Defining Technical/Professional Writing

Dear Dr. Bushman,

Although Dr. Franklin and I work well together as your Writers’ Slate team, the publication would benefit greatly from a third team member, especially if that team member were a technical writer, like myself. Technical writing is a broad term, and I understand if when you hear it you associate it objective writing, rigid and concise terminology, or writing that aims to be so exact that nearly any audience can understand it. These are the ways in which the term “technical writing” has been defined repeatedly in the past—these specific examples being paraphrased from a compilation David N. Dobrin lists in his article “What’s Technical about Technical Writing?”

 

Despite the ubiquity of these definitions of technical writing, they are limiting and misleading. As Jo Allen (technical writer and professor) discusses in her article “The Case Against Defining Technical Writing,” agreeing upon a definition is a great challenge “when we consider the recent expansion of our field” (68). The field is no longer limited to writing pamphlets and manuals, but now includes, among other things, “illustrations, communications management, public relations, editing, computers analysts and programming, [and] researching” (69). Technical writing has expanded far beyond writing and editing. It is now even crossing over into the humanities, and we at The Writers’ Slate should take advantage of this fact.

As Carolyn Miller is incessantly arguing, technical writing is both practical and has humanistic value. In other words, technical writers who earn their degree from a humanities department are not simply collecting skills that only apply to their field. They are also trained to think critically, communicate effectively, work in teams, work individually, research, improvise, design, draft, revise, and persevere. And because, as Allen informs us, there are now so many specialties in which each technical writer can focus and excel, the addition of a second technical writer can only make us a more well-rounded team.

I personally recommend searching for a candidate with a strong background in document design and communication—document design because it is not a great strength of either Dr. Franklin or myself, and communication because we are constantly discussing journal entries with contestants and their parents or teachers (many of the contestants are in grade school). Although our program has never, under the direction of Dr. Franklin, missed a deadline, there have been instances in the past in which excellent Slate entries had to be excluded or pushed back for a future edition simply because our two-person team can only do so much in such a short time frame. Having a third English major on board will help to ensure that we reach our deadlines without overlooking any important aspects of publication; having a technical writer on board will help to ensure that our product reaches a professional caliber.

Sources

Allen, Jo. "The Case Against Defining Technical Writing."

Dobrin, David N. "What's Technical About Technical Writing?"

Miller, Carolyn R. "A Humanistic Rationale for Technical Writing," "What's Practical About Technical Writing?" and "Carolyn Miller Responds"