up with a parade of social-justice-oriented projects from technical communication scholars. We draw specifically from the edited collections Citizenship and Advocacy in Technical Communication by Agboka and Matveeva, and Equipping Technical Communicators for Social Justice Work by Walton and Agboka. In discussing the chapters, we touch on topics including the Hawai’i false missile alert, tarot cards for tech, ranked choice voting, and Benton’s high-voltage senior design project. We hope you come away inspired by the ways people are enacting social justice in their research, teaching, and practice.
Sources and further reading
Agboka, G. Y., & Matveeva, N. (2018). Citizenship and Advocacy in Technical Communication: Scholarly and Pedagogical Perspectives. Routledge.
Expanding Inventional and Solution Spaces: How Asset-Based Inquiry can Support Advocacy in Technical Communication, Lucía Durá
Inclusive Practices in the Technical Communication Classroom, Jessica Edwards
Open-Source Technical Communication in the Classroom: Digital Citizenship, Communities of Play, and Online Collaboration, Robert Rowan
Social Media and Advocacy in The Technical and Professional Communication Classroom: A Social Justice Pedagogical Approach, Sarah Warren-Riley
Walton, R., & Agboka, G. Y. (2021). Equipping Technical Communicators for Social Justice Work: Theories, Methodologies, and Pedagogies. University Press of Colorado.
“I’m surprised that this hasn’t happened before”: An Indigenous Examination of UXD Failure during the Hawai’i Missile False Alarm, Emily Legg and Adam Strantz
The Tarot of Tech: Foretelling the Social Justice Impacts of our Designs, Sarah Beth Hopton
Election Technologies as a Tool for Cultivating Civic Literacies in Technical Communication: A Case of The Redistricting Game, Fernando Sánchez, Isidore Dorpenyo, Jennifer Sano-Franchini
Tech comm may have a reputation for being “objective” and “neutral,” but that reputation has made it too easy for the field to distance itself from the real injustices it has perpetuated. In their important book Technical Communication After the Social Justice Turn, Walton, Moore, and Jones show how social justice is integral to technical communication and explain foundational concepts such as privilege, intersectionality, and coalitional action. For instructors and practitioners wondering “What can I do?” this book is an excellent place to start.
Plus, stick around for Fun with Fungi with Benton, our resident fun guy.
Sources and further reading
Crenshaw, K. (2022). On Intersectionality: Essential Writings. New Press.
